Laserfiche WebLink
Section 5 <br />business or property. The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors <br />emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the <br />raising of fowl or animals." <br />The SCAQMD indicates that the number of overall complaints has declined over <br />the last five years. Over the last four years, odor complaints make up 50 to 55 <br />percent of the total nuisance complaints. Over the past decade, odors from paint <br />and coating operations have decreased from 27 to 7 percent and odors from <br />refuse collection stations have increased from 9 to 34 percent, <br />The SCAQMD recommends that odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative <br />manner. Such an analysis shall determine whether the project would result in <br />excessive nuisance odors, as defined Linder the California Code of Regulations <br />and Section 41700 of the California Health and Safety Code, and thus would <br />constitute a public nuisance related to air quality <br />Alternative 1: No Federal Action/No Project <br />Under Alternative 1, the project would not be implemented. There would be no <br />construction activities or well redevelopment activities that would emit diesel fuel <br />and increase the potential for adverse odor impacts. <br />Alternative 2: Proposed Project <br />Land uses typically considered associated with the long term generation of odors <br />include; wastewater treatment facilities, waste-disposal facilities, and agricultural <br />operations. The Proposed Project would not involve any of these land use <br />activities. Long term odor impacts would be less than significant. <br />Project construction and operational well redevelopment equipment activities <br />would generate odors. Potential construction odors would include diesel exhaust <br />ernissions and paving operations. There could be situations where construction <br />activity odors would be noticeable by persons using the park facilities or working <br />or living nearby. The odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from <br />the source with an increase in distance. Therefore, the Proposed Project odor <br />impacts would not be objectionable to a substantial number of people and would <br />be less than significant. <br />Alternative 3: Reduced Intensity Alternative <br />There would be lesser emissions of odors with Alternative 3 because one less <br />injection well would be constructed and redeveloped. Similar to the Proposed <br />Project potential odor impacts Under Alternative 3 would riot be objectionable to <br />a substantial number of people and would be less than significant <br />Mid Basin Centennial Park 1�gdnfjll Project Final EIR 5-37 <br />Q;� - '8 <br />