Minutes of the 7/19/2002 Little River Airport Advisory Comittee 1. Open meeting: 9:00am 2. Attendance: A. Present Tim Scully, Trey Loy, Susan Winding, Willow Trent, Tom Goncharoff B. Visitors: Stephen Ford of DOT, Kathie Sarin C. Excused - Dennis Vest, Steve Schoolman D. Absent - 3. Minutes of previous meeting - approved 4. Correspondence: A. 6/24 email from Tim Scully to Tom Peters reporting that a man named Ed Powers has Parcel 9 in escrow. B. 6/24 letter from Tim Scully to Dennis Vest re LRAAC appointment C. email exchange between Tim Scully, Dennis Vest and Barbara Vest D. 6/24-6/25 email exchange between Tim Scully and John Dervin re hangars E. 6/25 email echange between Tim Scully and Chuck Boyer of DOT F. report on the 6/28 Shutt Moen visit to Little River Airport G. letter from MCOG to LRAAC regarding the RTP H. email exchange between Tim Scully and Steve Schoolman I. email from Steve Ford of DOT to Tim Scully 5. Susan Winding reported that she will miss next month's meeting, she will be in West Virginia 6. We discussed the Shutt Moen site visit. Trey Loy added some things I'd forgotten to the report under F. below. 7. Tim Scully reported that just befoee the meeting, Dave Thorpe pointed out that we should probably not put the most Eastern hangar right at the bend in the taxiway since this is where runups are commonly done. Kathie Sarin suggested that if we have a runup area, it would be a good idea to paint a suggested aircraft orientation for runup, to direct the noise and blast properly. [Steve Schoolman later commented that this type of marking can't go on the taxiway but is approved on a runup area.] 8. We discussed the MCOG letter regarding the EIR for the RTP. Trey Loy suggested that Tim Scully write a letter to MCOG briefly summarizing the environmental issues that where considered for each of the projects listed for Little River Airport. These issues included water contamination, noise, traffic on the access roads, wind patterns and the impact of possibly lighting trees instead of cutting them. 9. We discussed the proposal for alternate members further. The consensus is that we would choose two alternates, one pilot and one non-pilot. We would encourage the alternates to attend all meetings (or at least most of them). Alternates could vote when filling in for a missing member of the same category. Both Trey Loy and Susan Winding are working on locating non-pilot candidates. We agreed that an alternate's term of office would be two years. Tim Scully was asked to report at the next meeting on how alternates were handled at the ad hoc committee. 10. next meeting will be Friday August 16 at 9am at the Clubhouse at the Woods 43300 Little River Airport Road 11. Agreed on agenda for the next meeting. Adjourned at 10:45am The agenda for this meeting is: Approve the minutes of the last meeting Communications (letters, FAXes, etc, sent/received since last meeting) status reports and discussion on: * The GPS approach, vegetation management plan * additional hangars at the airport * clear zone acquisition * Airport consultant status * LRAPA application for a pilot/tourist supply shop * possible selection of two alternate AAC members (one pilot and one non-pilot) to fill in for absent members Reports from subcommittees Public comment Agree on a date, time and place for the next meeting Agree on agenda for next meeting Members of the Little River Airport Advisory Committee ------------------------------------------------------ Tom Goncharoff Trey Loy non-pilot, lives near airport Steve Schoolman pilot, flight instructor & woodworker Tim Scully inactive pilot (lost medical), computer programmer, lives near airport Willow Trent airport neighbor, non-pilot Susan Winding airport neighbor, non-pilot, business owner Dennis Vest airline pilot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Tim Scully Sent: June 24, 2002 6:09 AM To: 'Tom Peters'; 'Stephen Ford' Cc: Tim Scully Subject: Parcel 9 I was telephoned last night by a fellow named Ed Powers who told me that he is in escrow to buy this parcel. He's interested in building equipment storage buildings on it, or in trading it for other land. Ed Powers Mendocino, CA 95460 I told him I'd send him a copy of the Airport Layout Plan so he could see the location of the recommended for swap by the Master Plan. It might be a good idea to contact him. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Tim Scully 6/24/2002 Dennis Vest Fort Bragg, CA 95437 Dear Mr. Vest: The clerk of the Board didn't tell me you had been appointed to the committee until late last week. I don't have an email address for you. If you have one, please send it to me so I can add you to the airport mailing list. Otherwise I'll have to pay the costs of printing and mailing paper copies of documents to you each month. I hope you will be able to attend the committee's meetings. We normally meet on the 3rd Friday of each month from 9am to about 11am at The Clubhouse at The Woods. We will all look forward to seeing you at our next meeting, July 19. I am enclosing the minutes of the last few meetings. Sincerely Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. Chair, LRAAC ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Barbara Vest Sent: October 06, 2002 5:00 PM[sic] To: tim.scully Subject: RE: LRAAC ;;Mr. Scully, My name is Barbara Vest, I'm Dennis Vests' wife, Im writing you at Dennis' request to let you know that Dennis will be starting training in Phoenix on July 17th, as he is moving from the L1011 to the Boeing 757 with his Airline, and regretfully will not be able to attend the Little River Airport Board meeting on the 19th, He says he will make it to the next meeting and looks forward to meeting you then. Thank You Barbara Vest > [Original Message] > From: To: Date: 6/27/2002 8:55:10 AM > Subject: RE: LRAAC > > Thank you for your email address, this will help a lot. We'll all look forward to seeing you at the next LRAAC meeting. