new ch03-15 traffic done - alameda county, california · 2014. 6. 6. · policy 190: the county...

Alameda County Community Development Agency Impact Analysis

Transportation/Traffic

APWRA Repowering Draft PEIR 3.15‐1

June 2014ICF 00323.08

3.15 Transportation/Traffic Thissectiondescribestheenvironmentalsettingandregulatorysettingfortransportationandtraffic.Italsodescribesthetransportationandtrafficimpactsthatwouldresultfromimplementationoftheprogramandtwoindividualprojects,andmitigationmeasuresthatwouldreducetheseimpactswherefeasibleandappropriate.

3.15.1 Existing Conditions

Regulatory Setting

Federal and State

CaltransisresponsibleforoperatingandmaintainingallState‐ownedroadwaysandinterstatehighwaysinCalifornia.TheCaliforniaVehicleCodeDivision15givesCaltransdiscretionaryauthoritytoissuespecialpermitsforthemovementofvehicles/loadsexceedingstatutorylimitationsonthesize,weight,andloadingofvehicles.AspecialpermitissuedbyCaltransisrequiredtoauthorizetheoperationofoversizeoroverweighttrucks,bothofwhichwouldberequiredforimplementationoftherepowerprogramandthesubjectprojects.

AlamedaCounty’sECAP(AlamedaCounty2000)containsgoalsandpoliciestomaintainanefficientcirculationnetworkintheeasternportionofthecounty.Goalsincludecreatingandmaintainingabalancedmultimodaltransportationsystem,cooperatingwithotherregionaltransportationplanningagencies,integratingpedestrianuseintothetransportationsystem,andmitigatingexceedancesoflevelofservice(LOS)standards.AccordingtoPolicy193,thetrafficLOSstandardformajorintercityarterialsisLOSD.TheLOSstandardadoptedbytheAlamedaCountyTransportationCommission(CTC),theCounty’sCongestionManagementAgency(CMA),fortheCongestionManagementProgram(CMP)andMetropolitanTransportationSystem(MTS)roadwayssegments(e.g.I‐580,I‐680,andSR84)isLOSE.

LOSstandardsandtraveldemandmeasures,establishedbytheAlamedaCTC,areintendedtoregulatelong‐termtrafficimpactsassociatedwithfuturedevelopment,anddonotapplytotemporaryconstructionprojectswhoseshort‐termtrafficincreasesendwhenconstructionactivitiesend.

AlamedaCountyhasnotdesignatedlocaltruckroutesnoradoptedspecificpoliciesregardingmanagementofconstructionactivities.Chapter12.08oftheAlamedaCountyCoderegulatesroadwayuse,includingissuanceofencroachmentpermitsforworkwithinanAlamedaCountyroadright‐of‐way.

Alameda County General Plan

TheAlamedaCountyGeneralPlanconsistsofthreeareaplansthatcontaintheLandUseandCirculationelementsfortheirrespectivegeographicareas,aswellasareaspecificgoals,policiesandactionsforcirculation,openspace,conservation,safety,andnoise.Inaddition,theGeneralPlancontainsHousing,Conservation,OpenSpace,Noise,SeismicandSafety,andScenicRouteelements

June 2014ICF 00323.08

thatcontaingoals,policies,andactionsthatapplytotheentireunincorporatedarea(AlamedaCounty2013).OtherthantheScenicRoutegoalsandpoliciesthatarediscussedinSection3.1,Aesthetics,therearenocountywidecirculationpoliciesrelatedtotransportationortrafficissuespertinenttotheproposedprogramandthesubjectprojects.Countywidetransportationplans,suchastheCountywideTransportationPlan,andpoliciesareprimarilydevelopedandmaintainedbytheAlamedaCTC,whichservesastheCounty’sCMA.

Alameda County East County Area Plan

TheAlamedaCountyECAPcontainsgoalsandpoliciespertinenttotransportationandtrafficissuesonlanduseinvolvingwindfarmsandonthearea’stransportationsystemsinvolvinggeneraltransportationtopics,transportationdemandmanagement,streetsandhighways,bicycleandpedestrianpaths,andaviation(AlamedaCounty2000:43,50–56).GoalsintheECAPareintendedtobegeneralstatementsofaconditionAlamedaCountywantstoachieve,andtheassociatedpoliciesarethefocusedstatementsofhowtheCountywillachievethesegoals.Thegoalsandpolicieslistedbelowareconsideredrelevanttotherepowerprogramandthesubjectprojects.

Land Use—Windfarms

Goal:Tomaximizetheproductionofwindgeneratedenergy.

Policy170:TheCountyshallprotectnearbyexistingusesfrompotentialtraffic,noise,dust,visual,andotherimpactsgeneratedbytheconstructionandoperationofwindfarmfacilities.

Transportation Systems—General Transportation

Goal:Tocreateandmaintainabalanced,multi‐modaltransportationsystemthatprovidesfortheefficientandsafemovementofpeople,goods,andservices.

*Policy179:TheCountyshalladheretoprovisionsoftheRegionalTransportationPlan,CountywideTransportationPlan,andCountyCongestionManagementProgram,insofarastheyarenotinconsistentwiththeInitiative.

Transportation Systems—Transportation Demand Management

Goal:ToreduceEastCountytrafficcongestion.

Policy183:TheCountyshallseektominimizetrafficcongestionlevelsthroughouttheEastCountystreetandhighwaysystem.

Policy184:TheCountyshallseektominimizethetotalnumberofAverageDailyTraffic(ADT)tripsthroughoutEastCounty.

Policy185:TheCountyshallseektominimizepeakhourtripsbyexploringnewmethodsthatwoulddiscouragepeakhourcommutingandsinglevehicleoccupancytrips.

Policy187:TheCountyshallmonitortrafficlevelsaccordingtoEastCountyAreaPlanandCongestionManagementProgramobjectives.

Policy188:TheCountyshallpromotetheuseoftransit,ridesharing,bicycling,andwalking,throughlanduseplanningaswellastransportationfundingdecisions.

Policy190:TheCountyshallrequirenewnon‐residentialdevelopmentsinunincorporatedareastoincorporateTransportationDemandManagement(TDM)measuresandshallrequirenewresidentialdevelopmentstoincludesiteplanfeaturesthatreducetraffictripssuchasmixedusedevelopmentandtransit‐orienteddevelopmentprojects.

Policy191:TheCountyshallworkwithcitiesandtheCongestionManagementAgencytocoordinatelanduseimpactanalyses.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Transportation Systems—Streets and Highways

Goal:TocompleteCounty‐plannedstreetandhighwayimprovementsthatareattractivelydesignedtointegratepedestrianandvehicleuse.

Policy192:TheCountyshallworkwithCaltranstoimprovetheinterstateandstatehighwaysystemsandtheCountyroadsystemaccordingtothestreetclassificationsshownontheEastCountyAreaPlanTransportationDiagram(seeFigure6),consistentwithPolicy177.

Policy193:TheCountyshallensurethatnewdevelopmentpaysforroadwayimprovementsnecessarytomitigatetheexceedanceoftrafficLevelofServicestandards(asdescribedbelow)causeddirectlybythedevelopment.TheCountyshallfurtherensurethatnewdevelopmentisphasedtocoincidewithroadwayimprovementssothat(1)trafficvolumesonintercityarterialssignificantlyaffectedbytheprojectdonotexceedLevelofServiceDonmajorarterialsegmentswithinunincorporatedareas,and(2)thattrafficvolumesonCongestionManagementProgram(CMP)designatedroadways(e.g.,InterstateHighways580and680andStateHighway84)significantlyaffectedbytheprojectdonotexceedLevelofServiceEwithinunincorporatedareas.IfLOSEisexceeded,DeficiencyPlansforaffectedroadwaysshallbepreparedinconjunctionwiththeCongestionManagementAgency.LOSshallbedeterminedaccordingtoCongestionManagementAgencyadoptedmethodology.TheCountyshallencouragecitiestoensurethattheseLevelsofServicestandardsarealsometwithinunincorporatedareas.

