Laserfiche WebLink
operations may be able to increase production in the short term to help offset the loss from Delta <br />Sand and Gravel. <br /> As noted above, the social and environmental consequences of allowing the proposal are <br />closely tied together. Surrounding properties will not experience the increased adverse effects of <br />dust caused by the shorter distances between the mining operation and residences located in the <br />area of conflict. There would be less likelihood that people with sensitive airways and children <br />living in the area of conflict would experience asthma attacks, wheezing, coughing, respiratory <br />irritation, or premature death. (Exhibit 33: “Particulate Matter Air Pollution, May 2003” and <br /> <br />“Cal/EPA Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, June 2005”). <br /> With regard to energy, evidence in the record suggests that, if the expansion is not <br />allowed, there will come a time when the aggregate used in local construction projects will need <br />to be hauled in from other areas, impacting the use of energy. <br />Analysis <br />(A) Degree of adverse effect on the existing land uses within the impact area <br />The degree of the dust’s adverse effects if the expansion is approved is discussed above. The <br />effects are significant. The applicant asserts that, even though its operation will be closer to the <br />existing residential uses, its dust impacts will not worsen. The City does not find this to be a <br />credible assertion and the applicant does not provide reasonable evidence to support its assertion. <br />(see discussion above). As discussed above, the minimization measures proposed by the <br />applicant are insufficient to adequately address those effects. Those previous findings are <br />incorporated here. <br />(B) Reasonable and practicable measures that could be taken to reduce the identified <br />adverse effects <br />The City’s findings, above, evaluate the effectiveness of the measures the applicant has proposed <br />to reduce dust creation, and the adverse effects of, the dust. As discussed above, those measures <br />are insufficient to minimize the effects. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that there <br />are other reasonable and practicable measures to reduce the effects. <br />(C) The probable duration of the mining operation and the proposed post-mining use <br />of the site. <br />The applicant estimates that the expansion site will provide 12-15 years of continued mining. <br />(Exhibit 1, Application, Page 1). The applicant provided a conceptual reclamation plan to reflect <br />its proposal to amend its existing reclamation plan, approved by DOGAMI in 1987 and 1995. <br />See File Record No.1, Original Delta application, Exhibit J. It states that “The mined area will <br />be filled to pre-excavation levels. No slopes will remain (same as main pit). No future use of <br />the reclaimed property is specified. <br />ESEE Conclusion <br />Considering the relative importance of the mining expansion when compared to the dust impacts <br />on the existing and approved uses identified in prior findings (impacts that cannot be <br />minimized), the City concludes the ESEE consequences of allowing mining expansion are so <br />detrimental to the conflicting uses that mining should not be allowed. The City concludes that <br />Ordinance - 25 <br /> <br />