DOCSLIB.ORG

Section 5 Alternatives

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Section 5 Alternatives Section 5 Alternatives 5.1 INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.; CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) require that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(d)). If a project alternative would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, the lead agency should not approve the proposed project unless it determines that specific technological, economic, social, or other considerations make the project alternative infeasible (PRC Section 21002, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)). The EIR must also identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and should briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(d)(2)). One of the alternatives that must be analyzed is the “No Project” Alternative. The No Project analysis must discuss the existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved and development continued to occur in accordance with existing plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126(d)(4)). This section includes an evaluation of four alternatives: the No Project Alternative, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Light Rail Vehicle (LRV), and the extension of BART. 5.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES The goal of the Proposed Project is to extend transit service into east Contra Costa County. A comprehensive list of specific objectives is included in Section 1, Introduction. The full array of project objectives is reproduced here, since project alternatives should feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, as noted above: Improve overall transportation service and enhance mobility in the State Route 4 corridor; Enhance access to transit systems; Enhance connectivity and seamlessness of the transit system, both from home to transit and from one form of transit to another; Promote transit-oriented land use initiatives and policies; East Contra Costa BART Extension Draft EIR Page 5-1 September 2008 5 Alternatives San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Enhance project return on financial investment; Balance short, medium, and long-term strategies; Protect and enhance the environment; Implement the mandate of Contra Costa voters as described in Measure J; and Provide a cost effective and technologically appropriate system. No Project Alternative The No Project Alternative represents a baseline scenario against which the other “build” alternatives can be compared. It represents continued operation of the existing transit services that serve the East County study area – BART and Tri Delta Transit. This alternative also assumes that other programmed highway and transit improvements within the study area and the region would occur. Anticipated improvements include Caltrans widening of SR 4, BART system extension to San Jose, and increases in and changes to service routes and schedules for Tri Delta Transit. Technology. BART provides regional rail access to east Contra Costa County, via its Concord Line, which terminates at the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. This station provides 2,036 public parking spaces. It also provides an intermodal bus transfer facility, which provides connections between BART and the local, public, and express bus services provided by Tri Delta Transit. Tri Delta Transit is the local public bus transit service provider in east Contra Costa County. It provides local fixed-route transit services and express bus services. The fixed-route services are operated using conventional 40-foot buses. On some of the express bus routes, Tri Delta Transit operates commuter bus coaches with comfortable, high-back seats. Route. BART service to the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station is provided by the Concord Line (C-Line), which extends to the San Francisco International Airport via Oakland, the Transbay Tube, and San Francisco. Concord Line passengers can transfer to the Fremont – Richmond line via a timed transfer at the MacArthur Station. BART plans to extend BART southward from Fremont through Warm Springs and, in partnership with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, to downtown San Jose. The No Project Alternative assumes the completion of these extensions as part of the regional transit service. Tri Delta Transit provides service on 18 fixed routes, of which six routes offer express services. Ten of these routes provide a connection to BART at the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. The following commuter-oriented express routes serve the study area: Page 5-2 East Contra Costa BART Extension Draft EIR September 2008 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 5 Alternatives 300 Express – from the Brentwood Park-and-Ride Lot to the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station via SR 4 with a stop at the Hillcrest Park-and-Ride Lot. Martinez-Delta Express – from the Hillcrest Park-and-Ride Lot via SR 4 and the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station to the Amtrak Station in Martinez. Livermore-Delta Express – from the Hillcrest Park-and-Ride Lot via SR 4 and the Brentwood Park-and-Ride Lot to the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories and Scandia Labs in Livermore. Dublin-Delta Express – from the Hillcrest Park-and-Ride Lot via SR 4 and the Brentwood and Discovery Bay Park-and-Ride Lots to the Hacienda Business Park and Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station. Two other express routes (390 east and westbound) provide long-distance, limited-stop service along the SR 4 corridor. Tri Delta Transit serves four park-and-ride lots in the SR 4 corridor. These lots are located in the City of Pittsburg near the Railroad Avenue interchange, in the City of Antioch at the Hillcrest Avenue interchange, and in the City of Brentwood, just north of the downtown. There is also a small park-and-ride lot at Discovery Bay. Ridership. Tri Delta Transit served approximately 2.5 million passengers in 2007, with an average weekday ridership of 10,000 passengers. Therefore, approximately 14 percent of the Tri Delta Transit patrons were traveling to or from the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station currently serves about 10,400 riders (entrances and exits) during the average weekday, based on statistics from May 2008. A survey of BART passengers conducted in 2002 revealed that 13 percent of the BART riders at Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station rode Tri Delta Transit to or from the BART station. This represents about 1,300 riders per day. The ridership projections for the No Project Alternative for the year 2030 indicate 14,600 daily BART riders at the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station. This forecast assumes no constraints on available parking at the station. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station currently has 2,036 parking spaces. According to the BART website, the existing parking spaces fill by 7:25 a.m. every weekday morning and as many as an additional 500 vehicles are parked on the streets south of the station impacting the adjacent neighborhoods.1 Ridership at the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station has been in the 9,000 to 10,500 riders per day range for a number of years, and 10,500 riders is effectively the maximum number of riders the station can handle without a substantial increase in the parking supply or an increase in feeder transit service. In terms of availability for public parking, the Pittsburg/Bay Point Station is effectively at capacity. However, even though the lot fills up due to the early morning commute, the station 1 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District. Pittsburg/Bay Point Station Overview. Accessed March 11, 2008. Available at http://www.bart.gov/stations/stationGuide/stationOverview_ BAYPT.asp. East Contra Costa BART Extension Draft EIR Page 5-3 September 2008 5 Alternatives San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District can continue to operate without impacting the number of riders because there are trains and buses operating at the station throughout the day. There is also a kiss and ride drop-off area. One potential source of new ridership is the proposed transit-oriented development around the station. The Pittsburg/Bay Point BART Station Area Specific Plan prepared by Contra Costa County and the City of Pittsburg calls for increased density of development around the station, which would result in additional ridership from the immediate station area. Reliability. BART service tends to be very reliable compared to other transportation modes. BART has a performance standard of 95 percent on-time service and in 2007 achieved 94 percent. In comparison, Tri Delta Transit’s operations in the SR 4 corridor are subject to the traffic delays and congestion that plague the area. The possible slow-down is minimized by the buses using the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on a portion of SR 4. These lanes now extend from SR 242 in Concord to Railroad Avenue in the City of Pittsburg and would be extended east to the junction of SR 4 with the SR 4 Bypass in the City of Antioch. As these lanes are extended, the reliability of Tri Delta Transit’s freeway express service should improve, but would remain in flux, as traffic continues to increase through the area. Schedule and Headways. The BART system has the following schedule of service:2 Monday through Friday: 4:00 a.m. to Midnight Saturday: 6:00 a.m. to Midnight Sunday: 8:00 a.m. to Midnight BART trains on the Concord Line run at least every 15 minutes on weekdays and Sundays.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Attachments for Measure J Growth Management
    1 City of Orinda Measure J Growth Management Program Compliance Checklist for Calendar Years 2018 and 2019 Supplementary Information – Attachments Table of Contents 1. Lamorinda Action Plan ............................................................................................................................ 2 1.a. Resolution 61‐19 Adoption of Connect Orinda Downtown Master Plan ......................................... 96 3.a.1. 2018 Housing element Report, April 9, 2019 ............................................................................... 100 3.a.2. 2019 Housing element Report, April 15, 2020 ............................................................................. 118 3.c. Ordinances for walking, biking and transit access ......................................................................... 134 6. CIP, 7‐21‐2020, abridged for Transportation projects ....................................................................... 137 7. TSM Ordinance – Resolution 00‐06 .................................................................................................... 233 9. Measure J Growth Management Element, Resolution 19‐09 ............................................................ 248 12.1. LSM Annual Report, FY 2017‐18 ................................................................................................... 257 12.2. LSM Annual Report, FY 2018‐19 ................................................................................................... 260 2 Lamorinda Action Plan Final Prepared by: 1970 Broadway,
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Station-Level Maps (Home Origins): North Berkeley
    North Berkeley Station: Home Locations of BART Riders by Mode 2015 BART Station Profile Study (weekday). Data are weighted to represent average weekday ridership. Weighted points are scattered around actual origin point. Scattering process may result in points appearing in bodies of water on some maps. The “Drive alone / carpool” category includes motorcycle, and “Drop off / taxi / other” includes app-based ridesharing services like Uber and Lyft. North Concord Station: Home Locations of BART Riders by Mode 2015 BART Station Profile Study (weekday). Data are weighted to represent average weekday ridership. Weighted points are scattered around actual origin point. Scattering process may result in points appearing in bodies of water on some maps. The “Drive alone / carpool” category includes motorcycle, and “Drop off / taxi / other” includes app-based ridesharing services like Uber and Lyft. Orinda Station: Home Locations of BART Riders by Mode 2015 BART Station Profile Study (weekday). Data are weighted to represent average weekday ridership. Weighted points are scattered around actual origin point. Scattering process may result in points appearing in bodies of water on some maps. The “Drive alone / carpool” category includes motorcycle, and “Drop off / taxi / other” includes app-based ridesharing services like Uber and Lyft. Pittsburg / Bay Point Station: Home Locations of BART Riders by Mode 2015 BART Station Profile Study (weekday). Data are weighted to represent average weekday ridership. Weighted points are scattered around actual origin point. Scattering process may result in points appearing in bodies of water on some maps. The “Drive alone / carpool” category includes motorcycle, and “Drop off / taxi / other” includes app-based ridesharing services like Uber and Lyft.