Transportation Systems—Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths

Goal:Toincludeacomprehensivenetworkofbicycleandpedestrianpathsinthelocalandsubregionaltransportationnetwork.

Policy211:TheCountyshallcreateandmaintainasafe,convenient,andeffectivebicyclesystemthatmaximizesbicycleuse.

Policy214:TheCountyshallrequirethatcirculationandsiteplansforindividualdevelopmentsminimizebarrierstoaccessbypedestrians,thedisabled,andbicycles(e.g.,collectorsorarterialsseparatingschoolsorparksfromresidentialneighborhoods).

Transportation Systems—Aviation

Goal:Toensuretheefficient,safe,andeconomicallybeneficialoperationoftheLivermoreMunicipalAirport.

Policy217:TheCountyshallrequirethat,whereconflictsbetweenanewuseandtheairportthatcouldinterferewiththeairport’soperationsareanticipated,theburdenofmitigatingtheconflictswillbetheresponsibilityofthenewuse.

Alameda County Congestion Management Program

TheAlamedaCountyCMPidentifiescountywidestrategiestorespondtofuturetransportation;onneedsandprocedurestoreducecongestion.TheCMPidentifiesexistinganddesiredtrafficconditionsonavarietyofroadwaysthroughoutthecounty.TheonlyCMP‐designatedroadwaythatextendsthroughtheprogramareaisI‐580,whichconnectstoI‐680tothewestandI‐205totheeast(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013a:35,Figure1).The2012LOSmonitoringstudyrevealedthatsegmentsofI‐580intheprogramvicinityoperatedatLOSFduringpeakhours:westboundsegmentfromGreenvilleRoadintheCountytoPortolaAvenueinLivermoreduringtheAMpeakhourandeastboundsegmentfrom1stStreetinLivermoretoNorthFlynnRoadintheCountyduringthePMpeakhour(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013b:12‐16).

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Alameda Countywide Transportation Plan

TheAlamedaCountywideTransportationPlan(CWTP)isalong‐rangepolicydocumentthatguidestransportationfundingdecisionsforAlamedaCounty'stransportationsystemovera25‐yearhorizon.TheCWTPlaysoutastrategyformeetingtransportationneedsforallusersinAlamedaCountyandincludesprojectsandotherimprovementsfornewandexistingfreeways,localstreetsandroads,publictransit(paratransit,buses,rails,ferries),aswellasfacilitiesandprogramstosupportbicyclingandwalking(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2012a).TheCWTPgoalsforthecounty’stransportationsystemareasfollows.

Multimodal.

Accessible,affordableandequitableforpeopleofallages,incomes,abilitiesandgeographies.

Integratedwithlandusepatternsandlocaldecision‐making.

Connectedacrossthecounty,withinandacrossthenetworkofstreets,highwaysandtransit,bicycleandpedestrianroutes.

Reliableandefficient.

Costeffective.

Wellmaintained.

Supportiveofahealthyandcleanenvironment.

Thesegoalsarethenalignedwithoneormoreperformancecategoriesandperformancemeasurements.Theplanalsoidentifieslanduseandconservationdevelopmentstrategies.

Alameda County Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan for Unincorporated Areas

TheBicycleandPedestrianMasterPlan(AlamedaCounty2012)describesexistingconditionsforbicyclingandwalking,identifiesneedsforcapitalandprogramimprovementstosupportthesemodes,andrecommendsimprovementprojectstoenhancebicyclingandwalkingintheunincorporatedareas.Highpriorityprojectsthatmeettheshort‐termneedsofthecommunitiesareidentified.Strategiesforeducation,fundingandimplementationoftherecommendedprojectsandprogramsarealsoprovided.Thisplanwaspreparedtoupdatethepreviousbicycleandpedestriandocuments.ItprovidesavisionforbicyclingandwalkinginAlamedaCountyasimportantalternativetransportationmodes.Theplanalsoidentifiesimplementableprojectsthatwillcontributetoamorebicycleandpedestrian‐friendlyenvironmentfortheunincorporatedareas.

TheBicycleandPedestrianMasterPlancontainsgoalsandpoliciesfordevelopingandimplementingabikewaysystemandpedestrianimprovementsthatmeettheCounty’svisionforsafe,attractive,andconvenientopportunitiesforbicyclingandwalkingforalltypesoftripsandusergroups.

Goal1:ImprovebicycleandpedestrianaccessandcirculationforallusersasameanstomeetthegoalsoftheAlamedaCountyUnincorporatedAreasClimateActionPlan.

Goal2:Createandmaintainacomprehensivesystemofbicycleandpedestrianfacilitiesinthelocalandsub‐regionaltransportationnetworkinordertoestablishabalancedmulti‐modaltransportationsystem.

Policy2.8:Routinelymaintainbicycleandpedestrianfacilitiesandamenities.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Goal3:Maximizetheuseofpublicandprivateresourcesforimplementingbicycleandpedestrianimprovements.

Goal4:Provideasaferbicyclingandwalkingenvironment

Policy4.1:Monitorbicycleandpedestrian‐involvedcollisionsintheUnincorporatedAreasandtargetthehighincidencelocationsforbicycleandpedestrianimprovements.

Policy4.4:Workwithlawenforcementofficialsoneducationandenforcementprogramsthatincreasesafetyawarenessofallroadusersforbicyclistsandpedestriansandthatreducebicycleandpedestrian‐involvedcollisions.

Goal5:Promotelandusesandurbandesignthatsupportapleasantenvironmentforbicyclingandwalking.

Policy5.2:Designnewdevelopmentandredevelopmentprojectstofacilitatebicycleandpedestrianaccess,reducebicyclingandwalkingtriplengths,andavoidadverseimpactstothebicycleandpedestriansafety,access,andcirculation.

Policy5.3:Consideroptionsforcommercialandindustrialdevelopmentprojectstoincludebicyclestoragefacilitiesforemployeesandcustomers,shower/lockerareas,andotherfacilitiesidentifiedinthisplanforemployeesthatcommutebybicycle.Thiscouldincludeon‐sitefacilitiesorservicesavailablethroughlocalpartnerships.Encourageincludingbicycleparkingandshower/lockerareasinnewconstructionormajorremodelprojects.

Policy5.7:Requirethatalltrafficimpactstudiesandanalysesofproposedstreetchangesaddressimpactsonbicyclingandpedestriantransportation.Specifically,thefollowingshouldbeconsidered:

ConsistencywithGeneralPlanandtheBicycleandPedestrianMasterPlanpolicies;

ImpactontheexistingandfutureBicycleandPedestrianMasterPlanBikewaySystem;

Permanenttravelpatternoraccesschangesincludingthedegreetowhichbicycleandpedestriantravelpatternsarealteredorrestrictedduetoanychangetotheroadwaynetwork;and

Conformitytoacceptedbicycleandpedestrianfacilitydesignstandardsandguidelines.

Goal6:Supportagencycoordinationfortheimprovementofbicycleandpedestrianaccess.