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Barbara Vest > Sent: September 25, 2002 5:00 PM > To: tim.scully > Subject: LRAAC > > > > > > Tim, > > Thank you for the contact information, I have been wondering when my duties would begin. I will try to attend all meetings. > Please email information to xxx I will look forward to meeting you and the other board members. > > Thank you > > Dennis Vest > > Ten Mile, Fort Bragg > > --- Barbara Vest > --- shorbird > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Tim Scully Sent: June 25, 2002 6:14 AM To: John Dervin; Tim Scully Subject: RE: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes No, none of the committee members has a deposit on a hangar. There were two open pilot positions on the committee for quite a few months and none of the hangar depositers applied for either of the open positions. Both of the positions have now been filled. The committee has no real authority to spend County money or enter into contracts [being advisory in nature] and no ability to speed up the project, beyong doing all it can to encourage and assist the Department of Transportation. I certainly can understand if you are feeling frustrated by the extreme slowness of progress. But I honestly believe that there is progress and that the hangars will most likely be built in 2003. Having the airport consultanting firm on board should help move the project forward this year, hopefully finalizing the location, generating an RFP and getting a contract negotiated. Public projects are almost always much slower than private development. > -----Original Message----- > From: John Dervin > Sent: June 24, 2002 8:23 PM > To: tim.scully > Subject: Re: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes > > > > Please send any correspondance to xxx > > Are there any people that forked over the deposit money on > this committee? > If so how many? > > Regards, John Dervin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Chuck Boyer Sent: June 25, 2002 8:31 AM To: tim.scully Cc: 'Tom Peters' Subject: RE: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes Tim, I had 3 or 4 inquires, but only one that wanted to be on a waiting list. Chuck CHUCK BOYER, Deputy Director Administration & Business Services Department of Transportation 340 Lake Mendocino Drive Ukiah, CA 95482-9432 -------------------- Original Message --------------------------- From: Tim Scully Sent: June 25, 2002 6:19 AM To: 'Chuck Boyer' Cc: Tim Scully Subject: FW: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes Please update your records to reflect John Dervin's new mailing address. He is one of the 16 hangar depositers. I have answered his email. On a related note, the LRAAC has asked me to write to you to inquire how many pilots have expressed interest in putting down deposits for a second block of County owned hangars? I recall that there were more than 16 interested when we solicited deposits 18 months ago. The committee is trying to learn how many additional hangars may be needed. I hope you are well. Respectfully Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. Chair, LRAAC -----Original Message----- From: John Dervin Sent: June 24, 2002 8:23 PM To: tim.scully Subject: Re: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes Please send any correspondance to xxx Are there any people that forked over the deposit money on this committee? If so how many? Regards, John Dervin Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 7:39 PM Subject: 7/19/02 AAC agenda, 4/19/2002 and 5/17/2002 AAC minutes > Airport Advisory Committee > > 10. There was a discussion of the pending hangar project. If it takes > one to two months to get the consultant agreement signed, and then it > takes another 3-4 months for the CalTrans loan application, can we > get construction started before the end of the year (and the 2 year > deadline on deposits)? DOT hope to at least have a signed contract by then. > We agreed that once there is concrete progress, a letter should be sent > to the depositers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On June 28 Tom Peters from DOT, Tim Scully and Trey Loy met at the airport with two representatives from Shutt Moen, the aviation consulting firm retained by the County. The consultants had spent the morning walking around the airport, making measurements. We walked around the area currently designated on the ALP for new hanagrs (the former fireman's park) and explained why we felt this was not a good location for hangars. Then we walked East down the taxiway to look at the proposed hangar location there. On the way the consultants pointed out that the tiedowns adjacent to the taxiway were too close to the taxiway, they should be set back further. The existing hangars along the taxiway are just outside the BRL (Building Restriction