Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTY PASSENGER RAIL STATIONSALTERNATIVES ANALYSISCHAPTER 7: FINDINGS FROM PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDERWORKSHOPS ON ALTERNATIVESPublic meetings and stakeholder workshops have been held during the course of the projectdevelopment process to solicit input regarding facility design and environmental impact mitigation.This public involvement has focused on the Caltrain Extension Alternative/Express Bus Alternativefacilities (stations, park-and-ride, layover base) within the context of the Caltrain Extension toMonterey County/Salinas.Insofar as the Caltrain Extension Alternative service (two to four round trips of Caltrain commuter railservice), no public comments have been received regarding operation of the train service over theUnion Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Coast Line track between Salinas and Gilroy. All public comment andinput has related to facility location and design.As part of the Monterey County Fixed Guideway Study, the provision of passenger rail service to theMonterey Peninsula via the Monterey Branch line has been examined. Public input has beenreceived regarding this alignment and is reported in this section.The public involvement program has focused on the Caltrain Extension Alternative service andfacilities as the Express Bus Alternative facilities are a subset of the Caltrain Extension Alternative,with the exception of the Marina/CSUMB (California State University–Monterey Bay) MST (Monterey–Salinas Transit) Transit Center.As part of the environmental document scoping process, community meetings regarding the provisionof passenger rail service, the proposed location of stations and support facilities, and the conceptualdesign of Caltrain facilities were held in Pajaro (March 31, 2003), Castroville (January 15, 2003) andSalinas (March 31 and April 2, 2003). Public comments received during these meetings wereincluded as part of the Initial Study prepared for the project. Summaries of these community andpublic meetings comments are included below.PAJARO COMMUNITYThe community of Pajaro is located on the edge of the city of Watsonville. Its population fluctuatesbetween approximately 3,400 in the winter months and approximately 7,000 in the summer months.Watsonville’s population numbered 44,265 at the time of the 2000 census and is now estimated bythe Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments to be 52,716 as of Year 2005. In 2000, thePajaro Station Area Feasibility Analysis indicated that new passenger and freight train activityprovides the opportunity to create mixed-use and industrial development to generate jobs for localresidents and to achieve a balanced community. Such a development could be based around apassenger rail station and expanded freight-handling capabilities.The existing facility is located at the UPRR Watsonville junction just east of the intersection of SalinasRoad and Railroad Avenue and just north of Lewis Road. It was constructed in 1948 and consists of a7,600-quare-foot wood and stucco-wood building and an asphalt concrete platform. The existingplatform is adjacent to the Santa Cruz branch line tracks. There is no platform adjacent to the CoastLine tracks that could be used for the proposed passenger service. There is also a 40,000-squarefootasphalt concrete parking area at the station.Freight activity at the Pajaro Valley station is currently generated by through traffic, loading andunloading of freight on the team track and spurs, storage of tank cars, maintenance of freight cars,parsons CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS FROM PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS ON ALTERNATIVES 167
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTY PASSENGER RAIL STATIONSALTERNATIVES ANALYSISand switching of local trains. In addition, UPRR crews are based in Pajaro and the yard is used for asubregional switching yard.A community meeting concerning train service to Pajaro was held on March 31, 2003 at Pajaro MiddleSchool, 250 Salinas Road, Pajaro. There were approximately 60 members of the Pajaro communityin attendance. Translation to Spanish was provided to ensure full participation. Comments weretaken and recorded to be incorporated into the Initial Study. Comments and concerns included remediationof the station site, rail service times, stops and passenger services at the depot, circulation,bike and pedestrian access and safety, security, noise and traffic issues.A public information/presentation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) findings and questionand answer session was held at an Action Pajaro Valley meeting on May 10, 2006. Comments/suggestions received included looking at design features that could reduce potential flooding and itsdisruption of service; adding a station/stop in Aromas; designing with drought-resistant landscaping;reusing the old Watsonville Junction sign on the site; and concerns over peak hour traffic on SalinasRoad adjacent to the site. It was noted that Caltrain service would depart in the morning prior to thepeak hour of traffic volumes, and return in the evening following the peak period of afternoon traffic.CASTROVILLE COMMUNITYCastroville is an unincorporated community with a Year 2000 population of 6,700 and a 2005population of 7,099. Currently no station facilities exist in Castroville. The proposed site for theCastroville facility is located immediately north of State Route (SR) 156 at Castroville Boulevard onland currently used for agriculture. The site lies between downtown Castroville and a residentialneighborhood about one-half mile to the east, which also houses North (Monterey) County HighSchool. The Monterey County General Bikeways Plan (2001) includes a pedestrian/bicycle trailthrough the site that connects Salinas Street with Castroville Boulevard along with a grade separatedpedestrian and bicycle crossing. The site is included within the community area boundaries defined inthe Castroville Community Plan and has been identified as a potential location for mixed-use transitorienteddevelopment. The site would be accessed from SR 156, which connects Monterey Baycommunities with U.S. 101 and Salinas Street/Benson Road. The city of Marina is seven miles (nineminutes) southwest of Castroville and is connected to the station site via a four-lane freeway.Marina’s estimated 2005 population is 23,172.A community meeting concerning train service to Castroville was held on January 15, 2003 atGambetta Elementary School in Castroville. There were approximately 70 members of the Castrovillecommunity in attendance. Comments were taken and recorded to be incorporated into the InitialStudy. Comments and concerns included a desire for weekend service, the need for a pedestrianundercrossing, connection of the bike route through the site to the high school, improvements to SR156, building aesthetics and creating a station design that blends in, security, passenger services,parking, noise issues, and energy efficiency. Three goals of the meeting were to integrate the projectwith the Community Plan, minimize traffic impacts and include a pedestrian path to the high school.A follow-up public information/presentation of the Draft EIR findings and question and answer sessionwas held at a Castroville Community Plan Advisory Committee meeting held on May 24, 2006. Nocomments on the Draft EIR or proposed project were received from the public other than support forthe overall service and proposed station facilities.parsons CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS FROM PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS ON ALTERNATIVES 168
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:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
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?