Environmental Setting

Roadway Network

Roadwayaccesstotheprogramareaisprovidedbyhighwaysandlocalcountyroadways.RegionalaccessisprovidedbyI‐580,amajoreast‐westtrucktravelrouteandmainthroughwayineasternAlamedaCountythatconnectsI‐680onthewestandI‐5ontheeast(seeFigure1‐1).The2012annualaveragedailytraffic(AADT)volumesonI‐580intheprogramareaareabout143,000vehiclesperdaywithabout10.4%oftrucktraffic(CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation2013).Caltransannualaveragedailytraffic(AADT)volumesandcompositionoftrucksdatafortheseroutesareprovidedinTable3.15‐1.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐1. Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes on Regional Access Roadways

RoadwayName SegmentLocation 2012AADT2012TruckAADT/PercentofTotalAADT

I‐580,inprogramarea

I‐205—GreenvilleRoad,Livermore

143,000 14,870/10.4%

I‐580,westofProgramarea

GreenvilleRoad,Livermore—I‐680

142,000–214,000 7,550–20,130/4.6%–12.2%

I‐580,eastofProgramarea

I‐5—I‐205 21,000–31,000 3,380–5,330/12.5%–17.9%

I‐205,Tracy I‐580—JunctionI‐5 82,000–114,000 10,560–13,680/11.3%–12.0%

I‐680,Dublin BernalAvenue,Pleasanton—AlcostaBoulevard,SanRamon

132,000–167,000 8,750–12,690/5.3%–9.2%

Sources:CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation2013.

MajorcountyroadsthatprovideaccessintheprogramareaincludeVascoRoad,AltamontPassRoad,andPattersonPassRoad.Inaddition,DyerRoad,FlynnRoad,andJessRanchRoadprovidelocalaccesstothewindfarmsintheprogramareaviaAltamontPassRoadandPattersonPassRoad.TherecentADTvolumescollatedonPattersonPassRoadareabout2,700to3,700vehiclesperday(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013a)andonAltamontPassRoadareabout5,850to10,250vehiclesperday(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013b).ThepostedspeedlimitsonPattersonPassRoadandtheothercountyroadstypicallyrangefrom45to50milesperhour(mph)intheprogramarea,withafewsegmentsthatallowupto55mph,orlimitspeedsto40mph.Therehavebeen47collisionsinthelast5yearsonPattersonPassRoad,whichrepresentsarelativelyhighrateandforwhichsafetyimprovementsareverydesirable(AlamedaCounty2013).Manycountyroadsinthevicinityhaveinsufficientroadbasetosupportheavy,frequenttruckloads(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013b),includingPattersonPassRoad.AveragedailytrafficvolumeshavebeencollectedforsomeoftheroadsintheprogramareaandareprovidedinTable3.15‐2.

Table 3.15‐2. Average Daily Traffic Volumes on Local Access Roadways in Program Area

RoadwayName CounterLocation CountDate Direction ADT

PattersonPassRoad EastofGreenvilleRoad January2009–December2012

Both 3,100

EastofSouthFlynnRoad 2,700

EastofMidwayRoad 3,700

AltamontPassRoad WestofGreenvilleRoad

September2011

Westbound 5,050

Eastbound 5,200

Total 10,250

WestofGrantLineRoad

September2011

Westbound 3,550

Eastbound 2,300

Total 5,850

Source:AlamedaCounty2013a,2013b.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Public Transit

Thereisnopublictransitserviceprovidedintheprogramarea.TothewestoftheprogramareatheclosestbusserviceprovidedisintheincorporatedLivermoreareabytheLivermoreAmadorValleyTransitAuthority.Eastoftheprogramarea,theclosestbusserviceisprovidedintheCityofTracybytheSanJoaquinRegionalTransitDistrict.TheAltamontCorridorExpress(ACE)trainisacommutertrainservicemanagedbytheSanJoaquinRegionalRailCommissionforweekdaytravelbetweenStocktonandSanJose.TheACEusestheUnionPacificRailroad(UPRR)tracksthroughtheprogramarea,withgrade‐separatedcrossingsofI‐580andAltamontPassRoad.

Bikeway/Pedestrian Circulation

BicyclefacilitiesinthecitiesandcommunitiesofAlamedaCountyareclassifiedintothreecategories:ClassI(bikepaths)aredescribedascompletelyseparated,off‐street,pavedright‐of‐way(sharedwithpedestrians)paths,whichexcludemotorvehicletraffic;ClassII(bikelanes)arestripedlanesforone‐waybiketravelonaroadway;andClassIII(bikeroutes)areon‐streetbikerouteswithoutstriping.TheBicycleMasterPlan,updatedin2012,usestheseorsimilarcategoriestodescribethebikewaynetworkintheunincorporatedareasofAlamedaCounty(AlamedaCounty2012).

TheonlyexistingdesignatedbikewayintheprogramareaistherecreationalpathalongtheCaliforniaaqueductinthenortheastportionoftheprogramarea,althoughtheBicycleMasterPlanrecommendsbikewayrouteadditionstotheexistingbikewaynetworkbydesignationofnewClassIIICruralbikeroutesonAltamontPassRoad,PattersonPassRoad,NorthFlynnRoadandSouthFlynnRoad(AlamedaCountyPublicWorksAgency2012:3‐18,Table3‐10,and3‐25,Figure3‐3e)andtheEastBayRegionalParksDistrict(EBRPD)MasterPlanidentifiespotentialbiketrailsintheprogramareathatwouldbecomepartofalargerregionalnetwork(EastBayRegionalParksDistrict2013).

Plannedbicycleroutesintheareawouldtypicallynotserveaconventionalbicyclecommuterfunction,butprimarilyareintendedasrecreationalandinter‐regionalaccessroutes.Notably,theareaishosttoseveralannualspring,summerandfallbicycletouring,racingandcharityeventsthatutilizetheseruralbikeroutes,suchasthewell‐knownAmgenTourofCalifornia,variousridesbycyclingclubs,andtheMealsonWheelsride.In2013,aportionofPattersonPassRoadintheprogramareawaspartoftheStage7RouteoftheAmgenTourfromLivermoretoMountDiablo(AmgenTourofCalifornia2013).

Air Traffic

Therearefourairportsinthevicinityoftheprogramarea:ByronAirportislocatedabout2milesnorthoftheprogramareaboundary;TracyMunicipalAirportislocatedabout6.5mileseastoftheprogramareaboundary;MeadowlarkFieldislocatedabout3mileswestoftheprogramareaboundary;andLivermoreMunicipalAirportislocatedabout7mileswestoftheprogramareaboundary.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

3.15.2 Environmental Impacts

Thissectiondescribestheimpactanalysisrelatingtotransportationandtrafficfortheproposedprogramandthesubjectprojects.Itdescribesthemethodsusedtodeterminetheimpactsoftheprogramandliststhethresholdsusedtoconcludewhetheranimpactwouldbesignificant.Measurestomitigate(i.e.,avoid,minimize,rectify,reduce,eliminate,orcompensatefor)significantimpactsaccompanytheimpactdiscussion.

