This section summarizes federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to aesthetic resources and applicable to ACEforward.

Transcription

1 Introduction This section describes the regulatory setting and environmental setting for aesthetic resources in the vicinity of ACEforward near-term and longer-term improvements. It also describes the impacts on aesthetic resources that would result from implementation of ACEforward and mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts, where feasible and appropriate. Appendix I, Supporting Information, contains additional technical information for this section. The study area for aesthetic resources, also referred to as the area of visual effect (AVE), is defined in Section 4.1.3, Methods of Analysis. Cumulative impacts on aesthetic resources, in combination with planned, approved, and reasonably foreseeable projects, are discussed in Chapter 5, Other CEQA- Required Analysis Regulatory Setting This section summarizes federal, state, regional, and local regulations related to aesthetic resources and applicable to ACEforward Federal There are no federally designated National Wild and Scenic Rivers (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2016a) or National Scenic Byways (Federal Highway Administration 2016) within the near-term or longer-term improvement areas. No lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) would be affected (Bureau of Land Management 2016a and 2016b). No national parks or monuments are located within the near-term or longer-term improvement areas (National Park Service 2016a). However, the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail and Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge are within the near-term and longer-term improvement areas. Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail The Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail is crossed by the near-term and longer-term improvement areas. The National Park Service is working toward a continuous, 1,200 mile nonmotorized recreation trail that will roughly follow the historic route of the Anza Expedition of Approximately 300 miles of recreation trail have been certified so far and each segment is independently operated (National Park Service 2016b). The Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management and Use Plan identifies that its management objective is to protect a trail ROW, to protect cultural and scenic resources along the trail, to foster public appreciation and understanding of the trail, to encourage facilities for resource protection and public information and use. However, the plan acknowledges that many segments of the historic trail have been altered from the effects of urbanization and from changing transportation systems, which is characteristic of the trail within the near-term and longer-term improvement areas. Recreational trails, which are a part of the trail system, cross near-term and longer-term improvements alternatives including existing and planned segments of the San Francisco Bay Trail 4.1-1

2 near Alviso Marina County Park that cross and parallel longer term Alternatives P-SJF-2a through P-SJF-2d and the Alameda Creek Trail that is crossed by near-term Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS- 1c. In addition, the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge is identified as an interpretive site for the trail (National Park Service 2016c). Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge The Alviso Baylands portion of the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge is within the longer-term improvements area. The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge is the nation's first urban national wildlife refuge and is located at the south end of San Francisco Bay. The refuge was created in 1974 and is a 30,000 acre oasis for millions of migratory birds and endangered species, and provides opportunities for wildlife-oriented recreation and nature study for the surrounding communities (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2016b). The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan identifies public access areas for wildlife viewing and photography are important and include the following objective pertaining to visual resources (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2016c): Objective 3.1. In five years, develop a visitor services plan that provides and promotes high quality, safe public opportunities such as wildlife observation, wildlife photography, hunting, fishing, and other compatible recreational programs for up to 1 million visits per year. National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) establishes the federal government policy on historic preservation. Section 106 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. Potential adverse effects include change in the physical features of the property s setting that contribute to its historic significance, or introduction of visual elements that diminish the integrity of the property s significant historic features. Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, documents and analyzed impacts to historic properties, including how visual changes resulting from the near-term and longer-term improvements would affect such resources State There are no state designated Wild and Scenic Rivers within the near-term or longer-term improvements (Friends of the River 2005 [Revised 2015]). No state parks are within the near-term or longer-term improvements (California Protected Areas Data Portal 2016). State Scenic Roadways and Highways State Scenic Highways lists highways that are either eligible for designation as a scenic highway or already are designated as a scenic highway. A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view (California Department of Transportation 2016a). There are a number of state scenic highways within 3 miles of the near-term and longer-term improvements. Officially designated and eligible state scenic highways, as of October 2016, that are located within 3 miles of the near-term or longer-term improvements are include in Table All of these highways, both designated and eligible, are considered in this analysis. There are no officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways within 3 miles of the near-term or longer-term improvements in Stanislaus and Merced Counties, so they are not included in the table

3 Table Officially Designated and Eligible State Scenic Highways within 3 Miles of the Near- Term or Longer-Term Improvements Area County Route Designation Post Mile Limits Segment Description Santa Clara I-280 E L From I-280/I-880 interchange to the San Mateo County line Alameda I-580 OD (E) a ( ) From San Joaquin County line to SR 205 (San Joaquin County line to I-80) I-680 OD (E) ( ) SR 84 OD (E) ( ) San Joaquin OD (E) ( ) From Mission Boulevard in Fremont to the Contra Costa County line (Contra Costa County line to the Santa Clara County line) From SR 238 (Mission Boulevard) to I-680 (Same) From I-5 to the Alameda County line (Same) Notes: a OD (E) signifies that these routes are Eligible and then all, or portions, of the segments became Officially Designated. However, Caltrans retains the original start and end post miles on the eligible list until the text within the Streets and Highways Code is revised by the legislature to remove the text describing Eligible segments that have become Officially Designated. (Justine pers. comm.) Therefore, the post miles for each are included in this table. E = Eligible I = Interstate OD = Officially Designated L = Overlap post mile SR = State Route Source: California Department of Transportation 2017 Several designated landscaped freeways are within view of the corridor (California Department of Transportation 2016c). Freeways within 3 miles in rural settings and within a half mile in urban areas of the corridor are considered in this analysis and are indicated in Table Table Designated Landscaped Freeways Potentially in View of the Near-Term or Longer- Term Improvements County Freeway Freeway Segment (Post Mile Limits) Santa Clara SR / / /6.90 US / / /42.13 SR 237 R3.98/R / / /8.17 Alameda I / / / / / / /

4 County Freeway Freeway Segment (Post Mile Limits) Alameda (continued) I /19.85 R20.42/R21.88 I / / /10.64 San Joaquin SR / / / / / / / / /8.96 SR 120 R0.07/R4.09 R4.54/R6.33 I-205 R5.95/R8.33 Stanislaus SR 99 R2.83/R3.87 R7.86/8.69 R11.24/R11.90 R12.91/R14.92 R15.06/R16.47 R22.20/R22.90 R22.94/R23.06 Merced SR / / / / / / / / / / / / /34.43 Sources: California Department of Transportation 2016b; California Department of Transportation 2016c. R = First realignment As defined by the Outdoor Advertising Act, a landscaped freeway means a section or sections of a freeway that is now, or hereafter may be, improved by the planting at least on one side or on the median of the freeway ROW of lawns, trees, shrubs, flowers, or other ornamental vegetation requiring reasonable maintenance. Landscaped freeways must have planting areas that are at least 1,000 feet in length that are in healthy condition and improve the aesthetic appearance of the 4.1-4

5 highway. Functional plantings (i.e., plantings for erosion control, traffic safety, reduction of fire hazards, and traffic noise abatement, or other non-ornamental purposes) do not qualify. The placement of advertising is prohibited within 660 feet of the edge of the ROW of a landscaped freeway (California Department of Transportation 2014) Regional and Local The San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC), a state joint powers agency, proposes improvements located within and outside of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way (ROW). The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA) affords railroads engaged in interstate commerce 1 considerable flexibility in making necessary improvements and modifications to rail infrastructure, subject to the requirements of the Surface Transportation Board. ICCTA broadly preempts state and local regulation of railroads and this preemption extends to the construction and operation of rail lines. As such, activities within the UPRR ROW are clearly exempt from local building and zoning codes and other land use ordinances. ACEforward improvements proposed outside of the UPRR ROW, however, would be subject to regional and local plans and regulations. Though ICCTA does broadly preempt state and local regulation of railroads, SJRRC intends to obtain local agency permits for construction of facilities that fall outside of the UPRR ROW even though SJRRC has not determined that such permits are legally necessary and such permits may not be required. Appendix H, Regional Plans and Local General Plans, provides a list of applicable goals, policies, and objectives from regional and local plans of the jurisdictions in which ACEforward improvements are proposed. Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans, specific plans, and regional plans. These plans were considered during the preparation of this analysis and were reviewed to assess whether ACEforward would be consistent 2 with the plans of relevant jurisdictions. ACEforward would be generally consistent with the applicable goals, policies, and objectives related to aesthetic resources identified in Appendix H. ACEforward would be generally consistent with the applicable goals, policies, and objectives related to aesthetic resources identified in Appendix H in particular because the near-term and longer-term improvements follow existing railroads and/or existing roadways in nearly all cases. The near-term improvements include a few alternatives in areas without existing roads or railways such as the Midway crossover, the Lammers crossover, and the Lyoth-Banta crossover. The longer-term improvements include a few alternatives in areas without existing roads or railways such as the Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) connection alternatives in the Tri-Valley; and portions of the tunnel alternatives and tunnel connections in the Tri-Valley and Altamont segments. These are reviewed in the analysis below for their aesthetic effects. 1 Altamont Corridor Express operates within a right-of-way (ROW) and on tracks owned by the Union Pacific Railroad, which operates interstate freight rail service in the same ROW and on the same tracks. 2 An inconsistency with regional or local plans is not necessarily considered a significant impact under CEQA, unless it is related to a physical impact on the environment that is significant in its own right

6 Table County- and City-Designated Scenic Routes within 3 Miles of the Near-Term or Longer- Term Improvements County or City Santa Clara County Roads None San Jose I-280 Santa Clara and Milpitas I-680 I-880 US 101 SR 87 SR 237 None Alameda County I-580 Dublin Fremont Livermore Castro Valley, Newark, Union City, and Pleasanton I-680 I-880 Tassajara Road Doolan Road Collier Canyon Road North Livermore Avenue Vasco Road Altamont Pass Road Greenville Road West Grant Line Road Flynn Road Patterson Pass Road Pleasanton Sunol Road Foothill Road Kilkare Road Palomares Road Niles Canyon Road Morrison Canyon Road Vargas Road Mission Boulevard (SR 238) Includes all County-designated roadways plus Fallon Road SR 84 (south of I-880) BART route Mission Boulevard Paseo Padre Parkway Niles Canyon Road Includes all County-designated roadways plus Isabel Avenue None San Joaquin County I-580 Corral Hollow Road (west of I-580) 4.1-6

7 County or City Tracy, Lathrop, Stockton, Manteca, and Ripon Stanislaus County Modesto, Ceres, and Turlock Merced County Livingston Atwater Merced Roads None None None None None Atwater Boulevard First Street Bellevue Road Shaffer Road Winton Way Broadway from Winton Way to First Street Buhach Road Third Street Part of Grove Avenue All entrances to the city North and South Bear Creek Drive within the city limits N Street from 16th Street to the Merced County Courthouse 21st Street from the Merced County Courthouse to Glen Avenue M Street from Black Rascal Creek to Bellevue Road West 28th Street from M Street to G Street R Street (extended) from Black Rascal Creek to Bellevue Road Olive Avenue East of McKee Road M Street from 18th Street to Bear Creek Campus Parkway Methods of Analysis Aesthetic resources are all objects (artificial and natural, moving and stationary) and features (e.g., landforms and water bodies) visible on a landscape. These resources add to or detract from the scenic quality of the landscape (i.e., the visual appeal of the landscape). A visual impact is the creation of an intrusion or perceptible contrast that affects the scenic quality of a viewscape. A visual impact can be perceived by an individual or group as either positive or negative, depending on a variety of factors or conditions (e.g., personal experience, time of day, weather, or seasonal conditions). Identifying a study area s aesthetic resources and conditions involves understanding the visual character of the area s visual features and the regulatory context. Once those parameters are understood, a study area s aesthetic resources are further defined by establishing the AVE and documenting the visual character of the environmental setting, including the natural and cultural environments. For the purposes of this section s analysis, the study area and AVE are synonymous. The affected population, or viewers, are defined by their relationship to the study area, their visual preferences, and their sensitivity to changes associated with the near-term and longer-term improvements. Visual preferences, or what viewers like and dislike about the AVE s visual character, 4.1-7