Line). The consultant's concern was whether a aircraft or car parked in front of a hangar would cause problems for a large aircraft trying to taxi past. We said that this has not been a significant problem so far. After looking at the proposed site next to the taxiway, we all climbed over the ditch to walk around "the desert" which has been proposed as an alternative location. This site is located in a bowl-like depression which is separated from the taxiway by both the ditch and by a small hill. The consultants expressed concern over drainage in this area. We discussed removing the old segmented circle. We discussed relocating the AWOS/ASOS on the ALP to the infield, the location shown on the ALP is on a little hill which would have atypical winds. We returned to the airport office where we were joined by Dave Thorpe. Dave said that the largest aircraft regularly using Little River was a King Air 200, with less frequent flights by a G5 and a Citation 10. The consultants had several comments about the CalTrans low interest loan program for building hangars. The paymnents are not always flat - CalTrans often requires larger payments early in the loan period, tapering off to smaller payments. Also, the pyments start as soon as the loan is funded, so it is prudent not to apply too early. Certainly there will be a period during construction when we will have to make loan payments with no income from hangar rentals. The consultants strongly encouraged DOT to call Mike Farmer of ClaTrans and start talking over the loan program. AAAE also has a loan program, but their minimum is $1,000,000. The consultants spoke in favor of box hangars as opposed to T hangars. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MENDOCINO COUNTY 2001 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN To: Interested, Responsible, and Trustee Agencies, Groups, and Individuals Project: Mendocino County 2001 Regional Transportation Plan Applicant: Mendocino Council of Governments The Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) is revising its Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The Draft 2001 RTP provides an assessment of the current modes of transportation in the county and identifies potential new travel options. It predicts future needs for travel and the movements of goods. The RTP includes a lIst of specific actions and improvements to facilitate travel and accessibility .The list of specific actions include major highway and local road construction projects, highway and street maintenance projects, bridge construction and repair, improvements to and expansion of aIrports, rehabilitation of rail lines, construction of bikelanes and bikeways, construction of mass transit transfer centers, improvements to harbors, and a variety of other transportation-related projects. The actions and projects identified in the short-range and long-range implementation programs can be arranged into three groups: 1) Implementation funding identified, 2) Programmed -funding not identified, and 3) Speculative - clear long-range need. Projects that fall into this last group are of interest because they reflect the ultimate vision of what a fully formed transportation system would look like. While these "speculative" projects are, in many cases, part of a "wish list" for the future of the region, they also point the way to a multi-modal system that will encourage sustainable economic development sensitive to the county's environmental heritage. Please review all attached materials and respond with any particular issues or concerns that you believe must be addressed in the EIR. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsiilities in connection with the proposed project. Public comments on the scope of issues to be evaluated in the EIR are encouraged. Members of the public can review a copy of the Draft RTP at the administrative office of MCOG, 367 North State Street, Suite 206, Ukiah, CA 95482. The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects to be assessed in the EIR are contained in the attached materials. An Initial Study is not attached. The comment period for this Notice of Preparation will close at 5:00 PM on August 2, 2002. Comments by FAX will not be accepted. Please send your response to Larry Wright, MCOG, 367 North State Street, Suite 206, Ukiah, CA 95482. Direct questions abQut the project can be directed to Larry Wright at (707) 463-1806. Date: July 1, 2002 Phil Dow , Executive Director Mendocino Council of Governments I. Introduction The Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) is proposing to adopt a new Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This RTP describes short-terrn and long-range transportation improvements that may occur over the next twenty years within the confines of the County of Mendocino. A number of the projects included in the RTP are major road improvements or major improvements to other transportation facilities. It is known that at least these major projects may have significant environmental effects. As such, MCOG has already concluded that a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be required for this RTP. The EIR to be prepared for the RTP will address impacts at a general or program level. Because future projects must be included in the RTP in order to be eligible for funding, many jurisdictions and agencies have included many projects