Methods for Analysis

Implementationoftheproposedprogram,includingtheGoldenHillsandPattersonPassprojects,wouldreplacetheexistingturbineswithfewerandlargerturbines.Becauseoftheearthworkvolumesinvolvedandtheneedfordeliveriesofhighly‐specializedmaterialsandwindturbinecomponents,constructionwouldintermittentlygeneratesubstantialvolumesoftrafficduringthedecommissioningandinstallationofwindturbines,andnumerousoversizeandoverweighttrucktrips.Oncetheturbinesareinstalledandinoperation,maintenanceneedswouldbelimitedandnotsubstantiallygreaterthancurrentlyrequired;post‐constructiontrafficgenerationwouldbewellwithinthecapacityofthelocalroadwaysystemandwouldnotdiffermateriallyfromcurrentmaintenancetrafficlevels.Analysisoftrafficimpactsthereforeconcentratedonconstructionactivities.

Analysisusedestimatedconstructiontrafficgeneration(expressedasaveragetripsperday)todevelopaqualitativeevaluationofshort‐termimpactsonthelocalandregionalroadwaysinthevicinityoftheprogramarea.Forthepurposeofidentifyingtrafficimpactsassociatedwithanticipatedprojectsthatcouldoccurintheprogramarea,atypical80MWrepoweringproject,basedonthereviewofwindrepoweringprojectsintheprogramvicinity,isassumedfortheanalysistoestimatetheconstriction‐relatedvehicletrips.BasedontheanalysisforVascoWindRepoweringProject(ContraCostaCounty2010)intheprogramvicinityanddataprovidedbytheprojectapplicants,atypical80MWrepoweringprojectintheprogramareaandGoldenHillsprojectareanticipatedtogenerateanaverageof424vehicletripsperday(304trucktripsand120workertrips)duringthepeakmonthsoftheconstructionperiod.ItisanticipatedthatworkertripswouldoccurduringAMandPMcommutehoursandtrucktripswouldoccurthroughouttheconstructionhours(assuming8hoursperday),whichwouldgenerateanaverageof98vehicletripsperhour(38trucktripsand60workertrips)duringthepeakcommutehours.ThePattersonPassproject,a27MWrepoweringproject,isanticipatedtogenerateanaverageof230vehicletripsperday(150trucktripsand80workertrips)duringthepeakmonthsoftheconstructionperiod,withanaverageof59vehicletripsperhour(19trucktripsand40workertrips)generatedduringthepeakcommutehours.

TheaveragedailytripgenerationforatypicalrepoweringprojectintheprogramareaandtwosubjectprojectsareshowninTable3.15‐3.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐3. Average Daily Construction Trip Generation Assumptions

Activity

AverageVehicleTripsperDay(one‐way)a

TotalHeavyDutyTruck

LightDutyTruck Worker

TypicalRepoweringProjectinProgramAreaandGoldenHillsProject

Decommissioning 8 6120,allconstructionactivity

RoadsandWTGfoundationsconstruction 166 108

WTGmachines,pads,andsubstationmaterialsdeliveryandinstallation

Total 184 120 120 424

PattersonPassProject

Decommissioning 4 280,allconstructionactivity

RoadsandWTGfoundationsconstruction 102 36

WTGmachines,pads,andsubstationmaterialsdeliveryandinstallation

Total 110 40 80 230

a Toprovidetheconservativeassessment,theaveragevehicletripsareestimatedforthepeakconstructionmonths.

Determination of Significance

InaccordancewithAppendixGoftheStateCEQAGuidelines,programAlternative1,programAlternative2,theGoldenHillsproject,orthePattersonPassprojectwouldbeconsideredtohaveasignificanteffectifitwouldresultinanyoftheconditionslistedbelow.

Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransit.

Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways.

Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks.

Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipment).

Resultininadequateemergencyaccess.

Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Impacts and Mitigation Measures

ImpactTRA‐1a‐1:Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransitorconflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Operations

ConstructiontrafficassociatedwithprogramAlternative1wouldbetemporary.Oncethenewturbinesareinstalledandinoperation,maintenanceneedswouldbelimitedandnotsubstantiallygreaterthancurrentlyrequired;post‐constructiontrafficgeneratedbythemaintenanceactivitieswouldbewellwithinthecapacityofthelocalroadwaysystemandwouldnotdiffermateriallyfromthecurrentmaintenancetrafficlevel.OperationofwindfarmsintheAPWRAisconsistentwiththeAlamedaCountyGeneralPlan,transportationplans,andregulationsincorporatingassumptionsofbuildoutoftheGeneralPlan.Accordingly,programAlternative1wouldnotconflictwithapplicabletransportationplans,ordinances,andpolicies.ThetrafficimpactassociatedwithoperationandmaintenanceoftheAlternative1wouldbelessthansignificant.

Construction

ConstructionofindividualrepoweringprojectsintheprogramareaassociatedwithAlternative1wouldtemporarilyincreasevehicletrafficonregionalandlocalaccessroutesintheprojectvicinityandinvolvethetransportofoversizeandoverweightwindturbinecomponents.Dependingonthesizeofeachseparaterepoweringproject,constructionactivitiescouldtakeplaceoveratimeperiodlastingbetween6and12months.AsdiscussedaboveandsummarizedinTable3.15‐3,atypical80MWrepoweringprojectintheprogramareaisanticipatedtogenerateanaverageof424vehicletripsperday(304trucktripsand120workertrips)and98vehicletripsperhour(38trucktripsand60workertrips)duringthepeakcommutehours.

Table3.15‐4summarizesanestimateoftheconstruction‐relatedtripsonregionalaccesshighwaysintheprogramvicinity.Theincreaseinconstructiontripsisasmallfraction(lessthan0.5percent)ofADTonI‐580intheprogramareaandtheregionalaccesshighwaysintheprogramvicinity;accordingly,theconstructiontrafficisnotexpectedtodegradetrafficoperationontheseregionalaccessroadways.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐4. Estimated Construction Trips on Regional Access Roadways—Typical Repowering Project and Golden Hills Project

RoadwayName Description

2012AADT

2012TruckAADT/PercentofTotalAADT

AverageDailyConstructionTrips/PercentofTotalAADT

AverageDailyConstructionTrickTrips/PercentofTotalAADT

143,000 14,870/10.4% 212a/0.1% 152a/0.1%

142,000–214,000

7,550–20,130/4.6%–12.2%

212a/0.1% 152a/0.1%

I‐5—I‐205 21,000–31,000

3,380–5,330/12.5%–17.9%

106b/0.5% 76b/0.2%–0.4%

I‐205,Tracy I‐580—JunctionI‐5 82,000–114,000

10,560–13,680/11.3%–12.0%

106b/0.1% 76b/<0.1%

132,000–167,000

8,750–12,690/5.3%–9.2%

53c/<0.1% 38c/<0.1%

aAssumes50percentoftotaldailyvehicletrips(424)andtotaltrucktrips(304)wouldoriginatefromwestoftheprogramarea,fromtheLivermoreareaandareastothewest,and50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldoriginatefromeastoftheprogramarea,fromtheTracyareaandareastotheeast.

bAssumes50percentoftheconstructiontrafficoriginatedfromeastoftheprogramarea,whichis25percentoftotalconstructiontraffic,wouldaccesstheprojectareaviaI‐580,and50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldaccesstheprojectareaviaI‐205.

cAssumes50percentoftheconstructiontrafficoriginatedfromwestoftheprogramarea,whichis25percentoftotalconstructiontraffic,wouldbefromareaswestofLivermoreanduseI‐680toaccesstheprogramarea.50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromsouthand50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromnorth(12.5percentoftotalconstructiontraffic).

