Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISCHAPTER 5: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSISIn May 2003, Parsons prepared the Initial Study for the Caltrain Extension to Monterey County projectto determine if significant adverse impacts (either short-term or long-term) would result from projectconstruction or operation. The Initial Study was prepared in accordance with the California EnvironmentalQuality Act (CEQA) to provide preliminary environmental investigation of the proposed project.The Initial Study determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environmentand that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required. Circulation of the InitialStudy and Notice of Preparation identified the following issues of concern, raised by regional andlocal agencies and the public via written responses received regarding the Notice of Preparation.• Purpose and need, policies, funding, alternatives— Associated operating costs and capital costs, and project timeline— Determination of need for the project and discussion of all alternatives considered— Coastal development permit required• Public outreach— Public outreach/environmental justice outreach to minority, migrant and agriculturalcommunity• Visual— Aesthetics qualities or impacts at each station• Air quality— Control and mitigation of construction emissions— Direct and indirect source emissions from operational activities— Project operational and construction particulate matter (PM 10 ) emissions should bequantified— Exposure of air quality impacts to sensitive receptors• Hazards/hazardous materials— Discussion and analysis of any onsite potential hazardous materials• Hydrology/water quality— Potential drainage impacts to Route 183— Discussion of drainage issues and identification of measures that will avoid erosion andthe discharge of polluted runoff both during and after construction— Compliance with Section 404 permits• Land use— Station design in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, safety, and legalrequirements— Discussion of transit-oriented development near stationsparsons CHAPTER 5: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 115
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS— Evaluations of the impact of the proposed project on existing Gilroy station andmaintenance yard• Noise— Control and mitigation of construction noise emissions• Traffic— Show project is identified by and consistent with the Monterey County Regional TransportationPlan— Consult with Caltrans District 5 staff on the scope of the traffic study area— Show level of services (LOS) methodologies and calculations— Discussion and analysis of existing and cumulative traffic volumes within study area, tripreduction measures, operational/queuing analysis to determine the impact of the proposedproject on traffic operations on Route 183, and recommendations for any new gradecrossings and the need for grade separations or crossings over or under rail lines.— Provide information on proposed service schedule and frequency— Exclusive use of park-and-ride lots at all three stations for train riders— The potential interface between the proposed project and the proposed intercity railservice between San Francisco and Monterey at the Salinas, Pajaro Valley, andCastroville stations.A joint National Environmental Policy Act/California Environmental Quality Act (NEPA/CEQA)document Draft Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EA/EIR) wassubsequently prepared. This Draft EA/EIR addressed the Caltrain Extension Alternative and No BuildAlternative. The Express Bus Alternative was not addressed by this environmental analysis, as itsphysical facilities are a subset of the Caltrain Extension Alternative with three exceptions. TheMarina/California State University–Monterey Bay (CSUMB) park-and-ride lot proposed for theExpress Bus Alternative rests on land owned by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County(TAMC) at the site of the former Fort Ord quartermaster industry siding and warehouse facilities. Thesite is currently clear with only final grading required prior to construction of the proposed surfaceparking lot. The proposed Marina/CSUMB Monterey–Salinas Transit (MST) transit center also lies onTAMC-owned land adjacent to the proposed park-and-ride lot. This transit center site lies on landcurrently occupied by a non-historic building, which would be removed. No aspect of the buildingdemolition, transit center construction, park-and-ride lot construction and/or operation is considered tocreate a significant environmental impact. Notwithstanding this assessment, a re-evaluation of theaffected environment for this facility would be required if the Express Bus Alternative is selected asthe locally preferred alternative (LPA).The second aspect of the Express Bus Alternative not addressed by the Draft EA/EIR document isthe proposed expansion of the Frank J. Lichtanski Monterey Bay Operations Center to accommodatethe express bus fleet. This planned facility rests on land owned by MST sufficient in size toaccommodate 60 express buses, in addition to the 170 vehicles for which the facility is beingdesigned. Adoption of the Express Bus Alternative as the LPA would likely necessitate a reevaluationof the affected environment prior to issuance of a record of decision.The third aspect of the Express Bus Alternative not addressed by the Draft EA/EIR document is theoperation of up to 50 express bus vehicles operating over highways and through local streetintersections while traveling between Monterey County and the San Francisco Bay Area. This aspectparsons CHAPTER 5: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 116
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?