for which there are no detailed or even conceptual design plans. The EIR will discuss impacts for such projects in a very general fashion since the actual impacts cannot be predicted without at least a conceptual design showing the proposed project and its location. In addition, all the projects in the RTP, when they are actually developed and proposed as discrete projects, will need to undergo CEQA review. The site-specific impacts and mitigation measures will be developed at that stage. This present EIR does not dismiss the need for this subsequent CEQA review. Instead, this Program EIR will provide an overview of the range of impacts that can be expected if all these projects are constructed over the next twenty years and will provide a mitigation framework for those projects that can be used as a mitigation baseline in subsequent CEQA reviews. Project-specific mitigation would need to include all pertinent Program EIR mitigation measures, though these measures may be revised or amended depending on the actual impacts predicted for each project. Finally, the Program EIR provides a picture of the cumulative impacts of all these projects to allow the reader to understand the long-range circulation pattern for the County. II. Specific Project Elements The RTP contains a lengthy list of possible transportation-related projects that may be built over the next twenty years. The following outlines the major proposed projects for each category of transportation improvement. MCOG has determined that some of the long-range projects included in tbe RTP are unlikely to be funded and constructed within the twenty-year time frame. These projects are listed as speculative projects. The speculative projects will be addressed in a summary fashion in the EIR, and the EIR will recognize that if by some chance funding does become available for these speculative projects, the Program EIR will be supplemented or amended to address these additional projects at the program level. The RTP includes the following projects: A .Significant Highway Corridors . Construct the Highway: 101 four-lane bypass of the City of Willits. An EIR/EIS has been prepared for this project. . Construct a four-lane bypass of Hopland on Highway 101. An EIR/EIS is being prepared for this project . Complete the four-lane expressway on Highway 101 from the southern terminus of the Hopland bypass to the existing four-lane section to the south. This project is under construction. . Construct a four-lane expressway on Highway 101 between the north end of Hopland bypass to freeway to the north. An EIR/EIS is being prepared for this project. This project is an "in-between!" project. The preliminary environmental assessment will be addressed as part of the Hopland By-pass alternatives analysis, however .funding for the implementation of the four-lane widening is not identified at this time. The actual construction of the four-lane widening from the north terminus of the Hopland By-pass to Burke Hill south of the Ukiah Valley is considered speculative. . Construct passing lanes at various locations on Highway 20 between Fort Bragg and Willits. There are no plans available. for these projects The field review of the route is currently under way to identify potential sites for passing lanes. Once these are identified, feasibility studies of each site will be completed by Caltrans. . Widen Highway 20 from !Trillium Lane to Summers Lane to accommodate two-way left turn lane east of Highway One junction. This is a long-range project. . Evaluate the feasibility of designating Highway One as a Pacific Coast Bike Route. MCOG has been negotiating with Caltrans to have any type of bikeway designation removedfrom SR-I. Until such time as the Coastal Commission and Caltrans can agree to provide funding and approvals for adequate and safe bicycle use of the route, we would strongly oppose any bicycle use of this route. . Construct a two-way left turn lane on Highway 1 from Pudding Creek Road to 0.1 mile south of Odom Lane in Fort Bragg. This is not a high priority project for Caltrans implementation based on their SHOPP program. . Construct a variety of less substantial pavement and road management projects, including repaving, shoulder widening, drainage improvements, bridge repair/replacement, and curve realignment on various portions of Highways 1, 20, 101, 128, and 153. These are all SHOPP projects which are assigned priorities by Caltrans for implementation. B. County Backbonei Circulation System and Local Roads . Provide a second access road to Brooktrails Township. A preferred route and right-of-way location has not yet been identified. The implementation of a second access route will be coordinated with the implementation of the Willits bypass in order to create a seamless freeway/county road interface . Improve North State Street, from PM 0.50 to MP 2.30. Improvement will include widening the traveled way, paving shoulders, and replacement of bridges over Masonite Road and Ackerman Creek. In the preliminary stage; no plans prepared yet. Environmental review will be done and expected to be constructed in 2004-2005 . Construct a Redemeyer Road Extension. This will require construction of a bridge over the Russian River and the extension of Redemeyer Road to Lake Mendocino Drive. Project distance is approximately 0.3 mile. Need to do feasibility study. . Improve Sherwood