Constructiontrafficcouldcauseasubstantialtrafficincreaseonthelocalcountyroadsthatprovidedirectaccesstotheprojectconstructionsites—e.g.,VascoRoad,AltamontPassRoad,PattersonPassRoad,DyerRoad,andFlynnRoad—astheseroadsgenerallyhavelowtrafficvolumes.Table3.15‐5summarizesanestimateoftheconstruction‐relatedtripsonmajorcountyroadsthatprovidedirectaccesstoconstructionsites(AltamontPassRoadandPattersonPassRoad)intheprogramarea.Theincreaseinconstructiontripswouldrangefrom2to8percentofADTandfrom5to18percentofpeakhourvolumesonAltamontPassRoadandPattersonPassRoad.Thesubstantialincreaseinconstructiontraffic,especiallyduringtheAMandPMpeakcommutehours,couldpotentiallycausedegradationoftrafficoperationontheselocalprojectaccessroutes.Theimpactfromincreasesconstructiontripsonthelocalroadwaytrafficoperationisconsideredasignificantimpact.

However,becausetheconstructionactivitieswouldbetemporaryandwouldnotcausethelong‐termclosuresoralternationofprojectaccessroadsthatwouldotherwisesubstantiallychangethecirculationofsurroundingroadwaysystemandcoulddegradethetrafficoperationtoanunacceptableLOS,implementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducetheimpactofincreasedtrafficonlocalaccessroadsandtheimpactofshort‐termtemporaryclosuresoftravellanesatprojectsiteaccesspointsduringdeliveryofoversizedloadstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐5. Estimated Construction Trips on Local Access Roadways—Typical Repowering Project and Golden Hills Project

RoadwayName CounterLocationExistingADT(vpd)

AverageDailyConstructionTripsa/PercentofTotalADT

AveragePeakHourConstructionTripsa/PercentofPeakHourTrafficb

PattersonPassRoad EastofGreenvilleRoad 3,100 212/7% 49/15%

EastofSouthFlynnRoad 2,700 212/8% 49/18%

EastofMidwayRoad 3,700 212/6% 49/13%

AltamontPassRoad WestofGreenvilleRoad 10,250 212/2% 49/5%

WestofGrantLineRoad 5,850 212/4% 49/8%a AssumesconstructiontrafficwouldaccesstheconstructionsiteseitherviaPattersonPassRoadorviaAltamontPassRoad,dependingontheprojectlocations;and50percentoftotalconstructiontraffic(424dailytripsand98peakhourtrips)wouldaccesstheprojectareaviaeitherroadwaysfromthewestand50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromtheeast.

b Peakhourtrafficontheroadwaysegmentstypicallyisassumedabout10%ofADT.

MitigationMeasureTRA‐1:Developandimplementaconstructiontrafficcontrolplan

Priortostartingconstruction‐relatedactivities,theApplicantshallprepareandimplementaTrafficControlPlan(TCP)thatwillreduceoreliminateimpactsassociatedwiththeproposedprogram.TheTCPshalladheretoAlamedaCountyandCaltransrequirements,andmustbesubmittedforreviewandapprovaloftheCountyPublicWorksDepartmentpriortoimplementation.TheTCPshallincludethefollowingelements.TheCountyandCaltransmayrequireadditionalelementstobeidentifiedduringtheirreviewandapprovaloftheTCP.

Scheduleconstructionhourstoavoidtheconstructionworkerscommutingto/fromtheprojectsiteduringtypicalpeakcommutehours(7a.m.to9a.m.and4p.m.to6p.m.).

Limittruckaccesstotheprojectsiteduringtypicalpeakcommutehours(7a.m.to9a.m.and4p.m.to6p.m.).

Requirethatwrittennotificationbeprovidedtocontractorsregardingappropriatehaulroutestoandfromtheprogramarea,aswellastheweightandspeedlimitsonlocalcountyroadsusedtoaccesstheprogramarea.

Provideaccessforemergencyvehiclestoandthroughtheprogramareaatalltimes.

Whenlane/roadclosuresoccurduringdeliveryofoversizedloads,provideadvancenoticetolocalfire,police,andemergencyserviceproviderstoensurethatalternativeevacuationandemergencyroutesaredesignatedtomaintainserviceresponsetimes.

Provideadequateonsiteparkingforconstructiontrucksandworkervehicles.

Requiresuitablepublicsafetymeasuresintheprogramareaandattheentranceroads,includingfences,barriers,lights,flagging,guards,andsigns,togiveadequatewarningtothepublicoftheconstructionandofanydangerousconditionsthatcouldencounteredasaresultthereof.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Completeroadrepairsonlocalpublicroadsasneededduringconstructiontopreventexcessivedeterioration.Thisworkmayincludeconstructionoftemporaryroadwayshoulderstosupportanynecessarydetourlanes.

Repairorrestoretheroadright‐of‐waytoitsoriginalconditionorbetteruponcompletionofthework.

Coordinateprogram‐relatedconstructionactivities,includingschedule,trucktraffic,haulroutes,andthedeliveryofoversizedoroverweightmaterials,withAlamedaCounty,Caltrans,andaffectedcitiestoidentifyandminimizeoverlapwithotherareaconstructionprojects.

ImpactTRA‐1a‐2:Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransitorconflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

AsmentionedinChapter2,ProjectionDescription,withtheexceptionofthenameplatecapacityandtheresultanttotalnumberofturbines(i.e.,approximately259turbinesunderAlternative1and281underAlternative2),thetwoalternativesareidentical.ForthepurposeofidentifyingtrafficimpactsassociatedwithanticipatedprojectsthatcouldoccurunderAlternative2,atypical80MWrepoweringproject,asanalyzedunderImpactTRA‐1a‐1forAlternative,isalsoassumedfortheanalysis.Therefore,operationandconstructiontrafficimpactoftheAlternative2wouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐1a‐1.

ThetrafficimpactassociatedwithoperationandmaintenanceoftheAlternative2wouldbelessthansignificant.However,theconstructiontrafficimpactwouldbesignificantonthelocalcountyroadsthatprovidedirectaccesstotheprojectarea.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐1b:Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransitorconflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

TheGoldenHillsProjectisan80MWrepoweringproject.Therefore,operationandconstructiontrafficimpactoftheprojectwouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐1a‐1.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Thetrafficimpactassociatedwithoperationandmaintenanceoftheprojectwouldbelessthansignificant.However,theconstructiontrafficimpactwouldbesignificantonthelocalcountyroadsthatprovidedirectaccesstotheprojectarea.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐1c:Conflictwithanapplicableplan,ordinance,orpolicyestablishingmeasuresofeffectivenessfortheperformanceofthecirculationsystem,takingintoaccountallmodesoftransportation,includingmasstransitandnon‐motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponentsofthecirculationsystem,including,butnotlimitedto,intersections,streets,highwaysandfreeways,pedestrianandbicyclepaths,andmasstransitorconflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

AsdiscussedunderImpactTRA‐1a‐1,maintenanceneedsoftheprojectwouldbelimitedandnotsubstantiallygreaterthancurrentlyrequired;post‐constructiontrafficgeneratedbythemaintenanceactivitieswouldbewellwithinthecapacityofthelocalroadwaysystemandwouldnotdiffermateriallyfromthecurrentmaintenancetrafficlevel.Therefore,thetrafficimpactassociatedwithoperationandmaintenanceoftheprojectwouldbelessthansignificant.

Constructionoftheprojectwouldtemporarilyincreasevehicletrafficonregionalandlocalaccessroutesintheprojectvicinityandinvolvethetransportofoversizeandoverweightwindturbinecomponents.AsdiscussedaboveandsummarizedinTable3.15‐3,theprojectisanticipatedtogenerateanaverageof230vehicletripsperday(150trucktripsand80workertrips)and59vehicletripsperhour(19trucktripsand40workertrips)duringthepeakcommutehours.