8 define the AVE s visual quality. Visual quality serves as the baseline for determining the degree of visual impacts and whether a project s visual impacts would be adverse, beneficial, or neutral. The impact assessment methodology for aesthetic resources includes the following components. Establish the AVE for aesthetics resources and determine landscape units. Inventory and describe the affected environment, affected viewers, and existing visual quality, and identify key viewpoints (KVP) and views for visual assessment. Assess visual compatibility and viewer sensitivity and analyze the project s visual impacts. Propose methods to mitigate significant visual impacts. This research and analysis methods used to determine the effects discussed in Section 4.1.5, Impact Analysis, are described in detail in Appendix I-1, Terminology, Methodology, and Rating System. The methods for evaluating impacts may include data collection methods and sources, inventory of regional and local conditions, evaluation of analytical context, and qualitative or quantitative data analysis techniques to determine how activities and physical changes associated with ACEforward could cause impacts and consider the context and intensity these impacts. The methods for evaluating impacts are intended to satisfy the federal and state requirements, including CEQA and general conformity. In accordance with CEQA requirements, an EIR must include a description of the existing physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project. Those conditions, in turn, will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant (CEQA Guidelines 15125[a]) Environmental Setting This section discusses the environmental setting related to aesthetic resources in the ACEforward near-term and longer-term improvements environments Near-Term Improvements Environment The study area associated with the near-term improvements consist of a blend of developed and rural areas that are intermixed with more natural, undeveloped landscapes. The existing ACE corridor predominantly consists of railroad tracks, ancillary structures (e.g., rail bridges and underpasses), intersecting freeways and local roadways, safety signage, at-grade crossings, exclusion fencing, and station platforms, station buildings, and parking facilities. San Jose to Fremont The City of San Jose recognizes that built vistas exist from US Highway (US) 101, Interstate (I-) 880, I-680, I-280, State Route (SR) 17, SR 85, SR 237, and SR 87 and requires that development be designed to preserve such vistas (Section 4.1.2, Regulatory Setting). Elevated locations in the improvements area and vicinity provide long-range views, including along elevated roadways, bridges, outdoor spaces, buildings located on hillsides, and multilevel buildings on flatter lands that are closer to the San Francisco Bay. Views from roadways or bridge crossings tend to be fleeting, unlike views from fixed locations such as buildings. Most vistas immediately available from the improvements area are from bridge crossings over the corridor

9 Views in the improvements area are characteristic of the Bay Area and encompass views of the Santa Cruz Mountains, Altamont Hills, the Alviso Baylands, and local developed land. They range from being more scenic to be more developed in nature and can have low to moderately high visual quality. Vistas that are low in visual quality tend to be more industrialized and have disjunctive land uses, such as abrupt transitions between residential and industrial areas that contain a great deal of utilities and infrastructure. These vistas offer limited opportunities to see the nearby mountains or bay where there is a transition between suburbanized to more urban land uses. Vistas that are moderately high in visual quality tend to include areas where development is unified and there are more subtle transitions between residential and commercial land uses. In various locations throughout the study area, natural features like the mountains or Alviso Baylands add to the quality of available views. Views of the improvements area are often blocked by vegetation, buildings, and infrastructure. However, when the improvements area is visible, rail features are often undistinguishable as independent visual elements due to the amount of infrastructure in the developed area. Viewers at locations crossing the near-term improvements area (bridges) or immediately adjacent to the corridor (multilevel buildings) are familiar with the existing visual conditions and the presence of infrastructure associated with the rail corridor within those vistas. Views of improvements area are more prevalent in areas with less urban density, such as in Fremont and near Sunol. The San Jose to Fremont segment travels through downtown San Jose, where dominant visual elements include the San Jose Diridon Station, HP Pavilion, and Bellarmine College athletic fields. The land uses surrounding both sides of the rail corridor are predominantly industrial and commercial big-box stores. Key visual features include industrial and commercial buildings, surrounding parking lots, and local roads and infrastructure. Once the train crosses US 101, there are multi-family residential land uses as well as industrial land uses. Levi Stadium and Santa Clara Golf and Tennis Club are points of visual interest. Once the train crosses Highway 237, the viewshed consists of the southernmost portion of the San Francisco Bay, including the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge and Alviso Marina County Park, and salt flats provide views of large expanses of grassland and open water. In Newark and Fremont, land uses are predominantly industrial and single-family residential. Alternative SJF-1 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of this alternative, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Diablo Range: The oak woodlands and grassy hillsides of the Diablo Range are visible to the east from the elevated SR 87 and from the existing rail corridor and local roadways that have view corridors where there are breaks in development and trees lining the existing rail corridor or view corridors. They are also visible from upper stories of multi-story and high-rise buildings. Santa Cruz Mountains: The forested Santa Cruz Mountains are visible to the east from the elevated SR 87. They are also visible from upper stories of multi-story and high-rise buildings. However, the elevated SR 87 corridor limits views of the mountains from locations east of the highway, including from the rail corridor

10 San Jose Skyline: The high-rise buildings of the San Jose skyline can be seen to the north, above the surrounding tree canopies, from the elevated SR 87 corridor. The skyline is visible to a lesser degree from the existing rail corridor, which is also elevated but is at a lower elevation than SR 87. SR 87: This is a San Jose scenic route with views of the alternative. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and the Highway 87 Bikeway, multi-family residents living in the New Horizons condominium complex and the Skyline high-rise, and industrial and commercial viewers along Almaden Road that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Single-family residences to the west of SR 87 do not have views of this alternative because the berm up to SR 87 is a visual barrier and prevents views. Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain with background views to the Diablo Range and the Santa Cruz Mountains. Vegetation near this alternative includes mature trees and shrubs that are associated, primarily, with residential areas. In addition, mature trees line the east side of the existing track, between the tracks and the residential and industrial areas, providing visual screening of the tracks for adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderate high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is dominated by development and terrain and vegetation are not very harmonious, resulting in moderately low natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of two- to three-story condominiums associated with the New Horizons multi-family residences, the 11-story Skyline multiunit residential development, and single-story commercial and industrial buildings and warehouses; the elevated SR 87, local roadways, and paved parking areas associated with residential and commercial areas; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles/lines), fencing, and elevated billboards and commercial signage. The separation between residential and commercial and industrial development is disjointed, resulting in moderately low cultural order. The alternative environment comprises the existing layover facility that consists of two throughtracks and four layover tracks that are located between SR 87 and adjacent development. The nearterm improvements environment blends well with its surroundings and serves as a transition between development and the SR 87 corridor, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low. Light and Glare While Alternative SJF-1 is surrounded by development and the freeway, daytime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site are moderate because there are not many vertical or paved surfaces surface to reflect light. Trees and shrubs along the corridor also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the site are moderately low because the corridor is not well lit and passing trains that are lit at night are not as frequent after peak commute hours

11 Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative SJF-1 vicinity are moderate high because SR 87 lacks landscaping and industrial areas are sparsely vegetated. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements vicinity are moderately high because the vicinity is well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with higher density suburban development, the interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial and industrial development, and the freeway and street lighting and passing vehicles on SR 87 and local roadways. Alternative SJF-2 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of this alternative, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Vargas Plateau: The oak woodlands and grassy hillsides of the Vargas Plateau are visible to the northeast from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways, including SR 84, which have view corridors because of breaks in development and trees. Centerville Depot/Fremont Station: The Centerville Depot/Fremont Station is a historic Southern Pacific rail station that looks as it did in 1910 (Altamont Corridor Express 2016a). Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users and patrons of the Depot Diner, recreationists using local roadways, multi-family residents living in the Cottonwood Place apartment complex, and commercial viewers along SR 84, and Fremont Boulevard that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Multi-family residents living along the southern and southwestern edges of the Meadowbrook condominium complex may also have limited views of the alternative. A single-family residence is located on Bonde Way, near the Post Street intersection, which would also have limited views of the alternative from the backyard. Another single-family residence that would have limited views of the alternative is located along SR 84. Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain with limited middleground and background views to the Vargas Plateau. Vegetation near this alternative includes mature trees and shrubs that are associated, primarily, with streetscape plantings, commercial buildings and parking areas, and the Fremont ACE Station. Mature trees along sound barriers and vines planted on sound barriers that line both sides of the existing track, between the tracks and the residential and commercial areas, provide visual screening of the tracks for adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderate high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is common to developed areas and vegetation is harmonious, resulting in moderate natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of mostly single-story and a few two-story commercial buildings, single-story single-family residences, and the three-story Cottonwood Place apartment building and Meadowbrook condominium complex; local roadways, and paved parking areas associated with residential and commercial areas; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines), fencing, and commercial signage. The separation between residential and commercial development is slightly disjointed, resulting in moderate cultural order

12 The alternative environment comprises the existing Fremont Station, which consists of two throughtracks that are located between the existing station parking lot and adjacent development. However, the proposed location of the parking facility is outside the rail corridor, located on a commercial development. The existing environment blends well with its surroundings and serves as a transition between development and the SR 87 corridor, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with Alternative SJF-2 site are moderately high due to the amount of vertical surfaces, including windows, and paved surfaces associated with suburbanized areas that reflect light. Trees and shrubs help to reduce glare to a degree. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the site are moderately high because station parking, the platform, and the site proposed for development are well lit. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative SJF-2 vicinity are also moderate high due to the suburbanized setting. Trees and shrubs help to reduce glare to a degree. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the vicinity are moderately high because the vicinity is well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with higher density suburban development, the interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial and industrial development, and the freeway and street lighting and passing vehicles on SR 87 and local roadways. Niles Subdivision, from Niles Junction to Elmhurst Junction Certain alternatives within the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b) would provide rail connections that would allow the shifting of some freight traffic from the Coast Subdivision between Newark and Oakland to the Niles Subdivision between Niles Junction and Elmhurst Junction in Oakland. The Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction already experiences train traffic due to Capitol Corridor s daily 14 trains as well as an estimated 2 daily freight trains. No physical improvements would be constructed north of Niles Junction and thus no direct change in scenic resources would occur. The addition of up to 4 daily freight trains (in 2020) and up to 6 daily freight trains (in 2040) due to the alternatives noted above would not introduce any new visual features along the Niles Subdivision nor would they change the visual character of this existing railroad. Thus, there is no potential for a significant visual impact. As such, the existing setting of the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction is not presented herein as it is not germane to the impact analysis. For impacts related to noise or air quality along the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction, please see Section 4.3, Air Quality and Section 4.12, Noise and Vibration. Centerville/Niles/Sunol The Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment travels from Centerville, where the predominant land use is single-family residential on both sides of the railroad tracks. In Parkmont, there are industrial land uses in north of the railroad tracks, and single-family, multifamily, and industrial uses south of the railroad tracks. The track improvements cross Alameda Creek and Alameda Creek Trail before crossing over Mission Boulevard(SR 84/SR 238), where the track improvements are surrounded on both sides by single-family residences. From Mission Boulevard (SR 84/SR 238), the railroad passes

13 through Niles Canyon in unincorporated Alameda County to Sunol and then terminates in Pleasanton. Within the canyon, the viewshed consists of rolling hills and oak woodlands, with very little development. Sunol and Pleasanton have low-density suburban development near the nearterm improvements. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of these alternatives, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Creek and Alameda Creek Trail: The trail borders Altamont Creek and includes paved and unpaved portions to accommodate multiple uses (e.g., horseback riding, cycling, walking, and jogging). Vargas Plateau, Walpert Ridge, Sunol Ridge, and Pleasanton Ridge: The oak woodlands and grassy hillsides of these features are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. Niles Canyon: This largely undeveloped canyon has scenic views of the surrounding vegetated hillsides and intermittent views of Alameda Creek. Mission Boulevard (SR 238), BART route, Paseo Padre Parkway, SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, I-680, Pleasanton Sunol Road, and Kilkare Road: These are state-, city-, and countydesignated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2, Scenic Route Screening). Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include BART and ACE rail users, recreationists using local roadways and the Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and singlefamily and multi-family residential, commercial, and industrial viewers that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain in Centerville. In Centerville, vegetation near this alternative includes mature trees and shrubs associated with streetscape plantings, commercial buildings and parking areas, and residential landscaping. Mature trees along sound barriers and vines planted on sound barriers often line both sides of the existing tracks and provide visual screening between the tracks and the residential, commercial, and industrial areas. Alameda Creek and remnant quarry ponds are visible water features in Centerville. The natural environment in the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection area is comprised of residential, commercial, and industrial landscaping; streetscapes; grassy open space areas associated with recreational fields, golf courses, parks, and vacant lots; riparian vegetation along Alameda Creek; and remnant quarry ponds. The natural environment in the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas is dominated more by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with oak woodlands. However, the Hearst double track improvement terminates at the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course, which has manicured turf and landscape plantings. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderate high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting in Centerville is common to developed areas and

