SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

XII. SUMMARY OF COMMMENTS AND RESPONSESB. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RESPONSESO. NOISEComment O-1: “Increased noise as a result of construction, enlargement of golf courses,increased public access and activities, such as fishing, will have a significant negative impact onbirds within the watershed.” (Golden Gate Audubon Society)Response: DEIR Section III.E evaluated, at a programmatic level, the effects of increased publicuse on natural resources. DEIR pages III.E-30 and III.E-31 describe the potential for birdharassment, alteration of nesting behavior, and increased human disturbance. The DEIRdescribes Management Plan actions that would reduce potential program level impacts to a lessthan significant level. However, the potential impacts of specific public access projects would beevaluated at the time they are proposed. If project-specific analysis demonstrated that asignificant impact would occur with project implementation, mitigation measures would berecommended or the SFPUC would need to adopt findings of overriding considerations perCEQA requirements prior to implementing the project.Comment O-2: “It [SMP-32] will produce unacceptable noise levels, … close to our schoolwhere our children will be adversely affected.” (Patricia Stillman – Pleasanton Public Meeting)Comment O-3: “The increase in noise pollution. NO MITIGATION. I guess SFPUC wantseveryone to enjoy the consistent hum of the quarry machinery…” (Maryanne Canaparo)Response: As described in DEIR Section III.L, the potential impacts associated with miningunder SMP-32 were evaluated in the EIR prepared for that project. SMP-32 mining activitieswould be closer to the Town of Sunol than the existing operations south of I-680. A detailednoise analysis was performed by Alameda County for the SMP-32 EIR and is summarized herefor informational purposes. That analysis assumed a worst-case condition, that quarry equipmentwill be operating at the existing ground elevation and in the northwestern corner of the site, at theclosest possible point to surrounding sensitive receptors such as Sunol Glen school. (In actuality,this scenario would occur only for a very short time. For the vast majority of the quarry’s life,operations would occur below grade and further from sensitive receptors.) The noise analysisfound that quarry-generated noise levels would not exceed Alameda County’s overall dailyexposure limit of 60 decibels, day-night level (dB DNL) for residential/school exterior areas, orthe limit of 67.5 dB DNL for commercial exterior areas. However, noise exposure for short-termperiods would be exceeded at a few locations. In response to these findings, Alameda Countyimposed conditions of approval for SMP-32 that eliminate the short-term noise exposure impacts.The conditions, which are listed in Section II.M of this document, include establishing atemporary noise mitigation berm in the northwestern portion of the site to reduce noise at SunolGlen school and other sensitive receptors; limiting hours of operation; phasing requirements thatspecifically minimize noise exposures; and conducting surface operations (overburden stripping)in the northwest portion of the site as quickly as possible to minimize noise impacts.Construction of the berm and overburden stripping is required to be done in the summer monthsto minimize impacts to the school and its play area. An additional condition was imposed: iftechnical investigation determines that, despite all mitigation, the quarry is causing adverseNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan C&R.109 ESA / 930385