Environmental Impact Statement - Sonoma Land Trust

California Department of Fish and Game
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Section 3.4. Public Health and Safety
segments and three options are proposed for the project as described in Chapter
2. In general, trail segments would be designed so as to provide sufficient width
and clearance for emergency, patrol, and maintenance vehicles, as well as to
accommodate pedestrians, bicycles, and other non-vehicular traffic moving in
two directions. In places where the trail is located near or over an existing road,
the trail wouldmay be flanked by a vegetated strip or 5-foot wide shoulder to
separate trail users from vehicular travel. Trails running parallel to the SMART
line Rail would be set back a minimum of 2550 feet from the rail centerline so as
to be consistent with standard rail-compatible trail design guidelines.
Barrier posts at trail intersections and entrances would be necessary to restrict
vehicle access. Removable bollards would be installed at trail locations to
maintain access control and to accommodate entry by maintenance, law
enforcement, or emergency services vehicles.
Implementing Trail System Option 1 (construct all five segments) would allow
maximum Providing increased public access to the project site for patrolling,
would increase the potential need for emergency or maintenance services
although this incremental increase is expected to be small. Trail system Option 2
(construct all five segments and close segment 1 during breeding seasons) and
Trail system Option 3 (construction segments 2 through 5) would provide the
same level of access as Option 1, except during breeding season, when access to
segment 1 would be either restricted to the public or no access would be provided
at all. Overall, improvements to the Bay Trail system under the Project would not
impede patrolling, emergency or maintenance access to the project site.
Emergency access to the site from off-shore would be improved by the boat
access for emergency responders continued to be provided as under existing
conditions; thereforeimproved by the boat access for emergency responders, this
impact is considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant.
Full-Tidal Alternative
The potential for flooding hazards would be the same for the Full-Tidal
Alternative as for the Project. The potential for impediments to emergency
response services would be similar the same for this alternative as Trail Systems
Option 1for the Project. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant,
and no mitigation is required.
Conclusion: Less than Significant.
Sears Point Wetland and Watershed Restoration
Project Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement
3.4-12
April 2012