14 vegetation is fairly harmonious, resulting in moderate natural harmony. The existing natural setting for the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection area is somewhat harmonious and consistent with developed landscapes, resulting in moderate natural harmony. The existing natural setting in the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas is more intact and harmonious, resulting in moderately high natural harmony. The cultural environment in Centerville consists of mainly suburban residential, industrial, and recreational land uses; local roadways, and paved parking areas associated with residential, commercial, and industrial areas; bridges, aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines), fencing, and commercial signage. Single-family residences are located on both sides of the railroad tracks except where two large industrial buildings are located north of the railroad tracks, off Shinn Drive. Where the Warm Springs Subdivision crosses Alameda Creek, views of Niles Canyon and the Mission Boulevard Bridge over Alameda Creek are predominant features in the viewshed. Alameda Creek Regional Trail, a paved, multiuse trail that begins at the mouth of Niles Canyon, crosses this alternative. Recreationists are mainly joggers and bicyclists. The cultural environment in the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection area consists of mostly residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Industrial land uses are located along the tracks between Industrial Parkway and Alameda Creek Trail, on the west side of the track. South of Alameda Creek Trail, the area is dominated by residential and mixed-use land uses. Mature trees, fencing, and sound barriers often provide visual screening between the tracks and many of the residences lining the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection. However, some residences along 12th Street face the alignment and have direct views of the subdivision. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), and fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. Views of Alameda Creek are predominant features in the view shed and the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection crosses the Alameda Creek Regional Trail. The cultural environment in the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas is dominated more by the natural environment and low-density suburban development that is mostly set back away from the tracks, except for a few single-family residences that border the tracks in downtown Sunol. The existing tracks also pass a few commercial properties through downtown Sunol, including Bosco s Bones & Brew, Sunol Railroad Cafe, and Sunol s Whistle Stop Antiques. The separation between residential and commercial development is slightly disjointed, resulting in moderate cultural order along the segment in Centerville. The industrial areas and infrastructure are disjointed and detract from the nearby suburban setting, resulting in moderate cultural order in the Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection area. Land uses transition and blend well in the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas, resulting in moderately high cultural order along these segments. The alternatives environment comprises the existing ACE corridor in Centerville, which consists of two through-tracks that converge down to one track after Mission Boulevard. Mature trees along sound barriers and vines planted on sound barriers often line both sides of the existing tracks and provide visual screening between the tracks and the residential, commercial, and industrial areas in Centerville. The existing alternatives environment of Centerville blends well with its surroundings but the tracks do slightly separate and segment development, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection consists of existing track sections of the rail line. The existing alternative environment is compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The Sunol double track and Hearst double track improvements are single tracks that skirt SR 84/Niles Canyon Road so that the tracks do not segment views. The Sunol double track and Hearst double track improvements blend well with the small town development of Sunol because these portions of Sunol

15 were built up around the tracks, and dense vegetation screens most views of the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas, resulting in moderately high near-term improvements site coherence along these improvements. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate for Centerville, moderate for the Oakland- Niles Subdivision connection, and moderately high for the Sunol double track and Hearst double track improvements. Light and Glare While the Centerville portion of the segment is surrounded by development, daytime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site are moderate because there are not many vertical or paved surfaces surface to reflect light. Trees and shrubs along the corridor also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the Centerville portion of the nearterms improvements site are also moderate because the corridor is not well lit, but surrounding development helps to illuminate the corridor, as do passing passenger trains with interior lighting. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Centerville portion of the near-term improvements site, Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection near-term improvements sites, and vicinities are moderately high due to the suburbanized and industrial setting. Trees and shrubs help to reduce glare to a degree. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the Centerville portion of the near-term improvements, Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection of the near-term improvements site, and vicinities are also moderately high because the vicinity is well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with higher density suburban development, the interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial and industrial development, and the freeway and street lighting and passing vehicles on local roadways. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Sunol double track and Hearst double track nearterm improvements sites are moderately low due to the more naturalized, vegetated setting and because the tracks only pass very low-density residential and commercial development through Sunol. Trees and shrubs also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the Sunol double track and Hearst double track near-term improvements sites and vicinity are low because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and the area surrounding the tracks are more naturalized with very limited low-density residential development directly adjacent to the tracks that contribute to illuminating the corridor. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Sunol double track and Hearst double track vicinities are also moderately low due to the more naturalized setting and limited low-density residential development. Trees and shrubs also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the Sunol double track and Hearst double track near-term improvements site are low to moderately low because the area surrounding the tracks is more naturalized along much of the length, but there is limited low-density residential and commercial development, street lighting, and passing vehicles on local roadways that illuminate the areas. Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following

16 Altamont Creek and Alameda Creek Trail: The trail borders Altamont Creek and includes paved and unpaved portions to accommodate multiple uses (e.g., horseback riding, cycling, walking, and jogging). Vargas Plateau, Walpert Ridge, Sunol Ridge, and Pleasanton Ridge: The oak woodlands and grassy hillsides of these features are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. Niles Canyon: This largely undeveloped canyon has scenic views of the surrounding vegetated hillsides and intermittent views of Alameda Creek. Mission Boulevard (SR 238), BART route, SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, I-680, Palomares Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, and Kilkare Road: These are state-, city-, and countydesignated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2). Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and the Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and single-family and multi-family residential and commercial viewers that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality Alternative CNS-2a travels through a short area of suburban development at the mouth of Niles Canyon in Fremont, then through Niles Canyon and Sunol, and ends just outside Pleasanton. Alternative CNS-2b follows the same alignment, except for a deviation through Sunol and near I A very short portion of the natural environment includes mostly level terrain near the mouth of Niles Canyon in Fremont with limited mature trees and shrubs associated with streetscape plantings, commercial buildings and parking areas, residential landscaping, and the Niles Depot. In Niles Canyon and past Sunol, along I-680, the natural environment is dominated by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with oak woodlands. Alameda Creek is a water feature that is intermittently visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderate high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting in Fremont is somewhat disharmonious due to the predominance of the alternatives environment, resulting in moderately low natural harmony. The existing natural setting in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton is more intact and harmonious, resulting in moderately high natural harmony. The cultural environment along the small portion of alternatives in Fremont consists of mainly suburban residential and commercial land uses; local roadways, and paved parking areas associated with commercial areas and the Niles Depot; bridges, aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines), and fencing. Alameda Creek Regional Trail, a paved, multiuse trail that begins at the mouth of Niles Canyon, is located adjacent to this alternative. The cultural environment in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton is dominated more by the natural environment and lowdensity suburban development that is mostly set back away from the tracks, except for several single-family residents that border the existing tracks along both Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b in Sunol. The existing tracks for Alternative CNS-2b also pass a few commercial properties through downtown Sunol including Bosco s Bones & Brew, Sunol Railroad Cafe, and Sunol s Whistle Stop Antiques. The separation between residential and commercial development is slightly disjointed, resulting in moderate cultural order along the alternative in Freemont. Land uses transition and

17 blend well in the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas, resulting in moderately high cultural order along these segments. The alternatives environment in Fremont consists of a triangular convergence of the Niles Canyon Railway (NCRY) with the Niles Subdivision. Landscaping, fencing, and sound barriers provide some visual screening between the tracks and the residential and commercial areas in Fremont. The existing alternatives environment acts to segment surrounding development, resulting in moderately low near-term improvements site coherence in Fremont. However, the single tracks that skirt SR 84/Niles Canyon Road in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton do not segment views. The Sunol double track and Hearst double track improvements blend well with the small town development of Sunol because these portions of Sunol were built up around the tracks, and dense vegetation screens most views of the Sunol double track and Hearst double track areas, resulting in moderately high near-term improvements site coherence along these segments. The overall visual quality of these alternatives is moderately low for the small portion in Fremont and moderately high for the portions in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton. Light and Glare While the portion of the Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b near-term improvements in Fremont is surrounded by development, daytime light and glare levels are moderate because there are not many vertical or paved surfaces surface to reflect light. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements in Fremont are also moderate because the corridor is not well lit, but surrounding development helps to illuminate the corridor, as do passing passenger trains with interior lighting. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b near-term improvements vicinity in Fremont are moderate high due to the suburbanized setting. Trees and shrubs help to reduce glare to a degree. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the vicinity in Fremont are also moderately high because the vicinity is well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with higher density suburban development, the interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial and industrial development, and the freeway and street lighting and passing vehicles on local roadways. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b near-term improvements sites in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton are moderately low due to the more naturalized, vegetated setting and because the tracks only pass very low-density residential and commercial development through Sunol. Trees and shrubs also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements sites in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton are low because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and the area surrounding the tracks is more naturalized with very limited low-density residential development directly adjacent to the tracks that contributes to illuminating the corridor. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b near-term improvements vicinities in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton are also moderately low due to the more naturalized setting and limited low-density residential development. Trees and shrubs also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements in Niles Canyon and just outside Pleasanton are low to moderately low because the area surrounding the tracks are more naturalized along much of the length but there is limited low-density residential

18 and commercial development, street lighting, and passing vehicles on local roadways that illuminate the area. Tri-Valley The Tri-Valley alternatives are located in Pleasanton and Livermore. In Pleasanton, land uses around the alternatives consist of suburban residential, commercial, institutional (schools and a community library), recreational (parks and fairgrounds), and open space. In Livermore, land uses around the alternative consist of industrial, warehouse, and recreational (park) uses. Alternative TV-1 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of this alternative, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Pleasanton Ridge, Black Hills, and Diablo Range: The oak woodlands and grassy hillsides of these features are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. I-680: This is a state- and Alameda County-designated scenic route with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). Bernal Community Park and Alameda County Fairgrounds: Bernal Community Park is a large park located just south of Bernal Avenue and the Pleasanton Station. The Alameda County Fairgrounds are immediately northwest of the station. Both provide recreation and are locations for community events. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using Bernal Community Park, Alameda County Fairgrounds, Pleasanton Middle School athletic fields, and local roadways, singlefamily and multi-family residents living along Bernal Court and Harrison Street, multi-family residents living in the Civic Square apartments, and commercial viewers at 5000 Pleasanton Avenue (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Travelers on I-680 may have limited middleground views of this alternative, in passing, over opens space areas that provide views where there are breaks in vegetation along the freeway. Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain with middleground views of the Altamont Hills and background views to Pleasanton Ridge, the Black Hills, and the Diablo Range. Vegetation near this alternative includes mature trees and shrubs that are associated with residential and commercial areas, the fairgrounds and community park, and the high school and library. In addition, mature trees line the east side of the existing track, between the tracks and the residential and industrial areas, providing visual screening of the tracks for adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting complements surrounding development and is somewhat harmonious, resulting in moderate natural harmony