Road from MP 0.00 to MP 1.65. Widen roadway, reconstruct pavement, grade and pave shoulders, and reconstruct drainage facilities. No plans are available, but the project is needed. It would be coordinated with the Brooktrails Second Access project. . Improve East Side Potter Valley Road, from MP 4.70 to MP 6.40. Phase II improvements include roadway widening, pavement reconstruction, grading and paving shoulders, and reconstruction of drainage facilities. In design and environmental review about to begin. No plans available. . Construct a variety of smaller projects on various County and City roads including repavement, drainage improvements, bridge repair/reptacement, intersection improvement, bike lanes, minor street widening, rail crossings, etc. . Consider a possible parallel north-south facility through the City of Fort Bragg. This project is being assessed in the EIR for the revised Fort Bragg General Plan. . Consider a second emergency access to the Noyo Harbor in Fort Bragg. This project is being assessed in the EIR for the revised Fort Bragg General Plan. . Consider possible future parallel north-south access through the City of Willits and enhancement of the internal circulation system in Willits when the bypass is completed. The City was awarded funding to conduct a feasibility study of this project. Project could be implemented in the next 5-10 years. However, no route is yet known. C. Bus Transit Capital projects include: . North Ukiah Transit Center. Project is funded and has plans. . Willits Transfer Center. Project funded and underway. . Fort Bragg, Point Arena, and Gualala Transit Bus Yards. Speculative project. . Ukiah Shop/Office Expansion. Speculative project. . Central Ukiah Transit Center. Speculative project. D. Rail Transit The North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) plans to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the overall needs and actions for their line, including its length through Mendocino County .This assessment will determine what areas need repair or replacement. All repair would be done only after extensive environmental review. As it is premature to predict what rehabilitation, repair, and other projects will be required, the EIR will only briefly discuss the likely range of impacts that might result from future projects. E. Aviation Major capital improvements that could have environmental impacts include: 1. At Ukiah AirPort, . Construct Helipad. No plans available or prepared. Project is very high in City of Ukiah's priority ranking. Listed for short-range program implementation. . Construct terminal facilies and ground access facilities including access roads and auto parking. This project is a high priority and a rough preliminary plan is available. . Reconstruct storm drain system & runway apron. This is a high priority project but is a long range project. . Construct RW 15/33 run-up area (approximately 6,000 square feet located 1,000 feet from end of runway). This is a very high priority project, but no plans yet prepared. This is a project which will be programmed in the short-range program category. . Repave ramp area between CDF and FBO area. Listed for short-range program implementation. . Enclose open drainage ditch. Listed for short-range program implementation. . Construct commercial helicopter operations area, including housing facilities for medical evacuation pel1sonnel. This is a long-range project. It is likely to be implemented, even though no time line has been identified as of yet. . Construct cargo ramp. long-range program project. No plans prepared. . Purchase adjoining properties for airport-related expansion, southwest and southeast of the present airport site. $peculative project. . Complete negotiation of aviation easements to the south of airport property. Speculative project. . Construct perimeter access road for airport circulation. Speculative project. . Construct sound wall/sopnd barricades. Speculative project. . Relocate corporation yard from airport to available parcels in airport industrial area. This will free airport land for airport development activities. Speculative project. 2 At Willits Airport: . Overlay runway, taxiway and ramp area. Listed for short-term program implementation. . Replace runway and taxiway lighting system. Listed for short-term program implementation. . Repair slide area at RW 16/24 at north end of runway and provide drainage improvements at RW. The initial steps in implementing this project are underway. Soils testing and structural sub-soil analysis are being conducted. . Improve parking area. This project is scheduled by the City of Willits for implementation. No plans have yet been prepared. . Construct perimeter fencing. Listed as a short-term project, but no plans available yet. . Construct heliport landing pad. Listed as a short-term project, but no plans available yet. . Construct turn around area at south end of runway 24. Listed as a short-term project, but no plans available yet. . Construct new administration building and pilot's lounge. Speculative project. . Extend new parallel taxiway on east side of runway. Speculative project. . Purchase 75-100 acres southwest of airport for extension of runway and runway protection zone. Speculative project. . Construct 10 new hangars. Speculative project. . Construct perimeter road around airport. Speculative project. . Extend runway 1,000 feet and lower a portion of the existing runway. Speculative project. 