    [Show full text]
  • Newspaper Articles
    Lafayette-Orinda fire station idea scrutinized - ContraCostaTimes.com http://www.contracostatimes.com/orinda/ci_22584533/lafayette-orinda-fi... Lafayette-Orinda fire station idea scrutinized By Jennifer Modenessi Contra Costa Times Contra Costa Times Posted: ContraCostaTimes.com MARTINEZ -- County supervisors this week authorized talks between the Contra Costa and Moraga-Orinda fire districts to build and operate a joint station on the Lafayette-Orinda border but not without hearing some stinging criticism of the proposal. County leaders took turns addressing ConFire Chief Daryl Louder on Tuesday following his request for formal discussions with MOFD Chief Randy Bradley to enter a partnership in which both districts would operate a joint fire station. If approved, the station would replace ConFire's Station 16 in Lafayette and nearby MOFD Station 43 in Orinda. Supervisors ultimately decided to let Louder discuss exploring a potential partnership with Bradley, but Supervisors Karen Mitchoff and John Gioia indicated anything formal should be part of future comprehensive talks between the county and other cities. MOFD directors approved the consolidation talks at a meeting Feb. 6. Under the plan proposed by the chiefs, ConFire would tap its capital funds and reallocate money used to operate Station 16 to the new station, whose construction and operating costs would be shared evenly with MOFD. Both districts say the move could help them save $1 million each in annual operating costs. However, the savings would materialize for ConFire only if Station 16 were operating; because it isn't, the new station would actually increase costs for the district. ConFire took that aging facility offline last year because of a rat infestation and mold-contamination issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Lamorinda Action Plan
    Lamorinda Action Plan Final Prepared by: 1970 Broadway, Suite 740 Oakland, CA 94612 September 2017 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 The Action Plan ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 2014 Action Plan ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Outline of the Document ........................................................................................................... 5 2 Action Plan Framework ............................................................................................. 7 2.1 Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies ................................................................................ 7 2.2 Routes of Regional Significance ................................................................................................. 9 2.3 Lamorinda Interjurisdictional Routes .................................................................................... 10 2.4 Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSOs) and Performance Measures ...................................................................................................................................... 11 3 Existing Transportation Conditions ........................................................................ 18 3.1 Routes of Regional Significance .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BART @ 20 Series Rail Access Modes and Catchment Areas for the BART
    BART@ 20 Series Rail Access Modes and Catchment Areas for the BARTSystem Robert Cervero Alfred Round Todd Goldman Kang-Li Wu Working Paper UCTCNo. 307 TheUniversity of California TransportationCenter Universityof California Berkeley, CA94720 The University of California Transportation Center The University of California Center activities. Researchers Transportation Center (UCTC) at other universities within the is one of ten regional units region also have opportunities mandated by Congress and to collaborate with UCfaculty established in Fall 1988 to on selected studies. support research, education, and training in surface trans- UCTC’seducational and portation. The UCCenter research programs are focused serves federal Region IX and on strategic planning for is supported by matching improving metropolitan grants from the U.S. Depart- accessibility, with emphasis ment of Transportation, the on the special conditions in California Department of Region IX. Particular attention Transportation (Caltrans), and is directed to strategies for the University. using transportation as an instrument of economic Based on the Berkeley development, while also ac- Campus, UCTCdraws upon commodatingto the region’s existing capabilities and persistent expansion and resources of the Institutes of while maintaining and enhanc- Transportation Studies at ing the quality of life there. Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, and Los Angeles; the Institute of The Center distributes reports Urban and Regional Develop- on its research in working ment at Berkeley; and several papers, monographs, and in academic departments at the reprints of published articles. Berkeley, Davis, Irvine, and It also publishes Access, a Los Angeles campuses. magazine presenting sum- Faculty and students on other maries of selected studies. For University of California a list of publications in print, campuses may participate in write to the address below.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Bike Parking Capital Program