19 The cultural environment consists of single-story buildings associated with single-family residences, the middle school, and library; apartments and commercial building that are two stories; local roadways and paved parking areas associated with multi-family residential, institutional, and rail uses; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines) and fencing. In addition, the fairgrounds has buildings and structures of various heights. The separation between residential and surrounding recreational and institutional land uses is somewhat disjointed because transitions are sometimes abrupt, resulting in moderate cultural order. The alternative environment comprises the existing Pleasanton Station, which consists of one through-track, a station platform, and the station parking lot located north of Bernal Avenue, between the fairgrounds and the library and single-family residential development. In addition, part of the site is located on a vacant open space parcel that is vegetated with grasses and trees. The environment serves as a transition between residential development and the fairgrounds, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative TV-1 near-term improvements site are moderate because there are not many vertical surfaces, buildings, or windows to reflect light. Trees and shrubs along the corridor also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site are also moderate because while the corridor has low lighting from parking lot lighting and passing trains; surrounding development increases lighting in the corridor, especially when the fairgrounds are in use. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative TV-1 near-term improvements vicinity are moderate to moderately high because SR 87 lacks landscaping and industrial areas are sparsely vegetated. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderate to moderately high because the vicinity is well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with suburban development, street lighting, and passing vehicles on local roadways. In addition, nighttime events at the fairgrounds increase lighting in the vicinity when more lights and higher powered lights are in use to illuminate the grounds. Alternative TV-2 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of this alternative, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills, Black Hills, Diablo Range, and Pleasanton Ridge: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of these features are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. Vasco Road and Patterson Pass Road: These are Alameda County- and City of Livermoredesignated scenic routes with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and William Payne Sports Park, single-family residences north of Brisa Street and multi-family residences south

20 of Brisa Street, and industrial and commercial viewers along Vasco Road, Patterson Pass Road, and Exchange Court that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes level terrain in the foreground with middleground views of the grassy Altamont Hills and background views to the oak woodlands and grassy hills of the Black Hills, Diablo Range, and Pleasanton Ridge. Vegetation near this alternative includes mature and semimature trees and shrubs associated with warehouse and industrial areas, the park, the Vasco Road Station parking, and streetscape plantings and immature trees and shrubs associated with new residential development north and south of Brisa Street. In addition, mature trees line portions along the south side of the existing track, between the tracks and warehouse areas, providing visual screening of the tracks for adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is dominated by warehouse and industrial development, and terrain and vegetation are not very harmonious, resulting in moderately low natural harmony. The cultural environment includes large warehouse facilities and industrial operations and twostory single-family residences; local roadways, and paved lots/parking areas associated with the Vasco Road Station; parking, warehouse and industrial facilities; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines), fencing, and lot perimeter walls. The separation between residential and industrial development is disjointed, resulting in moderately low cultural order. The alternative environment comprises the existing Vasco Road Station, which consists of one through-track, a station platform, and the station parking lot that are located north of the tracks, between industrial development and a multi-family residential development that is being constructed. The alternative environment blends well with the mostly industrial setting and slightly buffers residential land uses from industrial uses south of the station, resulting in moderate nearterm improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative TV-2 near-term improvements site are moderately high because while there are not many vertical or paved surfaces surface to reflect light, the area is fairly open and without much of vegetative cover from the semi-mature trees to help to reduce glare. Trees in the parking lot help, to a degree, but windshields and windows in parked vehicles contribute to glare in these more open conditions. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site are moderately low because the corridor and parking lot are not well lit, and passing trains that are lit at night are not as frequent after peak commute hours. Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative TV-2 vicinity are moderate because residential landscaping is not mature and industrial areas are sparsely vegetated. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderate because the vicinity is somewhat well lit from the interior and exterior lighting associated with suburban

21 development, the interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial and industrial development, and the street lighting and passing vehicles on local roadways. Altamont The Altamont segment is located in the Altamont Hills, east of Livermore and north of I-580. Open space land uses and wind farms on the grassy hillside are the dominant land uses. Alternative A-1 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternative A-1, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills: The grassy hillsides are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. I-580 and Altamont Pass Road: I-580 is a state- and Alameda County-designated scenic route and Altamont Pass Road is an Alameda County-designated scenic route with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and one single-family residential viewer (Appendix I-1, Table I- 1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality Alternative A-1 parallels Altamont Pass Road for a short distance between Carroll Road and Dyer Road. The natural environment is dominated by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. Altamont Creek is a seasonal water feature that is intermittently visible during the wet season. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is fairly harmonious due to the predominance of the alternative environment, resulting in moderately high natural harmony. The cultural environment is dominated more by the natural environment and there is only one single-family rural residence located east of Altamont Pass Road, at the northern terminus of this alternative. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (wooden utility poles with lines), and barbed wire fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. In addition, wind turbines line nearby ridgelines and can be seen in the middleground. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. The low level of development and infrastructure results in a cultural order that is moderately high. The alternative environment consists of a double track at the northern terminus that converges to a single curvilinear track heading south, paralleling Altamont Pass Road. The proposed realignment crosses grasslands and a gravel access road that is located between the tracks and Altamont Pass Road. There is no visual screening between the tracks and Altamont Pass Road. The existing alternative environment responds to and is compatible with both the rural natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderately high near-term improvements site coherence

22 The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative A-1 near-term improvements site and vicinity are low due to the more naturalized, vegetated setting and because the tracks pass only one residence. Trees and shrubs also help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also low because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and the area surrounding the tracks is more naturalized with only one residence to contribute to illuminating the corridor. Tracy to Lathrop The Tracy to Lathrop segment travels from the western edge of the Altamont Hills, passing through or skirting Tracy, across agricultural lands, the San Joaquin River, and terminating in Lathrop. Once the alignments leave the rolling, grassy terrain of the Altamont Hills, they travel across the flat valley floor. In rural areas, the predominant land use is agriculture and in developed areas, single-family, suburban residential and industrial land uses predominate. Views to the Altamont Hills are valued in the region, in addition to background views of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Under Alternative TL-1, there would be no track improvements. Therefore, there would be no physical or visual alterations to this segment and its setting is not discussed further. Proposed alignments and station alternatives are discussed below. Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills, Diablo Range, and Sierra Nevada Mountains: The grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills, oak woodlands of the Diablo Range, and the snow-capped mountains of the Sierra Nevada are visible from the rail corridor where elevation and breaks in development and vegetation allow for views. I-580, Patterson Pass Road, and Corral Hollow Road: I-580 is a state- and San Joaquin County-designated scenic route, and Patterson Pass Road and Corral Hollow Road are also county-designated scenic routes with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). Tom Paine Slough, Paradise Cut, and San Joaquin River: Natural waterways with riparian area passing under the tracks. California Aqueduct Bikeway, Joan Sparks Park, Tracy Downtown Plaza, and Mossdale County Park: Parks, trails, and recreational areas that have views of the rail line. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users; recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to the tracks; roadway users traveling on I-580, I-250, Business

23 205/West 11th Street, I-5, SR 120, and local roadways; and residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional (e.g., schools) viewers (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b are all alternatives that would travel from the western edge of the Altamont Hills, through Tracy, to Lathrop. These four alternatives share the same alignment starting at Lammers Road in Tracy to just east the I-5/SR 120 split, which is just east of the San Joaquin River, in Lathrop. Alternatives TL-2a and TL-4a share the same western terminus that is located west of I-580, south of the Altamont Pass Wind Farm Substation, and just east of Patterson Pass Road. Alternatives TL-2b and TL-4b share the same western terminus that is located just east of I-580 and west of the California Aqueduct, near the end of Hansen Road. In Lathrop, Alternatives TL-2a and TL-2b share the same eastern terminus that is located south of Lathrop Road and Alternatives TL-4a and TL-4b share the same eastern terminus that is located north of SR 120 and west of McKinley Avenue. Alternative TL-3 starts by branching off from the existing alignment (Alternative TL-1) just east of Lyoth, then crosses West 11th Street and Grant Line Road, before tying into and following Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b to Lathrop. Alternative TL-3 shares the same terminus in Lathrop as Alternatives TL-2a and TL-2b. Although there are slight differences in the termination points, these five alternatives share the same general setting. West of I-580, the natural environment is dominated by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. East of I-580, the natural environment is dominated by flat, vegetated open-space areas that include orchards, row crops, vineyards, and vacant parcels that are common to rural areas in the San Joaquin Valley. In developed areas, the natural environment is dominated by residential, industrial, and institutional landscaping. In addition, vacant parcels that have been disturbed from past and present mining and industrial storage and undisturbed vacant parcels that are vegetated with grasses are common to developed areas in the valley. Middleground views of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range and distant, background views to the Sierra Nevada Mountains are valued, locally and regionally. Permanent water bodies include the California Aqueduct, Delta Mendota Canal, Upper Main Canal, Tom Paine Slough, Paradise Cut, and San Joaquin River. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting can range from being more harmonious in the Altamont Hills and in rural areas to less harmonious in areas with industrial development, contributing to a natural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderately high in natural harmony. The cultural environment west of I-580 includes fewer than 10 single-family rural residences located mostly along Patterson Pass Road and Midway Road. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (wooden utility poles with lines), and barbed wire fencing also contribute to the cultural environment west of I-580. In addition, wind turbines line nearby ridgelines and can be seen in the foreground and middleground. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. The Altamont Pass Wind Farm Substation, off Patterson Pass Road, and the Musco Family Olive Company, off Via Nicolo Road, constitute the most prominent industrial land uses that are located on the lower foothills. However, these two locations do not detract from the majority of the cultural setting west of I-580 that has a low level of development and infrastructure. The cultural environment east of I-580 consists of residential, industrial, and institutional uses that border the tracks on the southern outskirts of Tracy, low-density rural development, and industrial

24 development located between Lothrop and Manteca. I-580, I-250, I-5, SR 120 are a prominent transportation corridors that cross and parallel the existing tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, and sound barriers separating residences from the tracks and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. In addition, Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b cross the large, concrete-lined canals associated with the California Aqueduct and Delta Mendota Canal. Residential, commercial, and rural development along the rail corridor is common to the valley cultural landscape. The industrial areas tend to be disjointed and detract from nearby suburban setting, contributing to a cultural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderately high in cultural order. The alternatives environment consists of existing single and double track segments that blend fairly well with the landscape in both the rural and developed settings. However, it acts as a defining separator between north and south Tracy and acts as a confining edge for eastern Lathrop. The existing alternatives environment mostly compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderately high to moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low to moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, and TL-4b near-term improvements site and vicinity range from moderately low to moderately high due to the rural and suburbanized and industrial settings. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity also range from moderately low to moderately high because of low lighting levels in rural areas and higher lighting levels in suburbanized and industrial. Lighting along the rail corridor primarily comes from street lighting associated with I- 580, I-250, Business 205/West 11th Street, I-5, SR 120, and local roadways; vehicle headlights; and light coming from developed areas. West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 are the same as described above for Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, and TL-4b. Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills and Sierra Nevada Mountains: The grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills are visible. The snow-capped mountains of the Sierra Nevada may be visible near I-580. I-580 and Patterson Pass Road: I-580 is a state- and San Joaquin County-designated scenic route and Patterson Pass Road is also a county-designated scenic route with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). California Aqueduct Bikeway: Recreational trail that has views of West Tracy Station A

25 Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways, roadway users traveling on I-580 and Patterson Pass Road, and rural residential and industrial viewers adjacent to the stations (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 are located in the Altamont Hills, in close proximity to one another, and share the same general setting. West of I-580, the natural environment is dominated by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. Distant, background views to the Sierra Nevada Mountains may also be present. Permanent water bodies include detention basins surrounding the Musco Family Olive Company. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is fairly harmonious in the Altamont Hills, contributing to a natural setting that is moderately high in natural harmony. The cultural environment west of I-580 includes fewer than 10 single-family rural residences located mostly along Patterson Pass Road and Midway Road. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (wooden utility poles with lines), and barbed wire fencing also contribute to the cultural environment west of I-580. In addition, wind turbines line nearby ridgelines and can be seen in the foreground and middleground. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. The Altamont Pass Wind Farm Substation, off Patterson Pass Road, and the Musco Family Olive Company, off Via Nicolo Road, constitute the most prominent industrial land uses that are located on the lower foothills. However, these two locations do not detract from the majority of the cultural setting west of I-580, which has a low level of development and infrastructure, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderately high in cultural order. The alternative environment for West Tracy Station A-1 consists of an existing single track segment that blends fairly well with the rural, hilly landscape but does create some cuts and berms as the rail line travels through the hills. Lattice steel transmission lines cross the near-term improvements area. The proposed station connects to Patterson Pass Road, a scenic route, via an access road. The alternative environment for West Tracy Station A-2 consists of an existing single track segment that blends fairly well with the rural, hilly landscape but does create some cuts and berms as the rail line travels through the hills. The proposed station connects to Hansen Road, which crosses under I-580, a scenic route, via an access road. The existing alternative environments are mostly undeveloped but the existing rail line segments associated with the proposed stations are mostly compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderately high nearterm improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of these alternatives is moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 near-term improvements site and vicinity are low due to the more naturalized, vegetated setting and because the tracks pass only a few residences. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also low because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and the area surrounding the tracks is more naturalized with only one