Table3.15‐6summarizesanestimateoftheconstruction‐relatedtripsonregionalaccesshighwaysintheprogramvicinity.Theincreaseinconstructiontripsisasmallfraction(lessthan0.3percent)ofADTonI‐580intheprogramareaandtheregionalaccesshighwaysintheprogramvicinity;accordingly,theconstructiontrafficisnotexpectedtodegradetrafficoperationontheseregionalaccessroadways.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐6. Estimated Construction Trips on Regional Access Roadways–Patterson Pass Project

RoadwayName Description

2012AADT

2012TruckAADT/PercentofTotalAADT

AverageDailyConstructionTrips/PercentofTotalAADT

AverageDailyConstructionTrickTrips/PercentofTotalAADT

143,000 14,870/10.4% 115a/<0.1% 75a/<0.1%

142,000–214,000

7,550–20,130/4.6%–12.2%

115a/<0.1% 75a/<0.1%

I‐5—I‐205 21,000–31,000

3,380–5,330/12.5%–17.9%

58b/0.3% 38b/0.1%–0.2%

I‐205,Tracy I‐580—JunctionI‐5 82,000–114,000

10,560–13,680/11.3%–12.0%

58b/<0.1% 38b/<0.1%

132,000–167,000

8,750–12,690/5.3%–9.2%

29c/<0.1% 19c/<0.1%

a Assumes50percentoftotaldailyvehicletrips(230)andtotaltrucktrips(150)wouldoriginatefromwestoftheprogramarea,fromtheLivermoreareaandareastothewest,and50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldoriginatefromeastoftheprogramarea,fromtheTracyareaandareastotheeast.

b Assumes50percentoftheconstructiontrafficoriginatedfromeastoftheprogramarea,whichis25percentoftotalconstructiontraffic,wouldaccesstheprojectareaviaI‐580,and50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldaccesstheprojectareaviaI‐205.

c Assumes50percentoftheconstructiontrafficoriginatedfromwestoftheprogramarea,whichis25percentoftotalconstructiontraffic,wouldbefromareaswestofLivermoreanduseI‐680toaccesstheprogramarea.50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromsouthand50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromnorth(12.5percentoftotalconstructiontraffic).

Constructiontrafficcouldcauseasubstantialtrafficincreaseonthelocalcountyroadsthatprovidedirectaccesstotheprojectconstructionsites—e.g.,PattersonPassRoadandJessRanchRoad—astheseroadsgenerallyhavelowtrafficvolumes.Table3.15‐7summarizesanestimateoftheconstruction‐relatedtripsonPattersonPassRoad,whichprovidesdirectaccesstoconstructionsitesintheprojectarea.Theincreaseinconstructiontripswouldrangefrom3to4percentofADTandfrom8to11percentofpeakhourvolumesonPattersonPassRoad.Thesubstantialincreaseinconstructiontraffic,especiallyduringtheAMandPMpeakcommutehours,couldpotentiallycausedegradationoftrafficoperationontheselocalprojectaccessroutes.Theimpactfromincreasesconstructiontripsonthelocalroadwaytrafficoperationisconsideredasignificantimpact.

However,becausetheconstructionactivitieswouldbetemporaryandwouldnotcausethelong‐termclosuresoralternationofprojectaccessroadsthatwouldotherwisesubstantiallychangethecirculationofsurroundingroadwaysystemandcoulddegradethetrafficoperationtoanunacceptableLOS,implementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducetheimpactofincreasedtrafficonlocalaccessroadsandtheimpactofshort‐termtemporaryclosuresoftravellanesatprojectsiteaccesspointsduringdeliveryofoversizedloadstoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

Table 3.15‐7. Estimated Construction Trips on Local Access Roadways–Patterson Pass Project

RoadwayName CounterLocationExistingADT(vpd)

AverageDailyConstructionTripsa/PercentofTotalADT

AveragePeakHourConstructionTripsa/PercentofPeakHourTrafficb

PattersonPassRoad EastofGreenvilleRoad 3,100 115/4% 30/10%

EastofSouthFlynnRoad 2,700 115/4% 30/11%

EastofMidwayRoad 3,700 115/3% 30/8%

a AssumesconstructiontrafficwouldaccesstheconstructionsiteseitherviaPattersonPassRoadorviaAltamontPassRoad,dependingontheprojectlocations;and50percentoftotalconstructiontraffic(230dailytripsand59peakhourtrips)wouldaccesstheprojectareaviaeitherroadwaysfromthewestand50percentoftheconstructiontrafficwouldbefromtheeast.

b Peakhourtrafficontheroadwaysegmentstypicallyisassumedabout10%ofADT.

ImpactTRA‐2a‐1:Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant)

AsdiscussedunderTRA‐1a‐1,maintenanceneedsoftheprojectwouldbelimitedandnotsubstantiallygreaterthancurrentlyrequired;post‐constructiontrafficgeneratedbythemaintenanceactivitieswouldbewellwithinthecapacityoftheCMProadwaysystemandwouldnotdiffermateriallyfromthecurrentmaintenancetrafficlevel.Therefore,thetrafficimpactassociatedwithoperationandmaintenanceoftheprojectwouldbelessthansignificant.

Theincreaseinconstructiontraffic,asshowninTable3.15‐4,isasmallfraction(lessthan0.5percent)ofADTonI‐580intheprogramareaandtheregionalCMProadways(I‐205andI‐680)intheprogramvicinity.AlthoughsomeoftheCMProadwaysegmentsoperatedatLOSF(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013b:12‐16).However,thesmallincreaseinconstructiontrafficisnotexpectedtodegradethetrafficoperationoftheCMProadwaysegmentsthatalreadyexceedtheLOSstandardEorcauseaCMProadwaysegmenttoexceedtheLOSstandard.Therefore,theconstructiontrafficimpactonCMProadwayswouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐2a‐2:Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant)

OperationandconstructiontrafficimpactsontheCMProadwaysystemintheprogramvicinitywouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐2a‐1.ThetrafficimpactonCMProadwayswouldbelessthansignificant.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

ImpactTRA‐2b:Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificant)

OperationandconstructiontrafficimpactsontheCMProadwaysystemintheprogramvicinitywouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐2a‐1.ThetrafficimpactonCMProadwayswouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐2c:Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagementprogram,including,butnotlimitedto,level‐of‐servicestandardsandtraveldemandmeasuresorotherstandardsestablishedbythecountycongestionmanagementagencyfordesignatedroadsorhighways—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)

OperationandconstructiontrafficimpactsontheCMProadwaysystemintheprogramvicinitywouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐1a‐1.Theincreaseinconstructiontraffic,asshowninTable3.15‐6,isasmallfraction(lessthan0.3percent)ofADTonI‐580intheprogramareaandtheregionalCMProadways(I‐205andI‐680)intheprogramvicinity.AlthoughsomeoftheCMProadwaysegmentsoperatedatLOSF(AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission2013b:12‐16).However,thesmallincreaseinconstructiontrafficisnotexpectedtodegradethetrafficoperationoftheCMProadwaysegmentsthatalreadyexceedtheLOSstandardEorcauseaCMProadwaysegmenttoexceedtheLOSstandard.Therefore,theoperationandconstructiontrafficimpactonCMProadwayswouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐3a‐1:Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificant)

