2009-034 (2) - Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Fairhaven/Lincoln

Home Browse Search

Executive Summary complies with applicable safety /quiet zone requirements by CPUC and S RRA. specific roadway improvements would include: Fairhaven /Lincoln Intersection • Reconfigure Fairhaven Avenue to terminate as a cul -de -sac east of the railroad tracks. The cul -de- sac would include emergency access driveways. • Close Lincoln Avenue between Fairhaven Avenue and Park Lane. Install a swing game just north of Park Lane to prohibit vehicles on the northernmost portion of Lincoln Avenue. The gate would allover emergency vehicle access. • Install "right turn only" signs and pavement markings on Park Lane at Lincoln Avenue. • Maintain two-way traffic on Lincoln Avenue from Park Lane to Santa Clara Avenue, Santa Clara /Lincoln Intersection • Install a traffic signal at the Santa Clara Avenue and Lincoln Avenue intersection, • Relocate utilities as necessary (minor) to facilitate signal operations. • Install new warning signals and signage on Santa Clara Avenue east of the track to prevent traffic queuing onto or near the tracks and to prevent vehicles from getting trapped between the railroad crossing gates. Westbound traffic on Santa Clara Avenue would stop before crossing the tracks, Partial take of land is required from the residential property located at the southwest corner of the intersection to r'egrade and raise the surface of the roadway. • Relocate the driveway at the southwest corner property from Lincoln Avenue to Santa Clara Avenue. • Install new landscape at the corner property. 1.6 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED Section 15123 b 3 of the C EQA Guidelines requires that an El contain issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant impacts. With regard to the proposed project, the major issues to be resolved include decisions by the lead agency as to the following: 1. Whether this Draft S E I R adequately describes the environmental impacts of the project 2. Whether the benefits of the project override any possible environmental impacts which cannot be feasibly avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance. 3. whether the mitigation measures should be adopted or modified, 4. Whether there are other mitigation measures that should be applied to the Project besides the Mitigation Measures identified in the Draft SEIR. 5. Whether there are any alternatives to the project that would substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the proposed project and achieve most of the basic project objectives. Page 1 -6 o The Planning ' r March 2009 Resolution No. 2009 -034 Page 18 of 130