3 .Little River Airport: . Prepare site and construct 16 aircraft hangers. Short-term project. . Finalize obtaining non-precision GPS approaches including clearing obstacles and trimming trees. Short-term project. . Install AWOS or ASOS at airport. Short-term project. . Replace septic system and upgrade restroom facilities. Short-term project. . Negotiate land swaps or purchase of adjacent land parcels for clear zones around airport. Short-term project . Replace existing runway lighting system and wiring for edge lights and directional lights; upgrade all llghting for runway and night operations. Short-term project. . Replace storage buildings at airport site. Long-range project, no plans but funding has been identified. . Place AC overlay on paved areas. Long-range project. . Replace lighting systemj Long-range project. . Replace operations building at airport. Long-range project,. no plans available. . Construct more hangars as needed. Speculative project. . Construct large transient hangar or covered aircraft parking. Speculative project. 4. Round Valley Airport: . Construct turn-around and connecting taxiway and expand apron area at RW 10. Short-term project. . Install above-ground fueling facilities. Short-term project. . Place AC overlay on all paved surfaces. Short-term project. . Construct new tie-down and relocate facilities. Short-term project. . Construct new taxiway. Long-range project. . Reconstruct runway and apron area. Speculative project. . Install apron and runway lighting. Speculative project. 5 .Boonville Airport: . Complete land acquisition (l-acre) for airport expansion. Short-term project. . Install drainage system and correct existing drainage problems across runway. Short-term project. . Establish clear zones all approaches to runway (Runway Protection Zone via Protection Easement). Easement negotiations are underway, if easements cannot be obtained at reasonable cpsts, property may have to be purchased. . Construct heliport Short-term project. . Construct and pave taxiway, apron, and parking area. Short-term project. . Install drainage system. Short-term project. . Develop lease agreement for hanger construction on airport expansion parcel. Long-range project. . Prepare site for hanger construction and construct access facilities to hanger area. Long-range project. . Rehabilitate pavement. long-range project. . Construct airport operations building and pilot's lounge. Speculative project. . Install lighting system. Speculative; unlikely FAA would approve. F. Maritime . Continue to pursue funds to construct a breakwater project at Noyo Harbor. Speculative project. . Provide additional storage areas for fishing-related uses at Noyo Harbor. Speculative project. . Provide additional berth at Noyo Harbor. Speculative project. G .Bicycle Transport The RTP includes a range of bikelane and bike path projects. All projects are within existing rights-of-way. While the EIR will generally discuss these projects, their construction will have minimal environmental impacts since they will be constructed on the edge of existing roads. III. Scope of the EIR The EIR will examine the pqtentially significant impacts that could result from the range of projects included in the RTP. Projects listed as speculative will not be assessed except to note that if these projects become feasible during the life-span of the RTP, the EIR will be amended, if necessary, to address these projects. Impacts will be assessed for each category of project (e.g. new roads, street and drainage improvements, bridge construction and rehabilitatipn, airport facility expansion, etc.) and mitigation measures will be recommended for signifiicant impacts. Generally, site-specific analyses of the projects will not be included since thpse projects not already having an EIR prepared for them (e.g., Highway 101 new road construction) have not been designed to a level where the precise project location and/or propsed project improvements are known at this time. The EIR will also not include quantitative projections of traffic, noise, or air quality. Impacts will be identified based on a general assessment of the environment in areas where RTP projects are located. The following areas of impact will be assessed. A .Geology and Soils The EIR will discuss the local geologic and soils constraints and impacts involving road and other transportation projects. The potential for soil erosion impacts will be discussed. Program-level mitigations requiring additional geotechnical review and other mitigations will be developed. B. Hydrology and Water Quality Potential impacts regarding flooding and generation of additional runoff will be discussed along with the potential for additional pollution of ground and surface water. Program-level mitigations requiring additional hydrologic analysis, avoidance of floodplains, and water quality protections will be provided. C. Biotic Resources The EIR will discuss the range of potential impacts to special status species, riparian habitat, streams, wetlands, and other sensitive habitat. Impacts on wildlife movement will be discussed. Program-level mitigations requiring additional field surveys, avoidance of wetlands and riparian habiat, avoidance of habitat supporting special status species, reduction of erosion and water pollutants, etc. will