ImplementingprogramAlternative1wouldnotaffectairtrafficpatternsofthepublicandprivateairportsinthevicinityoftheprogramarea.Additionally,thisalternativewouldnotresultinsubstantialsafetyrisksassociatedwithairportoperations(seeairportimpactdiscussionandFAAlightingrequirementsdiscussioninSection3.8,HazardsandHazardousMaterials,underImpactHAZ‐5andImpactHAZ‐6).Theimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐3a‐2:Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificant)

ImplementingprogramAlternative2wouldnotaffectairtrafficpatternsofthepublicandprivateairportsinthevicinityoftheprogramarea.Additionally,thisalternativewouldnotresultinsubstantialsafetyrisksassociatedwithairportoperations(seeairportimpactdiscussionandFAAlightingrequirementsdiscussioninSection3.8,HazardsandHazardousMaterials,underImpactHAZ‐5andImpactHAZ‐6).Theimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐3b:Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificant)

Theproposedprojectwouldnotaffectairtrafficpatternsofthepublicandprivateairportsinthevicinityoftheprojectarea.Theproposedprojectalsowouldnotresultinsubstantialsafetyrisks

June 2014ICF 00323.08

associatedwithairportoperations(seeairportimpactdiscussionandFederalAviationAdministrationlightingrequirementsdiscussioninSection3.8,HazardsandHazardousMaterials,underImpactHAZ‐5andImpactHAZ‐6).Theimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐3c:Resultinachangeinairtrafficpatterns,includingeitheranincreaseintrafficlevelsorachangeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificant)

Theproposedprojectwouldnotaffectairtrafficpatternsofthepublicandprivateairportsinthevicinityoftheproposedproject.Theproposedprojectalsowouldnotresultinsubstantialsafetyrisksassociatedwithairportoperations(seeairportimpactdiscussionandFederalAviationAdministrationlightingrequirementsdiscussioninSection3.8,HazardsandHazardousMaterials,underImpactHAZ‐5andImpactHAZ‐6).Theimpactwouldbelessthansignificant.

ImpactTRA‐4a‐1:Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipment)duetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Thepresenceoflarge,slow‐movingconstruction‐relatedvehiclesandequipmentamongthegeneral‐purposetrafficonroadwaysthatprovideaccesstotheprogramareacouldcauseotherdriverstoactimpatientlyandcreatetrafficsafetyhazards.Inaddition,theslow‐movingtrucksenteringorexitingtheprogramareafrompublicroadscouldposeatraffichazardtoothervehiclesandincreasethepotentialforturningmovementcollisionsattheprogramareaentranceintersection.Thecreationofpotentialtrafficsafetyhazardsasaresultofconstructiontruckswouldbeasignificantimpact.

Heavytrucktrafficdeliveringequipmentandmaterialstotheprogramareacouldresultinroadwearanddamagethatresultinadrivingsafetyhazard.Thedegreetowhichthislatterimpactwouldoccurdependsontheexistingroadwaydesign(pavementtypeandthickness)andexistingconditionoftheroad.FreewayssuchasI‐580aredesignedtoaccommodateamixofvehicletypes,includingheavytrucks,andtheconstructionvehicleimpactsareexpectedtobenegligibleonthoseroads.However,countyroadsarenotdesignedandconstructedtothesamestandardsastheinterstatehighwaysandcouldbedamagedbyconstructiontraffic.Thisimpactoncountyroadswouldbesignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ConstructionassociatedwithprogramAlternative1wouldrequirethedeliveryofequipmentandmaterials,suchaswindturbines,thatcouldcausetheconstructiontruckstoexceedroadwayloadorsizelimits.Totransportthisequipment,theprojectapplicantmustobtainspecialpermitsfromCaltransDistrict4andotherrelevantjurisdictionsincludingAlamedaCountytomoveoversizedoroverweightmaterials.Inaddition,theapplicantmustensureproperroutesarefollowed;propertimeisscheduledforthedelivery;andproperescorts,includingadvancedwarningandtrailingvehiclesaswellaslawenforcementcontrolareavailable,ifnecessary.Therefore,compliancewithrequiredspecialpermits,alsoincorporatedintoMitigationMeasureTRA‐1,wouldensurethatsafetyhazardimpactsasresultofoversizedoroverweighttruckswouldbelessthansignificant.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

ImpactTRA‐4a‐2:Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipment)duetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

TheconstructiontrafficimpactontrafficsafetyhazardsundertheAlternative2wouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedunderImpactTRA‐4a‐1.Thesafetyhazardimpactoncountyroadswouldbesignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐4b:Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipmentduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Proposedprojectingress/egresstotheprojectareawouldbeviaAltamontPassRoad,PattersonPassRoad,FlynnRoad,andDyerRoad.AsdescribedinSection2.6.1,minorintersectionimprovementswouldbeimplementedalongtheseroadstoallowforsafepassageoftheoversizedvehiclesandfacilitateingress/egressfromlocalaccessroads.Followingroadconstruction,allroadswouldbeinspectedtodetermineifandwhereanyadditionalgradingoradditionalgravelwouldbenecessarytomeetAlamedaCountyroadstandards.

Regardless,thepresenceoflarge,slow‐movingconstruction‐relatedvehiclesandequipmentamongthegeneral‐purposetrafficonroadwaysthatprovideaccesstotheprojectareacouldcauseotherdriverstoactimpatientlyandcreatetrafficsafetyhazards.Inaddition,theslow‐movingtrucksenteringorexitingtheprojectareafrompublicroadscouldposeatraffichazardtoothervehiclesandincreasethepotentialforturningmovementcollisionsattheprojectentranceintersection.Thecreationofpotentialtrafficsafetyhazardsasaresultofconstructiontruckswouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐4c:Substantiallyincreasehazardsbecauseofadesignfeature(e.g.,sharpcurvesordangerousintersections)orincompatibleuses(e.g.,farmequipmentduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Proposedprojectingress/egresstotheprojectareawouldbeviaPattersonPassRoadandJessRanchRoad.AsdiscussedinSection2.6.2,minorintersectionimprovementswouldbeimplementedalongtheseroadstoallowforsafepassageoftheoversizedvehiclesandfacilitateingress/egressfromlocalaccessroads.Followingroadconstruction,allroadswouldbeinspectedtodetermineifandwhereanyadditionalgradingoradditionalgravelwouldbenecessarytomeetAlamedaCountyroadstandards.

Regardless,thepresenceoflarge,slow‐movingconstruction‐relatedvehiclesandequipmentamongthegeneral‐purposetrafficonroadwaysthatprovideaccesstotheprojectareacouldcauseotherdriverstoactimpatientlyandcreatetrafficsafetyhazards.Inaddition,theslow‐movingtrucksenteringorexitingtheprojectareafrompublicroadscouldposeatraffichazardtoothervehiclesandincreasethepotentialforturningmovementcollisionsattheprojectentranceintersection.The

June 2014ICF 00323.08

creationofpotentialtrafficsafetyhazardsasaresultofconstructiontruckswouldbeasignificantimpact.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐5a‐1:Resultininadequateemergencyaccessduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Slow‐movingconstructiontruckscoulddelayorobstructthemovementofemergencyvehiclesonprogramareahaulroutes.Inaddition,lane/roadclosuresoccurringduringdeliveryofoversizedloadscouldimpairroadwaycapacityandincreasetheresponsetimeforemergencyvehiclestravelingthroughtheclosurearea.Therefore,constructionwouldhavethepotentialtosignificantlyaffectemergencyvehicleaccess.TheTCPrequiredundertheMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐5a‐2:Resultininadequateemergencyaccessduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

