Environmental Impact Statement - Sonoma Land Trust

More documents

Recommendations

Info

California Department of Fish and Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Section 3.10. Traffic and Transportation Access to Project Area Access to the central portions of the Project site is via Highway 37, a four-lane divided Highway that traverses the Project area in a west-east direction. From Highway 37, portions of the Project site along the Project’s northern boundary can be accessed via Lakeville Road. South of Highway 37, Lakeville Road becomes Reclamation Road, a rural two-lane road that crosses the SMART tracks and intersects the former Dickson Ranch property line. From this intersection, Black Point Sports Club and the Dickson Ranch complex are accessible via a private gated road. There is currently no emergency access to the site via Reclamation Road. The site can also be accessed via the Bay Trail segment that extends from the Napa-Sonoma Wildlife Area to Lower Tubbs Island, which is wide enough to accommodate emergency vehicles. However, because the Project site south of the SMART rail line consists entirely of privately-owned lands that are accessed via gated roads, emergency access to the site via the Bay Trail is restricted. Level of Service Definitions, Standards, and Significance Criteria Definitions The quality of service provided by a roadway or intersection is usually measured in terms of three parameters. • Level of service (LOS): A qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, based on service measures such as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, and convenience. • Volume to capacity (V/C) ratio: The number of vehicles that travel on a transportation facility divided by the full vehicular capacity of that facility (i.e., the number of vehicles the facility was designed to convey). • Delay: The additional travel time experienced by a vehicle or traveler because of inability to travel at optimal speed, and/or stops due to congestion or traffic control. Table 3.10-1 shows the relationship between V/C ratio, delay, driving conditions and LOS. Sears Point Wetland and Watershed Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement 3.10-3 April 2012 7
California Department of Fish and Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services Section 3.10. Traffic and Transportation Table 3.10-1. V/C Ratio, Delay, and Traffic Flow Conditions for LOS Designations LOS Approximate Maximum V/C Average Delay (seconds per vehicle) Stop- Controlled Intersection Signalized Intersection Traffic Flow Conditions A 0.6 10 10 Free-flow operations; vehicles unimpeded in ability to maneuver in traffic stream. B 0.7 11–15 11–20 Reasonable free-flow conditions; only slightly restricted ability to maneuver. C 0.8 16–25 21–35 Flows still near free-flow speed but noticeably restricted ability to maneuver. D 0.9 26–35 36–55 Speeds begin to decline; maneuverability limited and queues begin to form. E 1.0 36–50 56–80 Operation at capacity of roadway; maneuverability extremely limited and queues form with any disruption. F >1.0 >50 >80 Failure conditions indicating breakdowns in vehicular flow with long queues forming at breakdown points. Source: Transportation Research Board 2000. Level of Service Standards Sonoma County has defined the limit of acceptable traffic operations on arterial and collector roadways as LOS C, unless a lower LOS is determined to be acceptable due to environmental or community values or a project resulting in a lower LOS has an overriding public benefit that outweighs the increased congestion. For roadway segments operating at LOS D or worse, the County sets significance thresholds at an increase of five percent (0.05) in the existing volume-to-capacity ratio. A level of service of LOS D defines the limit of acceptable traffic operations at intersections in Sonoma County. Significant traffic impacts at intersections are defined to occur when the addition of new project traffic causes traffic operating conditions to deteriorate from an acceptable level of service to an unacceptable level, or increases the critical movement delay by five (5) or more seconds at intersections operating at LOS E or F. Existing Levels of Service on Affected Roadways Analysis of existing levels of service in the Project vicinity relies upon the traffic analysis in the Revised Draft Traffic Impact Study for Alternative F (Lakeville Site) of the Graton Rancheria Casino and Hotel Project (Kimley-Horn and Associates 2007), which is incorporated by reference. The proposed Graton Sears Point Wetland and Watershed Restoration Project Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement 3.10-4 April 2012 7
Page 1 and 2:
Sears Point Wetland and Watershed R
Page 3 and 4:
Sears Point Wetland and Watershed R
Page 5 and 6:
Contents List of Tables ...........
Page 7 and 8:
California Department of Fish and G
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Executive Summary This summary prov
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Table ES-1. Summary of Impacts and
Page 33 and 34:
Table ES-1. Continued Page 3 of 141
Page 35 and 36:
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:
Table 1-1. List of Local, State, an
Page 53 and 54:
Table 1-1. Continued Page 3 of 3 Ag
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Table 2-2. Action Alternatives Cons
Page 71 and 72:
Table 2-2. Continued Page 3 of 4 Ut
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 3 Affected Environment and
Page 121 and 122:
Section 3.1 Geology, Soils, and Pal
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Section 3.2 Surface-Water Hydrology
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Section 3.3 Water Quality Introduct
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:
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:
Section 3.4 Public Health and Safet
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
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:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Table 3.5-2. Special-Status Species
Page 225 and 226:
Table 3.5-2. Continued Page 3 of 12
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Section 3.6 Land Use and Public Uti
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284: California Department of Fish and G
Page 289 and 290: Section 3.7 Agricultural Resources
Page 333: California Department of Fish and G
Page 347 and 348: Section 3.11 Air Quality Introducti
Page 349 and 350: Table 3.11-1. Ambient Air Quality S
Page 357 and 358: Table 3.11-32, Continued Page 2 of
Page 377 and 378: Section 3.12 Noise Introduction Thi
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Section 3.13 Cultural Resources Int
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Section 3.14 Aesthetics Introductio
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Section 3.15 Environmental Justice
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Chapter 4 Consultation and Other Re
Page 425 and 426:
Sonoma Land Trust Chapter 4. Consul
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Chapter 5 Public Involvement and Sc
Page 445 and 446:
Page 447 and 448:
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
Page 453 and 454:
Sonoma Land Trust Chapter 7. Refere
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
Page 465 and 466:
Page 467 and 468:
Page 469 and 470:
Page 471 and 472:
show all

Environmental Impact Statement - Sonoma Land Trust

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?