be recommended. D. Cultural Resources It will be assumed that cuItural resources could be located at any of the sites where projects are proposed. The EIR will provide standard mitigation measures to ensure cultural resources are adequately surveyed and protected during future construction. E. Traffic The projects included in the RTP are intended to improve traffic safety and relieve traffic congestion. These benefici impacts will be described. A few of the road projects will result in increased traffic on other roads. These impacts will be generally discussed, though explicit traffic projections will not be developed. The EIR will provide a general discussion of the potential for increased air and rail traffic that could result from proposed projects. F. Noise The general impacts of construction noise will be discussed and program level mitigation measures recommended. The EIR will discuss the potential for increased vehicle-generated noise on new roads as well as aviation-related noise from new aviation projects. Explicit noise projections along roads, around airports, or near other projects will not be conducted. Program level mitigations wtll be provided. G. Air Quality Based on conversation with staff of the Mendocino County AQMD, no quantitative modeling of future air pollutant emissions will be conducted. Instead the EIR will provide a general discussion of pollutant emissions resulting from construction and increased motor vehicle use. Program level mitigations will be provided. H. Aesthetics Discuss how projects could affect aesthetic resources along roads, around airports, and near other proposed projects The discussion will be generalized and not include an explicit inventory of all aesthetic resources adjacent to every road or other project included in the RTP. Program level mitigation measures will be recommended. I. Public Services The EIR will discuss potential effects on public service providers. It is not expected that projects will have an adverse impact on any public service provider. In fact, improving road circulation safety and congestion will benefit fire, police, and emergency medical suppliers. J. Health Hazards Provide a general discussio of the potential for RTP projects to involve the transport or use of hazardous materials. program level mitigation measures will be recommended. K. Land Use Discuss general consistency of proposed projects with the General Plans of the County and its cities. Discuss how projects could adversely affect agricultural resources. Discuss whether projects would divide existing communities or displace housing or people. Program level mitigation measures will be recommended. L. Growth-lnducing Impacts Projects that might induce growth include the Highway 101 bypasses and widening projects (which could facilitate people commuting from Mendocino County to the south) and the proposed Redemeyer Road extension (which could open up development in the area served by that road). The growth-inducing impacts of those projects will be discussed. M. Cumulative Impacts The EIR will discuss the cumulative impacts on traffic circulation if all proposed projects are constructed. The EIR will not assess the cumulative impacts of all RTP projects plus all other proposed projects within the County. Such an analysis would be speculative given uncertainties about when RTP projects might actually be constructed. In addition the County and its cities have provided the circulation and transportation projects they wish to see implemented over the next twenty years. It is assumed that these projects would provide the necessary transportation system to meet the needs of new residents and businesses that would result from other proposed projects within their jurisdiction. No quantitative projections of traffic, noise, or air quality will be prepared for this general discussion. N. Project Alternatives The EIR will examine up to three alternatives for the proposed RTP. The alternatives will be developed by MCOG staff and MCOG's environmental consultant. MCOG encourages reviewers to provide recommendations for alternatives that should be addressed in the EIR. From: Tim Scully Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 6:05 AM To: 'Kathie Sarin & Steve Schoolman'; Tim Scully Subject: RE: Nomination for Alternate Pilot Member Thank you, I'll pass this on to the rest of the committee! > -----Original Message----- > From: Kathie Sarin & Steve Schoolman > Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 11:18 PM > To: Tim Scully > Subject: Nomination for Alternate Pilot Member > > > Tim, > > As I indicated to you last month I won't be able to attend this Friday's > LRAAC meeting because I'm in woodworking class. But my wife Kathie > Sarin will be there. And she's willing to be an Alternate Pilot member > if the committee wishes to appoint her. > > Her qualifications are: > > 1) She's an instrument rated Private Pilot, though she no > longer has a > medical certificate. > > 2) She's an active user of Little River Airport and owns a hanger > there. > > 3) She's a registered voter. > > Wish I could join you, but ... > > Steve > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Steve Ford Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 7:51 AM To: tim.scully Subject: RE: Parcel 9 Tim, I'm just leaving the office now (7:50) so I'll be a little late but I'll be there. Steve