4.7 Aesthetics
At its closest point, SO-7 would be located approximately 0.8 mile offshore. Residents on the bluffs would
have some view of the dredging operation for its entire duration. Because SO-7 would serve five receiver
sites (Table 2-2) dredging would continue within the dredge area for approximately 50 days. The dredge
area is approximately 50 acres in size. Depending on the type of dredge the view would be slightly
different. The cutterhead dredge would appear as a boat working in one area for some time, then moving
to another nearby location, and then another within the dredge area and would remain offshore. While
possibly visible, it would appear on the horizon much like many other boats (fishing, pleasure, etc.) which
are active along the coast. It would not be highly evident or dominate the landscape. The hopper dredge
would come to shore periodically which would make it more visible, but this would not be a permanent
significant visual impact.
Similar to SO-7, visual impacts at all borrow sites would be short-term. Dredging activities would not be
highly evident or dominate the landscape. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures for Alternative 1a
No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation measures would be necessary.
Impacts/Mitigation Measures for Alternative 1b
Under this alternative, sand placement activities would occur within a more restricted time frame when the
noise ordinance of a local jurisdiction would be applicable. The more restrictive noise ordinance would
not apply to receiver sites at South Carlsbad North, Batiquitos, Leucadia, Moonlight or Cardiff which are
served by borrow sites SO-7 and SO-6. Construction at the remaining receiver sites would be restricted
to generally 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, between8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and excluded
entirely on Sundays and holidays (Section 2.4). There would be no need for lights for nighttime
construction. However, the overall construction length would be increased by one-third and the amount
of sand placed would be reduced by one-half (refer to Table 2-2). Visual impacts are discussed below
for the receiver sites where construction practices would vary under Alternative 1b than that previously
described under Alternative 1a.
Regional Beach Sand Project EIR/EA
Page 4.7-9
99-69\SANDAG EIREA 4.1 to 4.13.wpd 7/17/00
Previous Page