26 residence to contribute to illuminating the corridor. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on I-580 and Patterson Pass Road and the limited lighting associated with adjacent industrial uses. West Tracy Stations A-3, A-4, and B-1 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the West Tracy Stations A-3, A-4, and B-1, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills and Sierra Nevada Mountains: The grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills are visible. The snow-capped mountains of the Sierra Nevada may be visible near I-580. I-580 and Corral Hollow Road: I-580 is a state- and San Joaquin County-designated scenic route and Corral Hollow Road is also a county-designated scenic route with views of the alternative (Appendix I-2). California Aqueduct Bikeway: Recreational trail that has views of the station alternatives. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users; recreationists using local roadways, the California Aqueduct Bikeway, and the canal for fishing; roadway users traveling on I-580 and local roadways; and rural residential and industrial viewers (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality West Tracy Stations A-3, A-4, and B-1 are located along the California Aqueduct, in close proximity to one another, and share the same general setting that is confined between I-580 and the California Aqueduct and Delta Mendota Canal. Located just east of I-580, the natural environment comprises low-lying, rolling terrain that signifies the end of the Altamont Hill. This terrain gives way to a flat patchwork of agricultural lands. Prominent foreground views of the Altamont Hills and distant, background views to the Sierra Nevada Mountains are valued locally and regionally. Permanent water bodies include the California Aqueduct and Delta Mendota Canal. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat harmonious, with quality views to the Altamont Hills, but landscape scaring from industrial development is disharmonious, contributing to a natural setting is moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment east of I-580 consists of rural residential and industrial land uses. I-580 is a prominent transportation corridor that passes by the station locations, and the large, concrete lined canals associated with the California Aqueduct and Delta Mendota Canal are also prominent built features. West Tracy Stations A-4 and B-1 would be located directly off local roadways, while West Tracy Station A-3 would require a connecting access road off Hansen Road. There is one rural residence located east of West Tracy Station A-3 that has large, ancillary storage areas near the aqueduct; two rural residences located on either side of the proposed access route; two rural residences located west of Hansen Road, in proximity to the proposed access road; and a wood pallet company is locate north of the proposed access road. These residences have some landscaping that may partially screen views of the site. The area to the east and south of West Tracy Station A

27 is undeveloped. West Tracy Station A-4 is located on agricultural lands, west of Lammers Road. Two rural residences are located east the station and both have a substantial amount of landscaping that likely screens most views of the site. West Tracy Station B-1 is located on a vacant grassy parcel west of Hansen Road. There is one rural residence located south of the station that has little vegetative screening to obscure views of the site and one rural residence located across the road, to the east, that has some landscaping that may provide some slight vegetative screening. In addition, a large-scale warehouse facility is located north of the proposed station. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, and sound barriers separating residences from the tracks and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. The cultural landscape tends to be slightly disjointed, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderate in cultural order. The alternative environment for stations consists of an existing single track segments that blend fairly well with the flatter rural landscape. Because stations do not currently exist at these locations, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of these alternatives is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the West Tracy Stations A-3, A-4, and B-1 near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately low due to the rural setting, limited number of residences, and glare from water sources. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the nearterm improvements site and vicinity are also moderately low because, although the tracks are not lit, the area receives low levels of lighting from rural and industrial development. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on I-580 and local roadways. West Tracy Stations A-5 and B-2 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the West Tracy Stations A-5 and B-2, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills and Diablo Range: The grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills are visible in the middleground, as is the Diablo Range in the background. Don Cose Park: Park that may have views of the rail line. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to the tracks, roadway users traveling on I-580 and local roadways, and residential, commercial, and industrial viewers bordering the stations (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality West Tracy Stations A-5 and B-2 share similar settings because they are both located in rural areas, on agricultural fields, and are in close proximity to suburban development. The natural

28 environment comprises flat terrain made up by a patchwork of agricultural lands. West Tracy Station A-5 is located next to a Basalite Concrete Product plant and Destination Anywhere Trucking facility that both have no landscaping. Rural residences are located north of West Tracy Station B-2 and those residences have sparse to denser landscaping surrounding their homes. In addition, rural residences west of Lammers Road, near the Valpico Road intersection, have denser landscaping surrounding their homes. Plant storage and landscaping surrounding the Golden Valley Material Supply & Nursery also contribute to the natural environment. Suburban land uses are also within 0.25 mile of the proposed station sites. Therefore, vegetation near the stations also includes trees, shrubs, and lawn associated with suburban streetscaping and residential landscaping. Prominent middleground views of the Altamont Hills and background views to the Diablo Range are present and valued, locally and regionally. Permanent water bodies include the Delta Mendota Canal and the Upper Main Canal. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat harmonious, with quality views to the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range, but the abrupt transition from rural to suburban environments is disharmonious, contributing to a natural setting is moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of rural and suburban residential and industrial land uses. The I- 580 corridor skirts the base of the Altamont Hills in the middleground and the Delta Mendota Canal is not readily visible due to distance. Both stations would be located directly off local roadways. As described above, industrial land uses are located next to West Tracy Station A-5, including the Basalite Concrete Product plant and Destination Anywhere Trucking facility. These facilities are grouped together, east of the station, and have large storage areas and smaller office buildings, and the Basalite plant also has large warehouse facilities. In addition, a small utility facility is located across the existing tracks, to the north of the station. The nearby single-family suburban residences and Don Cose Park are surrounded by sound barriers that, along with landscaping, help to screen views of the site. However, multi-family suburban residences located along Middlefield Drive, near the Corral Hollow Road intersection, do not have sound barriers and they have views of the site over the adjacent vacant lot. Seven rural residences are located north of West Tracy Station B-2 and are likely to have views of the site but landscaping may provide some slight vegetative screening. The Golden Valley Material Supply & Nursery and rural residences west of Lammers Road are surrounded by dense landscaping and are likely to have no views or limited views of the site. The single-family suburban residences northeast of the site are surrounded by sound barriers that, along with landscaping, help to screen views of the site. However, a few two-story residences may have views of the site from second-story windows over the adjacent agricultural fields. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, sound barriers separating residences from the tracks, middleground views of industrial areas, and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. The cultural landscape tends to be slightly disjointed, due to the abrupt transition from rural to suburban development, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderate in cultural order. The alternative environment for stations consists of existing single track segments that blend fairly well with the flatter rural landscape. Because stations do not currently exist at these locations, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of these sites is moderate

29 Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the West Tracy Stations A-5 and B-2 near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderate due to the rural setting in close proximity to suburban development with higher traffic volumes and lack of trees and shrubs to help reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderate because, although the tracks are not lit, the area receives moderate levels of lighting from higher density rural and nearby suburban residential land uses and industrial development. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on local roadways and street lighting. Existing Tracy Station Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the Existing Tracy Station, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following: Altamont Hills: Channelized background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills are visible from the rail corridor. Veteran s Park and Pedestrian Parkways: Parks, trails, and recreational areas that have views of the station. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to the station, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and residential and industrial viewers bordering the station (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The Existing Tracy Station is located on a vacant parcel of land and is bordered to the east, south, and west mostly by industrial lands uses. The existing station is north of the site and to suburban development is located to the northeast and northwest. The natural environment comprises flat terrain that has been scared by industrial land uses. These sites range from having exposed dirt surface, being devoid of vegetation, to having ruderal grasses growing in between exposed gravel and dirt areas. Similarly, there is little vegetation associated with the existing rail station. Between the proposed station site and Tracy Boulevard is an area that includes mixed commercial, light industrial, and rural residential land uses. These parcels have mature trees and shrubs, with plantings along the fence line to help screen views of adjacent land uses. Suburban land uses are also within a 0.1 mile of the proposed station site and vegetation includes trees, shrubs, and lawn areas that are associated with suburban streetscaping, pedestrian parkway, and residential landscaping. Channelized background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills are visible from the rail corridor and Linne Road, which parallels the tracks. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat disjointed due to the disturbed industrial landscape and abrupt transition from industrial to suburban environments, which is disharmonious, contributing to a natural setting is moderately low in natural harmony

30 The cultural environment consists of rural and suburban residential, industrial, commercial, and rural residential land uses. The near-term improvements site is located directly off Tracy Boulevard, across from the existing station. As described above, industrial land uses surround the site and are comprised of large storage areas, smaller office buildings, and larger warehouse facilities. The mixed commercial, light industrial, and rural residential land uses between the proposed station site and Tracy Boulevard are disjointed. Overall, the cultural landscape south of Linne Road is disordered. North of Linne Road, the suburban landscape is more orderly. The single-family suburban residences, pedestrian parkway along Dietrick Avenue and Dandelion Loop and Veteran s Park are surrounded by sound barriers that, along with landscaping, help to screen views of the site. In addition, views of the site from the office complex located at the corner of Tracy Boulevard and Whispering Wind Drive are not available due to landscaping that screens views. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, billboards at the corner of Tracy Boulevard and Linne Road, and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. The cultural landscape tends to be disjointed, due to the abrupt transition from rural to suburban development and disturbed industrial landscape, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderately low in cultural order. The alternative environment for the existing station consists of the existing single track segment, station platform, and parking lot that blend fairly well with the suburban landscape. Because proposed site is not currently developed with station facilities, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderately low near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this site is moderately low. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Existing Tracy Station near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high due to the industrialized and suburban setting with higher traffic volumes. Trees and shrubs associated with suburban development, pedestrian parkways, and Veteran s Park help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderately high because the existing station is well lit and the area receives lighting from nearby suburban residential land uses, institutional, commercial, and industrial development. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on local roadways and street lighting. Downtown Tracy Station Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the Downtown Tracy Station, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills and Diablo Range: Background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range are visible down the rail corridors and can be seen rising above suburban development on the horizon line. Tracy Downtown Plaza: Public plaza that has views of the station

31 Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and the plaza adjacent to the station, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and residential and commercial viewers bordering the station (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The Downtown Tracy Station alternative is located on a vacant parcel of land, where three separate rail lines converge, and is west of the existing City of Tracy Transit Station. Vacant land is also located east of the existing station and west of the alternative site, commercial and residential land uses associated with downtown Tracy are located north of the site, and suburban development is located to the south. The natural environment comprises flat terrain and the vacant parcels with ruderal grasses growing on them. The commercial and residential areas north of the site, along 6 th Street, have mature to semi-mature landscaping including trees, shrubs, and lawn areas that are associated with businesses, streetscaping, parking areas, the plaza, and residential landscaping. Suburban land uses south of 4th Street also have mature landscaping such as trees, shrubs, and lawn areas that are associated with suburban streetscaping and residential landscaping. Background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range are visible down the rail corridors and can be seen rising above suburban development on the horizon line because the vacant parcels lack buildings to obstruct views. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat disjointed due to the vacant land uses and abrupt transition from commercial to suburban environments, which is slightly disharmonious, contributing to a natural setting that is moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists primarily of suburban residential and commercial land uses. The near-term improvements site is located directly off Central Avenue, across from the existing station. The vacant land uses surrounding the site lack buildings, but some remnant concrete pads and concrete rubble is located on the vacant parcels that are east of the existing station. The commercial land along 6 th Avenue and Central Avenue (between B Street and D Street) has well-maintained, single-story and two-story buildings, with attractive streetscaping and parking areas. South of West 6th Street, between West Street and B Street, is a small area that consists of light industrial land uses and an associated storage yard that is surrounded by fencing. Suburban residential areas located north and south of the site consist of older homes that are mostly well maintained, single-story structures. Most of these homes have fencing to delineate their properties and provide screening from adjacent roadway and rail traffic. Commercial and residential properties bordering the site are like to have views of the station from business fronts and front yards. The Tracy Downtown Plaza and Central Avenue/6th Street roundabout complement and provide a smooth transition between the station and commercial land uses. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), and adjacent local roadways also contribute to the cultural environment. Commercial and suburban development around the site is orderly. However, the vacant parcels segment land uses and detract from the adjacent setting, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderate in cultural order. The alternative environment for the Downtown Tracy Station consists of the station building, existing single track segments that converge at the station, the station platform, bus depot, and two parking lots that blend fairly well with the suburban landscape. The existing parking lots are located east of the station, south of 6th Street, and south of the station, across the tracks and north of 4th