    BART Bike Parking Capital Program Increasing bike access while reducing bikes onboard April 2015 EISEN|LETUNIC TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENTAL AND URBAN PLANNING BART bike parking capital program Table of contents Introduction Introduction ..................................................................... 1 In 2013, BART commissioned the first BART Bike Proposed bicycle capital program ................................ 2 Parking Capital Program, which recommended Station profiles ................................................................ 5 specific bicycle parking improvements at the system’s 12th Street Oakland .......................................................... 6 18 busiest stations in terms of bicycle access. The 2012 16th Street/Mission ........................................................... 7 BART Bicycle Plan suggested this approach based on 24th Street/Mission .......................................................... 8 the document’s finding that about 25% of cyclists who Balboa Park ...................................................................... 9 currently bring their bikes onboard do so because of a Bay Fair............................................................................ 10 lack of secure parking at their origin station. Castro Valley ................................................................. 13 Civic Center ................................................................... 12 The urgency of BART’s efforts to increase the supply Colma .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Station Profiles
    2015 BART Station Profile Study Station Profiles – Home Origins STATION PROFILES – HOME ORIGINS This section contains a summary sheet for each BART station, based on data from customers who travel to the station from home. Maps for each station are contained in separate PDF files at www.bart.gov/stationprofile. Note that the San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and Oakland International Airport stations are not included in this section due to small sample sizes of home origin trips at these stations. The maps in the separate PDF files depict home origin points of customers who use each station, and the points are color coded by mode of access. The points are weighted to reflect average weekday ridership at the station. For example, an origin point with a weight of seven will appear on the map as seven points, scattered around the actual point of origin. Note that the number of trips may appear underrepresented in cases where multiple trips originate at the same location. The following summary sheets contain basic information about each station’s weekday home origin trips, such as: absolute number of entries and estimated home-origin entries access mode share trip destination types customer demographics. Additionally, the total number of car and bicycle parking spaces at each station are included for context. The source for the car parking data is BART’s draft SRTP/CIP for FY17 (the car parking data are noted as current as of December 2015). The bicycle parking data were provided by BART’s Customer Access Department for spring 2015 and include bike racks, lockers, and bike station spaces where applicable.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Information Orinda Station Orinda Orinda Station
    VIETNAMESE Transit Routes Rutas del tránsito 公車路線圖 Cac Tuyen Duong Xe Cong Cong H A P P B E A R Y Transit C R E E K R D V A SAN LUIS RD L L E Y R Information Briones B R E L N M A I N S T D Regional Park I U E E Z N V A A Walnut Creek Station S L V P R L I I E S N T Orinda Station G Y H 1 1M 2 4 5 9 15 21 25 A I L R L D A R V D E 93X 95X 96X 98X 70X 580 O O D L E W D R D A Orinda BART N Y L M B A R L O H A V A PLEASANT HILL RD P P Y L L E Y R D Acalanes HS 25 Map Key S P R I N Happy Valley G B Acalanes R O Elementary School O Open Space You Are Here K TRINITY AVE Lafayette Station R D D R BART R D 6 25 250 BART E R N I Y E M R L County Connection L 6 D A Weekday & Weekend Service VIA V S R OB N LE Y 24 E P DEER HILL RD H P P A County Connection E H 25 25 Weekday Service Only T LOS ARABIS R V D Lamorinda Tra R D L Y S il B Lo E A o PLEASANT HILL RD p O W P 250 B L D T P Veterans I A V 580 S D L H U Lafayette O R A N C R D T B County Connection E L N I D Memorial 6 Plaza M Meher Park 6 Building Limited Weekday Service Lafayette Library & 24 25 Orinda Learning Center 40 Solano Express/FAST Country R D D L V P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Lamorinda Weekly Issue 24 Volume 10
    Page: A8 LAMORINDA WEEKLY 925-377-0977 www.lamorindaweekly.com Wednesday, January 25, 2017 MOFD Board OKs Major Apparatus Purchase By Nick Marnell standing-room crowd that to purchase two additional ambu- finance committee first. whose words were echoed by Fire Aincluded more than a dozen lances, replacing one with over But most of the discussion dealt Marshal Kathy Leonard. “Three- Fire Districts firefighters saw the Moraga-Orinda 150,000 miles and the other with with the purchase of the truck ver- story buildings are being construct- Fire District board approve a $2.85 over 100,000 miles. sus a quint, a vehicle that carries ed on 20-foot-wide streets,” Leon- Public Meetings million purchase of two fire en- Healy explained that the new an aerial ladder, a ground ladder, a ard said, making access by a ladder Moraga-Orinda Fire gines, one fire truck and two ambu- ladder truck will take 14 months pump, water and a hose. It operates truck a near necessity. lances, though two of the directors to build, the engines take about both as a fire truck and a fire engine Nevertheless, Jex and Jorgens Board of Directors District questioned the timing of the expen- nine months and the ambulances but according to many firefighters, voted against the purchase of the Wednesday, Feb. 15, 7 p.m. diture. six, and once MOFD commits to does neither operation well. truck and the engines, but the mo- Go to the website for meeting The district’s long-range capi- the purchase the district jumps to “I know what an engine can do tion passed 3 to 2 at the Jan.