ConstructiontrafficimpactoftheAlternative2wouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheAlternative1underImpactTRA‐5a‐1.Therefore,constructionwouldhavethepotentialtosignificantlyaffectemergencyvehicleaccess.TheTCPrequiredunderMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐5b:Resultininadequateemergencyaccessduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

ConstructiontrafficimpactoftheproposedprojectwouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheprogramunderImpactTRA‐5a‐1.Therefore,constructionwouldhavethepotentialtosignificantlyaffectemergencyvehicleaccess.TheTCPrequiredunderMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐5c:Resultininadequateemergencyaccessduetoconstruction‐generatedtraffic—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

ConstructiontrafficimpactoftheproposedprojectwouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedfortheprogramunderImpactTRA‐5a‐1.Therefore,constructionwouldhavethepotentialtosignificantlyaffectemergencyvehicleaccess.TheTCPrequiredunderMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

ImpactTRA‐6a‐1:Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities—programAlternative1:417MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Nopublictransitservicesorpedestrianfacilitiesareavailableontheprojectaccessroutesintheprogramvicinity.Therefore,themaintenanceandconstructionactivitiesassociatedwithwindfarmsintheprogramareawouldnotconflictwithpolices,plans,orprogramsregardingthealternativetransportationordegradetheperformanceoftransitservicesandpedestrianfacilities.

Mostofthemaintenanceandconstructionactivitiesassociatedwithwindfarmsarecontainedwithinthespecificprojectworksitesandarenotexpectedtoresultinthelong‐termclosuresoftravellanesorroadwaysegments,permanentlyalterthepublicaccessroadways,andcreatenewpublicroadwaysthatcouldsubstantiallychangethetravelpatternsofvehiclesandbicyclesonthesurroundingroadwayfacilitiesandconflictwiththepoliciesandplansregardingbicyclefacilities.

However,duringtheconstruction,slow‐movingoversizedtruckscouldpotentiallydisruptthemovementofbicyclestravelingontheshouldersalongAltamontPassRoad,PattersonPassRoad,andFlynnRoadintheprogramareaandincreasethesafetyconcernsforanybicyclistswhousetheroutes.TheseroadwaysarenottheCountyclassifiedbikeways,butareusedasrecreationalandinter‐regionalaccessroutes.Inaddition,lane/roadclosuresoccurringduringdeliveryofoversizedloadsneartheworksiteaccesspointscouldtemporarilydisruptthebicycleaccessontheroads.Therefore,constructionwouldhavethepotentialtosignificantlyaffectbicycleaccess.ThetrafficcontrolplanrequiredundertheMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐6a‐2:Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities—programAlternative2:450MW(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Theconstructiontrafficimpactonalternativetransportationfacilities(transitservice,pedestrianfacilities,andbicyclefacilities)undertheAlternative2wouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedunderImpactTRA‐6a‐1.Theconstructiontrafficimpactonbicyclefacilitieswouldbesignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

ImpactTRA‐6b:Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities—GoldenHillsProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Theconstructiontrafficimpactonalternativetransportationfacilities(transitservice,pedestrianfacilities,andbicyclefacilities)undertheprojectwouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedunderImpactTRA‐6a‐1.Theconstructiontrafficimpactonbicyclefacilitieswouldbesignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

ImpactTRA‐6c:Conflictwithadoptedpolicies,plans,orprogramsregardingpublictransit,bicycleorpedestrianfacilities,orotherwisedecreasetheperformanceorsafetyofsuchfacilities—PattersonPassProject(lessthansignificantwithmitigation)

Theconstructiontrafficimpactonalternativetransportationfacilities(transitservice,pedestrianfacilities,andbicyclefacilities)undertheprojectwouldbesimilartotheimpactdiscussedunderImpactTRA‐6a‐1.Theconstructiontrafficimpactonbicyclefacilitieswouldbesignificant.ImplementationofMitigationMeasureTRA‐1wouldreducethisimpacttoaless‐than‐significantlevel.

3.15.3 References Cited

AlamedaCounty.2000.EastCountyAreaPlan.AdoptedMay1994.ModifiedbypassageofMeasureD,effectiveDecember22,2000.Oakland,CA.

———.2012.AlamedaCountyBicycleandPedestrianMasterPlanforUnincorporatedAreas.April.Available:http://www.acgov.org/pwa/documents/Bike‐Ped‐Plan‐for‐Unincorporated‐Final.pdf.Accessed:February7,2014.

———.2013.PattersonPassRoadandTeslaRoadSafetyStudy.PublicMeetingPresentationonMarch27.AlamedaCountyPublicWorksAgency.Available:http://www.acgov.org/pwa/updates/pattersonpassstudy.htm.Accessed:June27,2013.

AlamedaCountyTransportationCommission.2012a.AlamedaCountywideTransportationPlan.Available:http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/Document/8043/ALAMEDA_CWTP_FINAL.pdf.Accessed:August28,2013.

———.2012b.AlamedaCountywideBicyclePlanwithVisionNetworkMaps,EastPlanningArea.AdoptedOctober2012.Available:http://www.alamedactc.org/files/managed/Document/10086/ACTC_Bike_East_011013.pdf.Accessed:August19,2013.

———.2013a.AlamedaCountyCongestionManagementProgram.October.Available:http://www.alamedactc.org/app_pages/view/5224.Accessed:February7,2014.

———.2013b.2012LevelofServiceMonitoringReport.January.Available:http://www.alamedactc.org/app_pages/view/8091.Accessed:February7,2014.

AmgenTourofCalifornia.2013.Stage7–LivermoretoMtDiablo.Available:<http://www.amgentourofcalifornia.com/Route/stages/stage7.html>.Accessed:October17,2013.

CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation.2013.2012TrafficVolumesforAllVehiclesand2012TruckTrafficonCaliforniaStateHighways.TrafficDataBranch.Available:http://traffic‐counts.dot.ca.gov/.Accessed:February7,2014.

ContraCostaCounty.2010.VascoWindsRepoweringProjectDraftEnvironmentalImpactReport.December.SCHNo.2010032094.CountyFileNo.LP08‐2049.DepartmentofConservationandDevelopment.

June 2014ICF 00323.08

EastBayRegionalParksDistrict.2013.2013MasterPlanMap.July16.Available:http://www.ebparks.org/Assets/_Nav_Categories/Park_Planning/Master+Plan/Maps/Master+Plan+Map+‐+August+2013.pdf.Accessed:February7,2014.

new ch03-15 traffic done - alameda county, california · 2014. 6. 6. · policy 190: the county...

Documents

santa rosa county, florida - northwest florida water...

unincorporated areas

pima county, arizona county, arizona and incorporated areas...

ordinance no. 2016- an ordinance updating …...clark...

pinal county housing needs assessment & strategy...

comprehensive plan for unincorporated …...comprehensive...

king county unincorporated area services

comprehensive plan for unincorporated hillsborough county...

mwrdgc · municipality index 0591 0211 bluff du page...

circulation element - sacramento county, california · the...

board of county commissioners washoe county, …...research...

unincorporated san diego county - san diego association of...

broward county, florida - north...

ceas and hb 7103...history of orange county approach to...

technical report #1: estimating adu potential in...

county administrator’s office - acgov.org€¦ · county...

hancock county zoning ordinance · 2010-04-06 · hancock...

zoning unincorporated county of orange, california

floyd county, georgia · floyd county, georgia and...

city of - starr team · city of mitchell creek portland cl...