32 Street. Both station parking lots feature landscaping that improves the visual quality of the parking areas. Because the proposed site is not currently developed with station facilities, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this site is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Downtown Tracy Station near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high due to the commercial and suburban setting. Trees and shrubs associated with suburban development, the plaza, streetscapes, and parking areas help to reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderately high because the existing station is well lit and the area receives lighting from nearby suburban residential and commercial land development. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on local roadways and street lighting. Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station and Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station and Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills and Diablo Range: Background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range are visible down the rail corridors and can be seen rising above suburban development on the horizon line. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways adjacent to the tracks, roadway users traveling on SR 120 and local roadways, and rural residential and industrial viewers bordering the tracks (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station and Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station sites are located in close proximity to one another and share the same general setting. Both are located north of SR 120, in proximity to Yosemite Avenue, on agricultural fields. The natural environment comprises flat terrain, mostly made up of a patchwork of agricultural lands with low-growing vegetation. The Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station, station parking lot, large warehouse facility, and trucking company have sparse landscaping in the form of a limited number of trees. Rural residences are located south of the existing station and have sparse landscaping surrounding the homes. However, an orchard backs the homes. The proposed relocation site is bordered to the south by SR 120 and a few rural residences are scattered around the site. These residences have sparse landscaping, as well. Background views of the grassy hillsides of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range are visible down the rail corridors and can be seen rising above suburban development on the horizon line because the vacant parcels lack buildings to obstruct views. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze,

33 seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is characteristic of rural area but is slightly disharmonious due to neighboring industrial land uses, contributing to a natural setting is moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of rural residential and industrial land uses. The Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station, station parking lot, large warehouse facility, and trucking company are the dominant cultural features surrounding the existing station site. These land uses include large, paved parking and storage areas and medium-sized and larger-scale building structures. Rural residences are one-story and two-story homes that are often surrounded by fencing. These homes face the site and have views of the site from their front yards. The proposed relocation site is surrounded by scattered rural residences that are likely to have direct views of the site. A large construction trailer storage yard, associated with Tuff Boy Sales, is located west of the site. However, views of the relocation site from this facility are not likely available due to storage containers along the property line that block views. In addition, SR 120 is a prominent transportation corridor in close proximity that is built on a berm near the site, which limits views of the site from the south, but allows for elevated views out and over the relocation site. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), and tracks also contribute to the cultural environment. The cultural landscape tends to be slightly disjointed, due to the abrupt transition from agricultural to industrial development, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderate in cultural order. The Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station is located behind a large warehouse facility and a trucking company is located on the other side of the tracks. The alternative environment for the existing station includes a single track rail alignment, the access road, parking, and the station platform. A double track rail alignment passes the proposed relocated station site. The single and double track sections blend fairly well with the flatter rural landscape. The proposed station facilities are not currently developed; therefore, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of these sites is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station and Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderate due to the rural setting in close proximity to rural residential and industrial development with sparser vegetative cover to help reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderate because, although the tracks are not lit, the area receives moderate levels of lighting from the station s parking lot and platform lightings, higher density rural and industrial development. Lighting also comes from street lighting and vehicle headlights on SR 120 and local roadways. River Islands Station Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of the River Islands Station, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following

34 Diablo Range: The grassy hillsides and oak woodlands of the Diablo Range are visible from the rail corridor where elevation and breaks in development and vegetation allow for views. Paradise Cut and San Joaquin River: Natural waterways with riparian area passing under the tracks. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users; recreationists using local roadways and Dell Osso Family Farm; roadway users traveling on I-5, SR 120, and local roadways; and residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional (e.g., schools) viewers bordering the tracks (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality River Islands Station is located in a rural area, on agricultural fields, which are in close proximity to suburban development. The natural environment comprises flat terrain made up by a patchwork of agricultural lands. The Dell Osso Family Farm is southeast of the proposed station and just east of the proposed access; the farm only has a few mature trees and seasonal row crops. The River Islands development borders the site to the north and portions of the development that are adjacent to the station have yet to be constructed. However, the site is slightly disturbed from some grading and construction staging that is taking place in this area, but the area is mostly vegetated with ruderal grasses. Suburban land uses also exist within 0.5 mile of the proposed station site. Prominent background views of the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range are present and valued both locally and regionally. There are no permanent natural water bodies adjacent to the site; however, Paradise Cut and San Joaquin River are approximately 0.5 mile away. In addition, there are built ponds associated with the River Islands development and the Brown Sands and soil company that is south of I-5, which are both also over 0.5 mile away. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat harmonious, with quality views to the Altamont Hills and Diablo Range, but the transition from rural to suburban environments is slightly abrupt, contributing to a natural setting that is moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of rural, suburban residential, and light industrial land uses. The I-580 corridor can be seen skirting the base of the Altamont Hills in the middleground and the Delta Mendota Canal is not readily visible due to distance. The station would be located off of Manthey Road. The Dell Osso Family Farm is located adjacent to the station and has a main farm building, several open-sided structures, fencing and site features, large paved areas, and ancillary buildings and structures. The River Islands development to the north has single-family suburban residences that are not surrounded by sound barriers, so they have views of the site over the adjacent vacant lot. However, the area between the River Islands Station and the existing River Islands development will be infilled with additional development associated with River Islands. A commercial area is planned to be located adjacent to the station location and this development would block views of the River Islands Station site. Industrial land uses associated with the Brown Sand company are located south of I-5. This facility has small and large storage areas smaller office buildings, and aggregate transport structures. The site is characteristic of nearby areas where islands of remnant agricultural lands are juxtaposed against existing residential development and construction occurring on large areas of land to accommodate future residential land uses is common

35 Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, sound barriers separating residences from the tracks, middleground views of industrial areas, and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. The cultural landscape tends to be slightly disjointed, due to the abrupt transition from rural to suburban development, contributing to a cultural setting that is moderate in cultural order. The alternative environment for the station consists of existing single track segment is located on a berm that blends fairly well with the rural landscape because river levees and freeway berms are also common features in the landscape. Because the station does not currently exist at this location, the alternative environment comprises the natural and cultural environments. Consistent with the natural and cultural environments, the alternative environment has moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of these sites is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the River Islands Station near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderate due to the rural setting in close proximity to suburban development with higher traffic volumes and lack of trees and shrubs to help reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderate because, although the tracks are not lit, the area receives some lighting from nearby suburban residential land uses. Lighting also comes from vehicle headlights on I-5, SR 120, and local roadways and street lighting. Lathrop to Stockton Alternative LS-1 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resource within the viewshed of the station improvement location, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, is the following. Robert J. Cabral Station: The station and the area surrounding the station has undergone revitalization (Altamont Corridor Express 2016b; San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission 2008). Western Pacific Railway Depot: As described in Chapter 2, Description of Near-Term Improvements, this a historical resource. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail and bus users, recreationists and travelers using local roadways, residents living in single-family and multi-family homes along Channel Street and Aurora Street, and commercial and light industrial viewers along all streets that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain with limited landscaping, including mature trees and shrubs, which is associated with residences and the station. Commercial and light

36 industrial uses have little to no landscaping. In addition, several vacant lots with dirt, gravel, and ruderal grasses border the station. There is little visual screening of the tracks from adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting not very harmonious because of a number of visual distractions, resulting in moderately low natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of the two-story Robert J. Cabral Station, the one-story Western Pacific Railway Depot, single-story and two-story commercial buildings, light industrial, singlefamily residences, and multi-family residences; local roadways and paved parking areas associated with businesses and the station; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines) and fencing. The Western Pacific Railway Depot was damaged in a fire, but still retails its exterior architectural detailing. Land uses are fairly disjointed, resulting in moderately low cultural order. The alternative environment comprises the existing ACE/Amtrak Stockton Station that consists of two through-tracks and a siding track, the parking lot, clock tower, and platform. However, the proposed location of the parking facility is outside the existing station footprint, located south of the station on the east side of the tracks, on a parcel with a vacant building. The existing alternative environment is disjunctive, like its surroundings, resulting in moderately low near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative LS-1 near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high due to the amount of vertical surfaces, including windows, and paved surfaces associated with light industrialized/commercial areas that reflect light. Pavement is also prominent and the present trees and shrubs do not help to offset glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high because station parking, the platform, and the site proposed for development are well lit from interior and exterior lighting associated with light industrial and commercial areas; freeway, street lighting, and parking lot lighting; and passing vehicles on local roadways. Manteca to Modesto Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Diablo Range and Sierra Nevada Mountains: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of the Diablo Range and the conifer forests and snow-capped mountains of the Sierra Nevada are visible from the rail corridor where elevation and breaks in development and vegetation allow for views

37 Primavera Park, Mayors Park, Manteca Skateboard Park, Manteca Tidewater Bikeway, Wilson Park, Manteca High School Athletic Fields, Manteca BMX Park, Army Corps Park Ripon River Crossing and Bike Trail, Country Stone Park, and Wincanton Park: Parks, trails, and recreational areas that have views of the rail line. Stanislaus River: Natural river corridor with riparian area passing under the tracks. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to the tracks, roadway users traveling on SR 99 and local roadways, and residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional (e.g., schools) viewers bordering the tracks (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment comprises flat, vegetated open space areas that include orchards, row crops, vineyards, and vacant parcels that are common to rural areas in the San Joaquin Valley; residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional landscaping and vacant parcels that are common to developed areas in the valley; and intermittent background views of the Diablo Range. Permanent water bodies include the Stanislaus River, Modesto Irrigation District (MID) Lateral Number 6, MID Lateral Number 7, MID Lateral Number 3, and MID Lateral Number 4. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting can range from being more harmonious in rural areas to less harmonious in areas with industrial development, contributing to a natural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses that border the tracks in Manteca, Ripon, Salida, and Modesto. SR 99 is a prominent transportation corridor that parallels the existing tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, and sound barriers separating residences from the tracks and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. Residential, commercial, and rural development along the rail corridor is common to the valley cultural landscape. The industrial areas tend to be disjointed and detract from the nearby suburban setting, contributing to a cultural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderate in cultural order. The alternatives environment consists of existing single and double track alignments that blend fairly well with the landscape in rural and developed settings, as it parallels SR 99 for most of its length. The primary difference between the two alternatives is a curved Oakland-Fresno Subdivision connection that crosses a disturbed, vacant open space parcel that would be constructed under Alternative MMO-1b, but not under Alternative MMO-1a. The existing alternative environment is mostly compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderate near-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low to moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b near-term improvements site and vicinity range from moderately low to moderately high due to the rural and

