RES 81127 - Laserfiche WebLink

4. Biotic Condition The EIR should consider the impact of loss of water on downstream riparian areas as a result of the diversion of the southerly arm of Gold Creek. Note that this southerly arm forms a major amenity in the planned development of Moller Park and is bordered by many large trees both in the park and in the viewshed of Foot- hill Road west of Foothill Road. 5. Geology Soils, Seismicity (a) Landslides have been mapped on or very near the site of the proposed quarry. These should be reconciled with the statement that there are presently no landslides on the site. Because of the abundant landslides, both large and small as well as ancient and recent, within the area of the site and containing similar geology, the EIR should address the issue of stability of finish slopes as well as working slopes in more detail. (b) Justification should be given for the conclusion that the slopes will remain stable ("minimal danger") in the event of an earthquake possibly occurring directly at the site and with 100 times as much energy as the moderately-sized Livermore quakes. 6. Noise (a) The noise analysis appears to contain errors in the cal- culation of the distances to be "normally acceptable," especially the Stoneridge Drive calculation found in the Supplement. In the latter case, "normally acceptable" levels would be about four times farther from the roadway than indicated. The report should specify the assumptions used in making all the truck noise calcula- tions. (b) The methodology used in making the noise analysis, that' of distance to a "normally acceptable" level, does not enable consideration of the incremental increase in noise brought about by the presence of large trucks within the overall traffic pattern. It is impossible to determine the "masking" of one sound by another without knowing the actual difference in noise level (dBA) between the two. The EIR should present an analysis including existing and projected no~se levelsat sensitive locations and the increases in noise level as a result of the quarry trucks' presence. (c) The EIR should address the nature of truck noise as a single souce irritant as well as simply a part of the overall ambient noise level. Truck noise ]eveis are very loud and create interference with activities at each pass-by. This effect needs to be addressed for uses near the truck route. Similarly, if the quarrying operation requires blasting or other infrequent but very loud activities, the impact of those noises should be addressed. -2-