ARCHIVED REPORTS_DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

Home Browse Search

mgd. The WQCF would be projected to accommodate increased urban growth in the City service area for the next 5-10 years depending on the buildout rate of proposed development, at which time the average dry weather flow (ADWF) discharge from the WQCF is projected to reach the plant's currently permitted ADWF capacity of 9.87 mgd. Under this alternative, WQCF discharges would be"capped"at 9.87 mgd ADWF, and growth in the City's service area would be constrained. Plant improvements needed to address regulatory requirements, ongoing maintenance needs,or technical upgrades(including buildout of the WQCF)would still be implemented,but capacity would not be increased above 9.87 mgd. If the No Project Alternative were implemented, other options would need to be considered to address the wastewater treatment demands associated with future development in the City's service area. Because any discussion of the size,location, and infrastructure requirements of a potential new wastewater treatment plant would be speculative, a potential new plant is not discussed in this alternative analysis. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Land Use and Agricultural Resources The No Project Alternative would avoid the project's conversion of 41 acres of agricultural land to nonagricultural use because no development would occur. Therefore,this alternative would result in substantially less agricultural resource impacts compared to the project.[Less] Visual Resources Under this alternative,no new development would occur. Thus,there would be no alteration in the visual character of the project area,views of the project site from surrounding areas would be unchanged, and no new sources of light and glare would be created. By comparison,the project would result in minor alterations the visual character of the WQCF site and at the location of the proposed pump stations;however,these impacts were determined to be less-than-significant because visual screening(e.g., separation distances, landscaping, fencing) of proposed facilities would be provided. Although visual impacts of the project would be less than significant, this alternative would not result in any changes in the visual environment; therefore, impacts would be less.[Less] Air Quality The No Project Alternative would not include any new development, and thus would not generate new construction or operation-related emissions. The project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to generation of substantial odors. While this alternative would not construct any new facilities at the WQCF,the WQCF would continue to treat wastewater at current permitted levels(e.g.,up to 9.87 mgd)with existing treatment processes. These processes have been documented in the past to produce substantial odors (i.e., generated more than 1 complaint per year). It is likely that a similar potential for the generation of odors would continue under this alternative. Therefore, odor impact would be similar to the project and this alternative would not avoid this significant and unavoidable impact of the project. However,because this alternative would not generate any construction-related emissions or increased operational emission, overall this alternative would result in less air quality impacts.[Less] Noise Under the No Project Alternative,no new construction would occur,no new noise-generating land uses would be developed, and no additional traffic would be generated. Therefore,there would be no increase in potential noise conflicts under this alternative.By comparison,the project would result in significant impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to ground borne vibration. However,these impacts would be mitigated to less-than- significant levels through restriction of construction activities generating groundborne vibration within 60 feet of sensitive receptors.Nonetheless,implementation of the No Project Alternative would not result in any noise impacts and overall impacts would be less than the project.[Less] Manteca WQCF and Collection System Master Plans EIR EDAW City of Manteca 7-3 Alternatives to the Proposed Project