    [Show full text]
  • Mobility on Demand (MOD) Sandbox Demonstration: BART Integrated Carpool to Transit Access Program Evaluation Report
    Mobility on Demand (MOD) Sandbox Demonstration: BART Integrated Carpool to Transit Access Program Evaluation Report FEBRUARY 2020 FTA Report No. 0156 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Elliot Martin, Ph.D. Adam Cohen Ziad Yassine Susan Shaheen, Ph.D. Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley Les Brown ICF COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Bay Area Rapid Transit DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Mobility on Demand (MOD) Sandbox Demonstration: BART Integrated Carpool to Transit Access Program Evaluation Report FEBRUARY 2020 FTA Report No. 0156 PREPARED BY Elliot Martin, Ph.D. Adam Cohen Ziad Yassine Susan Shaheen, Ph.D. Transportation Sustainability Research Center University of California, Berkeley 2150 Allston Way, #280 Berkeley, CA 94704 Les Brown ICF 9300 Lee Highway Fairfax, VA 22031 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Joint Program Office (JPO) U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation
    [Show full text]
  • LAMORINDA SERVICE PLAN Existing Conditions Report
    LAMORINDA SERVICE PLAN Existing Conditions Report Final December 2014 Lamorinda Service Plan – Final Existing Conditions Report County Connection This project is in part funded by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, 511 Contra Costa and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i Lamorinda Service Plan – Final Existing Conditions Report County Connection Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1-1 Study Purpose......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Community Profile .................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Existing Planning Efforts ....................................................................................................................... 1-3 2 Existing Transportation Services ......................................................................................2-1 Public Transportation ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 Transportation Network ...................................................................................................................... 2-13 3 Market Analysis ...............................................................................................................3-1
    [Show full text]
  • Bart Seismic Upgrade – How Much?
    BART SEISMIC UPGRADE – HOW MUCH? John EIDINGER1, Ed MATSUDA2 1G&E Engineering Systems Inc, 6315 Swainland Rd., Oakland, CA 94611-1843. [email protected] 2BART, P.O. Box 12688 (LKS-17), Oakland, CA 94604-2688. [email protected] SUMMARY This paper summarizes a seismic risk analysis of the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system (Figure 1). The analysis shows that a $1.3 Billion seismic mitigation program is warranted. The paper describes how the money was raised. Figure 1. BART System, Showing Location of Nearby Faults INTRODUCTION The Seismic Risk Analysis includes assessments of: 1. How the existing BART system might perform after large earthquakes on the San Andreas, Hayward, Calaveras and Concord faults. 1/8 2. How a seismically-upgraded BART system might perform after these same earthquakes, assuming implementation of any of five different retrofit alternatives (called Packages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). 3. The benefits and costs of the six alternatives: do nothing, or implement any of the five retrofit packages. This assessment is done using benefit-cost analyses. INVENTORY The Seismic Risk Analysis was performed for essentially every structure and piece of equipment in the BART system, including 10,106 track, embankment, aerial girders components; 1,983 aerial columns; 27 bored tunnels; 28 cut-and-cover tunnels; 57 Transbay tube segments; 43 passenger stations; 90 ventilation facilities; 68 electric substations; 40 circuit breaker stations; 21 maintenance yard buildings; 7 multi-story parking lots; 17 non-occupied equipment buildings; and most administrative and operations buildings. The analyses were performed using the System Earthquake Risk Assessment (SERA) program.
    [Show full text]