38 suburbanized and industrial settings. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the near-term improvements site and vicinity also range from moderately low to moderately high because of low lighting levels in rural areas and higher lighting levels in suburbanized and industrial areas. Lighting along the alignment corridor primarily comes from street lighting associated with SR 99 and local roadways, vehicle headlights, and light coming from developed areas Longer-Term Improvements Environment San Jose to Fremont The longer-term improvements setting introduction for the San Jose to Fremont alternatives is the same as that described for the San Jose to Fremont alternatives under Section , Near-Term Improvements Environment. Alternative P-SJF-1 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternative P-SJF-1 are the same as those described for Alternative SJF-1 under Section Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P- SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Diablo Range and Santa Cruz Mountains: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of the Diablo Range and Santa Cruz Mountains are visible from the rail corridor where elevation and breaks in development and vegetation allow for views. US 101, SR 237: These are state-, city-, and county-designated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2). Oracle Campus, Lick Mill Park, Levi Stadium, Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park, Santa Clara Golf and Tennis Club, Santa Clara Police Activities League BMX Track, Guadalupe River Trail, Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, San Francisco Bay Trail/ Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail, South Bay Yacht Club, and Alviso Marina County Park: Parks, trails, and recreational areas that have views of the rail line. Guadalupe River, Coyote Creek, and Mud Slough: Natural waterways passing under the tracks. Alviso Baylands: Salt ponds and marshlands associated with southern end of the San Francisco Bay. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users; recreationists using local roadways and parks, Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, San Francisco Bay Trail, and waterways; roadway users traveling on US 101, SR 237, and local roadways; and single-family and

39 multi-family residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial viewers that border the alternative sites (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment comprises residential, commercial, and industrial landscaping; streetscapes; grassy open space areas associated with recreational fields, golf courses, parks, and vacant lots; and the waters and marshes of the Alviso Baylands. The Guadalupe River, Coyote Creek, and Mud Slough are located north of SR 237 and are permanently filled with water. In addition, the Alviso Baylands salt ponds have geometric upland perimeter levees, sinuous channels, and marshes that create a unique water-based landscape. In addition, background views of the Diablo Range and Santa Cruz Mountains are notable natural features that are visible through breaks in development, south of SR 237, and are more readily visible in the Alviso Baylands. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is somewhat harmonious and consistent with developed landscapes, resulting in moderate natural harmony south of SR 237, and is harmonious and contributes to the cultural setting, resulting in moderately high natural harmony in the Alviso Baylands. The cultural environment consists of mostly residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial land uses to the south of SR 237 and in Alviso, just north of SR 237. Industrial and warehouse development is located along the tracks between De La Cruz Boulevard and Montague Expressway, on the west side of the track, and Aldo Avenue on the east sides of the tracks. The Mineta San Jose International Airport runways are a prominent feature located just east of the existing tracks. North of Montague Expressway and Aldo Avenue, land uses transition to mostly single-family and multifamily, high-density suburban residential land uses intermixed with commercial and recreational land uses. US 101, Montague Expressway, Tasman Drive, and SR 237 are prominent transportation corridors that bridge the existing tracks and local roadways. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), and fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. In the Alviso Baylands, the cultural landscape comprises buildings, boardwalks, trails, site furnishings, and site features associated with the wildlife refuge s interpretive facilities; salt pond water diversion structures; bridges and tracks associated with the existing rail line; industrial buildings on the western edge of Fremont that are built on the eastern edge of the Alviso Baylands, and lattice steel transmission lines. The industrial areas and infrastructure are disjointed and detract from the nearby suburban setting, resulting in moderate cultural order in developed areas. In the Alviso Baylands, cultural features blend better with and, for the most part, do not dominate the natural environment, resulting in moderately high cultural order in the Alviso Baylands. The alternatives environment consists of the existing single and double track sections of the rail line, associated bridges and underpasses to cross roadways, and stations. The existing alternative environment is compatible with the natural and cultural environments and provides quality views to the surrounding Alviso Baylands north of SR 237, resulting in moderate longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate to moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P- SJF-2d longer-term improvements sites and vicinity is moderately high due to the suburbanized and

40 industrial setting and the reflective water surface of Alviso Baylands. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and vicinity range from moderately high to moderately low because of the higher lighting levels in developed areas compared to very low nighttime lighting levels in the Alviso Baylands. In developed areas, lighting along US 101, SR 237, and local roadways; vehicle headlights; and light coming from developed areas that increase nighttime lighting in the vicinity. In the Alviso Baylands, nighttime lighting is mostly associated with development in Alviso, the western industrial areas associated with Freemont, distant lighting from developed areas, and moonlight reflecting off water surfaces. Alternative P-SJF-3 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternative P-SJF-3 are the same as those described for Alternative SJF-2 under Section Centerville to Union City The longer-term improvements setting introduction for the Centerville to Union City alternatives is the same as that described for the Centerville portion of the Centerville/Niles/Sunol segment under Section Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC-2b The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC- 2b are the mostly the same as described for Alternatives SJF-2, CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c under Section The primary difference is that the long-term improvements, which are all located at the same site, would require new tracks north of the existing ACE tracks to provide a connection from the Niles Subdivision to the Oakland Subdivision. Viewer groups of this alternative include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and the Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and single-family residential and industrial viewers that border the site (Appendix I- 1, Table I-1.7). The overall visual quality of this location, however, is moderately low because setting is dominated by segmented industrial land uses that are bordered on three sides by rail lines. Daytime and nighttime light and glare levels for this longer-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately low because there is not much development or many paved surfaces to reflect light or to contribute to nighttime lighting and the corridor is not well lit. In addition, the area north of the site is bordered by old quarry ponds and Alameda Creek, which are unlit, and a vacant industrial property with very little lighting borders the site to the east. Residential areas border the south and west, but existing trees and shrubs along the corridor also help to reduce light and glare from these sources. In addition, the BART Union City Station is included under Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC- 2a, and P-UC-2b. The most important visual resources within the viewshed are the same as those described for Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c under Section However, Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC-2b have more prominent views of Walpert Ridge due to the closer proximity of the site to the hills. Viewer groups of these alternatives include BART rail users, recreationists using local roadways, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and single-family and multi-family residential viewers that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). This area largely comprises the BART Union City Station and newer single-family and multi-family residential development. The natural harmony is moderately high because attention has

41 be paid to streetscaping and landscaping the BART Union City Station, the park along 11 th Street, and residential areas. This planned community also results in a cultural order that is moderately high because attention has be paid to transitions between adjoining land uses. As development has centered on the transportation corridor as an amenity and part of the communities fabric, the longer-term improvements site coherence is also moderately high. The overall visual quality for this developed area is moderately high. Daytime and nighttime light and glare levels for this longer-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high because the area is fairly developed and there are buildings, windows, and paved surfaces surface to reflect light and this development contributes to nighttime lighting. In addition, the station corridor is well lit. Tri-Valley The longer-term improvements setting introduction for the Tri-Valley alternatives is the same as that described for the Tri-Valley alternatives under Section Bus shuttles traveling on local roadways are an existing part of local and regional transit and would not result in a perceivable visual change to the environment. Therefore, Alternatives P-TV-1d and P-TV-2d are not discussed further. Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P- TV-1c, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills, Black Hills, Diablo Range, and Pleasanton Ridge: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of these features are visible from I-580. I-580, Isabel Avenue, North Livermore Avenue, Vasco, Road, Altamont Pass Road, and Greenville Road: These are state-, city-, and county-designated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2). However, portions of these routes adjacent to I-580 are not particularly scenic in character due to existing commercial and industrial development including Isabel Avenue, North Livermore Avenue south of I-580, Vasco Road, and Greenville Road (south of I-580). Brushy Peak Regional Preserve: Preserve area overlooking I-580. Northfront Park: Park adjacent to I-580. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to I-580, roadway users traveling on I-580 and local roadways, and commercial and residential viewers bordering I-580 (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment comprises flatter, grassy open space areas of the valley; residential, commercial, and industrial landscaping; streetscapes; and the rolling terrain and grassy hillsides of the lower Altamont Hills with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. The South Bay Aqueduct is located to the east and is permanently filled with water. Atmospheric visibility can range from

42 moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is harmonious and contributes to the cultural setting, resulting in moderately high natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of mostly residential and commercial land uses to the south of I- 580 between Isabel Avenue and First Street and north of I-580, on either side of Vasco Road. Industrial and warehouse development is located south of I-580 between First Street and just east of Greenville Road, along the lower foothills of the Altamont Hills. This eastern border of Livermore is described in more detail under Standard Rail Track Connection Options (Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, and Connection from Long Tunnel), ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station Options, (Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel), and Alternative P-BART-1. I-580 is a prominent transportation corridor that bridges the existing roadways and tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), and fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. In addition, wind turbines line the Altamont Hills ridgelines and can be seen in the middleground and background. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. The industrial areas and infrastructure are disjointed and detract from nearby suburban setting and the cultural setting, resulting in moderate cultural order. The alternatives environment consists of the I-580 corridor and connections to existing single track segments, except east of Greenville Road where they connect to an existing double track that converges to a single track heading north. The existing alternative environment is compatible with the natural and cultural environments and provides quality views to the nearby hills, resulting in moderately high longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c longer-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high due to the suburbanized and industrial setting and the grassy hills with few trees to help shade and reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and the area surrounding the alternatives are also moderately high because of lighting along I-580 and local roadways, vehicle headlights, and light coming from developed areas in the vicinity. Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c are the same as those described above for Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c. The primary difference is that Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c continue farther west along I-580, extending from Isabel Avenue to just east of Hopyard/Dougherty Road. Additional important visual resources within the viewshed include the following. Doolan Canyon: An open space area north of I-580. Tassajara Creek: A waterway crossing under I-580 that has riparian vegetation to the north of I

43 Tri-Valley Golf Center and Las Positas Golf Course: Recreational areas bordering I-580. Unnamed Water Detention Ponds: The detention facility borders I-580 to the north, at the termini of Grafton Street and Northside Drive, is enclosed but features a park-like setting and three detention ponds that are connected by natural looking channels. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare are consistent with the eastern portion of the alternatives that are described under Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c. The main difference is that business parks and commercial areas are the predominant land uses along I-580 between Santa Rita/Tassajara Road and Hopyard/Dougherty Road. In addition, there is an existing segment of BART within the I-580 median that terminates just east of Hacienda Drive. Standard Rail Track Connection Options (Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, and Connection from Long Tunnel), ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station Options (Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel), and Alternative P-BART-1 The standard rail track connection options (Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, and Connection from Long Tunnel) would be implemented with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-2a, or P-TV-2b. The ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station options (Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel) would be implemented with Alternatives P-TV-1c or P-TV-2c. Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel, Facilities with Existing Alignment, Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel, and Alternative P-BART-1, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills: The grassy hillsides are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. I-580, Patterson Pass Road, Altamont Pass Road, Greenville Road, and Flynn Road: I-580 is a state- and Alameda County-designated scenic route and Patterson Pass Road, Altamont Pass Road, Greenville Road, and Flynn Road are Alameda County-designated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2). However, Greenville Road immediately south of I-580 is not particularly scenic due to existing commercial and industrial development. Brushy Peak Regional Preserve: Preserve area overlooking I-580. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and two single-family residential viewers (Appendix I-1, Table I- 1.7)

44 Existing Visual Character and Quality The Connection from Existing Alignment is located north of I-580 and the Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel, Facilities with Existing Alignment, Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel, and Alternative P-BART-1 are all located south of I-580 between the South Bay Aqueduct and Greenville Road. These alternatives share the same general setting. The natural environment comprises the rolling terrain and grassy hillsides of the lower Altamont Hills with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. The South Bay Aqueduct is located to the east and is permanently filled with water. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is harmonious but industrial development slightly detracts from the natural setting, resulting in moderate natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of scattered industrial land uses that are located on the lower foothills between the aqueduct and Greenville Road, industrial and warehouse development located west of Greenville Road, and the Club Moto Motorcross Track between Altamont Pass Road and I These uses create visible scarring on the landscape. There is one single-family rural residence located 0.5 mile east of the aqueduct, north of Flynn Road. I-580 is a prominent transportation corridor that bridges the existing tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (wooden utility poles with lines), and fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. In addition, wind turbines line nearby ridgelines and can be seen in the middleground. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. In addition, the concrete-lined South Bay Aqueduct is screened terrain and is not prominent in the landscape. The industrial areas and infrastructure are disjointed and detract from the cultural setting, resulting in moderate cultural order. The alternatives environment consists of connections to existing single track segments, except east of Greenville Road where they connect to an existing double track that converges to a single track heading north. The alternative environment also consists of the grassy hillsides and industrial areas where the alignments would cross. The existing alternative environment is somewhat compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderate longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel, Facilities with Existing Alignment, Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel, and Alternative P-BART-1 longerterm improvements sites and vicinities are moderate due to the industrial development and the grassy hills with few trees to help shade and reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and area surrounding the alternatives are also moderate because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and vehicle headlights, lighting along I-580 and local roadways, and light coming from the eastern edge of Livermore act to slightly increase lighting in the vicinity. Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 are the same

