Chapter 1 - Caltrans - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination Affected Environment This segment of U.S. 101 within the project limits is a major north-south transportation corridor, it is located adjacent to the Pacific Ocean. It travels through the communities of Mussel Shoals, La Conchita, and Rincon Point in Ventura County before entering Santa Barbara County at the Bates Road Interchange and continues on through the City of Carpinteria. The U.S. 101 through Ventura and Santa Barbara County is considered eligible for state scenic highway designation 3 . The natural visual resources within the project segment of U.S. 101 consist of the Pacific Ocean, coastal bluffs, hillsides, relatively varied topography, exposed geological formations, and mostly ruderal and landscaping vegetation. High quality views of resources are available from public locations along U.S. 101, nearby beaches, and communities. Primary views in the region include dramatic views of coastal bluffs and hillsides to the northeast of U.S. 101 and Pacific Ocean views to the southwest of U.S. 101. Throughout the stretch of U.S. 101 within the proposed project limits, there are a few residential communities located on both sides of the highway including Mussel Shoals, La Conchita, and Rincon Point, which are small residential enclaves along the highway and the City of Carpinteria. Other developments along the coast include public campgrounds/open space uses, oil and gas support facilities, and some commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses in Carpinteria. The overall character of the region is relatively rural and agricultural. Methodology To provide a clear description of the existing visual setting and to define anticipated impacts, the project area was divided into two landscape units. A landscape unit is a portion of the regional landscape, and can be thought of as an outdoor room that exhibits a distinct visual character. A landscape unit will often correspond to a place or district that is commonly known among local viewers. Landscape units are areas of distinct, but not necessarily homogenous, visual character that offer similar kinds of views toward the proposed project and/or within which there would likely be similar concerns about landscape issues. These landscape units provide the framework for analyzing the impacts of the alternatives and developing appropriate mitigation measures. 3 The status of a scenic highway changes from eligible to officially designated when the local jurisdiction adopts a scenic corridor protection program, applies to the California Department of Transportation for scenic highway approval, and receives notification from Caltrans that the highway has been designated as a Scenic Highway. 96 IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project
Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination The primary landscape units and associated landscape types for the proposed project are: • U.S. 101 – Northern Portion Landscape Unit primarily Santa Barbara County • U.S. 101 – Southern Portion Landscape Unit primarily Ventura County Identify Visual Character – Visual character is descriptive and non-evaluative, which means it is based on defined attributes that are neither good nor bad in and of themselves. A change in visual character cannot be described as having good or bad attributes until it is compared with the viewer response to that change. If there is public preference for the established visual character of a regional landscape and resistance to a project that would contrast that character, then changes in the visual character can be evaluated. Assess Visual Quality – Visual quality is evaluated by identifying the vividness, intactness, and unity present in the viewshed. The FHWA states that this method should correlate with public judgments of visual quality well enough to predict those judgments. This approach is particularly useful in highway planning because it does not presume that a highway project is necessarily an eyesore. This approach to evaluating visual quality can also help identify specific methods for mitigating each adverse impact that may occur as a result of a project. The three criteria for evaluating visual quality can be defined as follows: • Vividness is the visual power or ‘memorability’ of landscape components as they combine in distinctive visual patterns. • Intactness is the visual integrity of the natural and man-built landscape and its freedom from encroaching elements. It can be present in well-kept urban and rural landscapes, as well as in natural settings. • Unity is the visual coherence and compositional harmony of the landscape considered as a whole. It frequently attests to the careful design of individual man-made components in the landscape. Methods of Predicting Viewer Response Viewer response is composed of two elements: viewer sensitivity and viewer exposure. These elements combine to form a method of predicting how the public might react to visual changes brought about by a highway project. Viewer sensitivity is defined both as the viewers’ concern for scenic quality and the viewers’ response to change in the visual resources that make up the view. Local values IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project 97
Page 1 and 2:
VENTURA / SANTA BARBARA 101 HOV PRO
Page 4 and 5:
VEN-SB US101 HOV Project IS/EA ❖
Page 6 and 7:
❖ iv VEN-SB US101 HOV Project IS/
Page 9 and 10:
List of Figures List of Figures Fig
Page 11 and 12:
Chapter 1Proposed Project 1.1 Intro
Page 13 and 14:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project Backgrou
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project between
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project on a bas
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project For Vent
Page 21 and 22:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project South Co
Page 23 and 24:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project • Inst
Page 25 and 26:
Source: The Department 2008 Chapter
Page 27 and 28:
Chapter 1 Proposed Project 1.2.7 Pe
Page 29 and 30:
Chapter 2 Affected Environment, Env
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project 23 C
Page 35 and 36:
IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project 25 C
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
2.1.6 Farmlands Chapter 2 Affected
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56: Total Population Race White Black o
Page 57 and 58: Chapter 2 Affected Environment, Env
Page 61 and 62: Housing Units Owner Occupied Renter
Page 73 and 74: Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination
Page 105: Bikeway Chapter 3 Comments and Coor
Page 131 and 132: • Provide hardscape decorative de
Page 137 and 138: To comply, the following must be an
Page 141 and 142: • Soil stabilization Practices
Page 149 and 150: 2.2.6 Air Quality Chapter 3 Comment
Page 157 and 158:
Chapter 3 Comments and Coordination
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Receiver Site #A Site #A1 Site #A2
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Table 2.4-1 Cumulative Projects and
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Chapter 4 List of Preparers Chapter
Page 215 and 216:
Chapter 5 Distribution List Elected
Page 217 and 218:
California Native Plant Society 909
Page 219 and 220:
Community Based Organizations Ventu
Page 221 and 222:
Richard Zavala Rincon Island/ Greka
Page 223 and 224:
Evan E Skei Resident 6770 Ojai Ave.
Page 225 and 226:
Mary C & James Cox Resident 7062 Ox
Page 227 and 228:
Virginia Cotsis Resident 6820 Santa
Page 229 and 230:
Doug and Jaleh White 8128 Puesta De
Page 231 and 232:
Harry Van Wingerden 3902 Via Real C
Page 233 and 234:
Thomas J. McGillis, M.D. 5206 Beckf
Page 235 and 236:
Appendix A CEQA Checklist Appendix
Page 237 and 238:
) Violate any air quality standard
Page 239 and 240:
Potentially significant impact Less
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Please refer to section e) 12. POPU
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Appendix B Traffic Flow Charts Exis
Page 249 and 250:
2015 Build Appendix B Traffic Flow
Page 251 and 252:
2035 Build Appendix B Traffic Flow
Page 253 and 254:
Appendix C Title VI Policy Statemen
Page 255 and 256:
Appendix D Glossary and Abbreviated
Page 257 and 258:
Appendix E Minimization and/or Miti
Page 259 and 260:
Impact Avoidance or Minimization Me
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Appendix F Noise Aerial Maps and Ta
Page 271 and 272:
20-Minute Noise Measurement Locatio
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project 265
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Table B Predicted Noise Reduction F
Page 283 and 284:
Appendix G Letter to the State Hist
Page 285:
IS/EA VEN-SB US101 HOV Project 275
show all

Chapter 1 - Caltrans - State of California

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?