45 as those described above for Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c because these alternatives would be also located in the median of I-580. The primary difference is that Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 continue underground in a subway from Portola Road to the existing ACE Livermore Station, where there would be no above-ground views or resources seen along the alignment. The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Livermore Station are described, below, under Alternatives P-TV-4. Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 would then follow the existing rail line to the Vasco Road Station, described in Section , under Alternative TV-2a. It would terminate east of Greenville Road [refer to Standard Rail Track Connection Options (Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, and Connection from Long Tunnel), ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station Options, (Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel), and Alternative P- BART-1, above]. Additional important visual resources within the viewshed of the existing rail line include the following. Doolan Park: A park located at the corner of Junction Avenue and Ladd Avenue, north of the existing rail line. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare are consistent with the eastern portion of the alternatives that are described under the previously listed alternatives. The main difference is that single-family suburban residential development lines the existing tracks between the Livermore and Vasco Road Stations. Residences are separated from the rail corridor by sound barriers. Alternative P-TV-3 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternative P-TV-3 is the same as described for Alternative TV-1 under Section Alternative P-TV-4 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternative P-TV-4, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Bankhead Theater Plaza: The parklike setting serves as a public plaza for surrounding businesses. Altamont Hills, Black Hills, Diablo Range, and Pleasanton Ridge: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of these features are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways, where there are breaks in development and vegetation. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of this alternative include rail and bus users, recreationists and travelers using local roadways, single-family and multi-family residents living north of the tracks, and commercial viewers along Railroad Avenue, North Livermore Avenue, and North I Street that border the alternative site (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7)

46 Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment includes mostly level terrain with limited middleground and background views to the Altamont Hills, the Black Hills, the Diablo Range, and Pleasanton Ridge. Vegetation near this alternative includes mature trees and shrubs that are associated with streetscape plantings, commercial buildings and parking areas, and the residential area. There is little visual screening of the tracks from adjacent land uses. No water features are visible. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is common to developed areas and vegetation is harmonious, resulting in moderate natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of mostly single-story and two-story commercial buildings, single-story single-family residences, and the two-story apartment buildings; local roadways, the two-story Livermore Station parking garage, and paved parking areas associated with residential and commercial areas; and aboveground utility infrastructure (lights and utility poles and lines) and fencing. The separation between residential and commercial development is slightly disjointed, resulting in moderate cultural order. The alternative environment comprises the existing Livermore Station that consists of two throughtracks, the parking garage, bus terminal, and platform. However, the proposed location of the parking facility is outside the rail corridor, located on a commercial development. The existing longer-term improvements environment blends well with its surroundings, resulting in moderate longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderate. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternative P-TV-4 longer-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high due to the amount of vertical surfaces, including windows, and paved surfaces associated with suburbanized areas that reflect light. Trees and shrubs help to reduce glare to a degree. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and vicinity are moderately high because station parking, the platform, and the site proposed for development are well-lit from interior and exterior lighting associated with higher density suburban development; interior and exterior lighting associated with commercial development and the parking garage; freeway, street lighting, and parking lot lighting; and passing vehicles on local roadways. Alternative P-TV-5 The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternative P-TV-5 is the same as those described for Alternative TV-2 under Section

47 Altamont Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Altamont Hills: The grassy hillsides are visible from the existing rail corridor and from local roadways. I-580, Altamont Pass Road, Greenville Road, and Flynn Road: I-580 is a state- and Alameda County-designated scenic route and Altamont Pass Road, Greenville Road, and Flynn Road are Alameda County-designated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I-2). As noted above, the portion of Greenville Road near I-580 is not considered particularly scenic due to existing commercial and industrial development. Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways, roadway users traveling on local roadways, and two single-family residential viewers (Appendix I-1, Table I- 1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 are all tunnel alternatives that would pass under the Altamont Hills. Alternative P-A-1 terminates east of Greenville Road like Alternative P-A-3 and terminates north of I-580, near the Altamont Pass Road and Carroll Road intersection, like Alternative P-A-2. Similarly, Alternative P-A-2 and Alternative P-A-3 terminate in the same general area, to the east, south of I-580. Therefore, these three alternatives share the same general setting. The natural environment is dominated by rolling terrain and grassy hillsides with a few, scattered oak trees and shrubs. Altamont Creek and Mountain House Creek are seasonal water features that are intermittently visible during the wet season. In addition, Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-3 cross the South Bay Aqueduct that is permanently filled with water. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting is fairly harmonious due to the predominance of the alternative environment, resulting in moderately high natural harmony. The cultural environment is dominated more by the natural environment. There is one single-family rural residence located north of Carroll Road near the I-580/Flynn Road exit and another is located 0.5 mile east of the aqueduct, north of Flynn Road. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (wooden utility poles with lines), and barbed wire fencing also contribute to the cultural environment. In addition, wind turbines line nearby ridgelines and can be seen in the foreground and middleground. While the wind turbines are prominent and detract slightly from views, they create visual interest and do not overwhelm the cultural landscape. In addition, Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-3 cross the concrete-lined South Bay Aqueduct. Between the aqueduct and Greenville Road, there are some scattered industrial land uses located on the lower foothills and there is industrial and warehouse development located west of Greenville Road. This small area

48 does not detract from the majority of the cultural setting, which has a low level of development and infrastructure that results in a cultural order that is moderately high. The alternatives environment consists of connections to existing single track segments, except east of Greenville Road, where Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-3 connect to an existing double track that converges to a single track heading north. The alternative environment also includes the grassy hillsides under which the proposed alternatives would tunnel. The existing alternative environment responds to both and is compatible with the rural natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderately high longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately high. Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 longerterm improvements sites and vicinities are moderately low due to the more naturalized setting but there are few trees to help shade and reduce glare. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and vicinity are also moderately low because, while passing passenger trains have interior lighting, the tracks are not lit and the area surrounding the tracks are more naturalized, with only two residences to contribute to illuminating the corridor. However, vehicle headlights and lighting along I-580 and light coming from the eastern edge of Livermore act to slightly increase lighting in the vicinity. Tracy to Lathrop Alternatives P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-ET, P-TL-DT, P-TL- RI, P-TL-RLM, and P-TL-ELM The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for the longer-term Tracy to Lathrop stations are the same as those described for the Tracy to Lathrop stations under Section The alternatives correspond, as follows: Alternative P-TL-A1: West Tracy Station A-1 Alternative P-TL-A2: West Tracy Station A-2 Alternative P-TL-A3: West Tracy Station A-3 Alternative P-TL-A4: West Tracy Station A-4 Alternative P-TL-A5: West Tracy Station A-5 Alternative P-TL-B1: West Tracy Station B-1 Alternative P-TL-B2: West Tracy Station B-2 Alternative P-TL-ET: Existing Tracy Station Alternative P-TL-DT: Downtown Tracy Station Alternative P-TL-RI: River Islands Station Alternative P-TL-RLM: Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station Alternative P-TL-ELM: Existing Lathrop/Manteca Station

49 Lathrop to Stockton The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for Alternative P-LS-1 is the same as those described for Alternative LS-1 under Section Alternative P-LS-1 would construct one or two surface parking lots, North Lot 1 that would be located on a vacant lot that is north of the station on the west side of the tracks and North Lot 2 would be located on a vacant lot that is north of the station on the east side of the tracks. There is no building on the North Lot 1 site, but there is a warehouse facility on the North Lot 2 site. Manteca to Modesto Alternatives P-MMO-MAN, P-MMO-RIP, and P-MMO-MOD The Existing Visual Resources, Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity, Existing Visual Character and Quality, and Light and Glare for the longer-term Downtown Manteca, Ripon, and Modesto stations are the same as those described for the Manteca to Modesto alternatives under Section The alternatives correspond, as follows: Alternative P-MMO-MAN: Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b Alternative P-MMO-RIP: Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b Alternative P-MMO-MOD: Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b Modesto to Merced Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b Existing Visual Resources The most important visual resources within the viewshed of these Alternatives P-MME-1a and P- MME-1b, based on analysis of aerial and satellite mapping, site surveys, and review of policy documents, include the following. Diablo Range and Sierra Nevada Mountains: The grassy hillsides and distant oak woodlands of the Diablo Range and the conifer forests and snow-capped mountains of the Sierra Nevada are visible from the rail corridor where elevation and breaks in development and vegetation allow for views. Atwater Boulevard, First Street, Shaffer Road, Winton Way, Broadway from Winton Way to First Street, Buhach Road, Third Street, Entrances to Atwater, and M Street from 18th Street to Bear Creek: City-designated scenic routes with views of the alternatives (Appendix I- 2). Independence Park, Ceres-Whitmore Park, Summerfaire Park, Broadway Park, Central Park, Shattuck Educational Park, and Merced River Resort: Parks, trails, and recreational areas that have views of the rail line. Tuolumne River and Merced River: Natural river corridors with riparian areas passing under the tracks

50 Viewer Groups and Existing Viewer Sensitivity Viewer groups of these alternatives include rail users, recreationists using local roadways and recreational areas adjacent to the tracks, roadway users traveling on SR 99 and local roadways, and residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional (e.g., schools) viewers bordering the tracks (Appendix I-1, Table I-1.7). Existing Visual Character and Quality The natural environment comprises flat, vegetated open space areas that include orchards, row crops, vineyards, and grassy, vacant parcels that are common to rural areas in the San Joaquin Valley; residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional landscaping and vacant parcels that are common to developed areas in the valley; and intermittent background views of the Diablo Range. Permanent water bodies include the Tuolumne River, Turlock Irrigation District Lateral Number 1, Ceres Main Canal, Upper Lateral Number 212, Lateral Number 3, and Upper Lateral Number 4, Lateral Number 5, Lateral Number 6, High Fine Canal, Merced River, Hammatt Lateral, Arena Canal, Atwater Canal, Buhach Lateral, Canal Creek, Trindale Drain, El Capitan Canal, and Bear Creek. Atmospheric visibility can range from moderately high to moderate due to natural weather patterns that can include limited seasonal haze, seasonal rain, and overcast weather conditions. The existing natural setting can range from being more harmonious in rural areas to less harmonious in areas with industrial development, contributing to a natural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderate in natural harmony. The cultural environment consists of residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses that border the tracks in Modesto, Bystrom, Ceres, Keyes, Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, Atwater, Fergus, Merced, and smaller rural development. SR 99 is a prominent transportation corridor that parallels the existing tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, and sound barriers separating residences from the tracks and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. Residential, commercial, and rural development along the rail corridor is common to the valley cultural landscape. The industrial areas tend to be disjointed and detract from nearby suburban setting, contributing to a cultural setting that ranges from moderately low to moderate in cultural order. The alternatives environment consists of existing single and double track alignments that blend fairly well with the landscape in rural and developed settings, as it parallels SR 99 for most of its length. The primary difference between the two alternatives is a proposed station in Livingston for Alternative P-MME-1a versus a proposed station in Atwater for Alternative P-MME-1b. The proposed Livingston Station site is located in a grassy field that is behind a small warehouse, east of Main Street, between the existing tracks and SR 99. Commercial and industrial areas and a few single-family residences border the site. The proposed Atwater Station site is located on parcels that are currently developed with commercial uses and the Atwater Transpo bus station, east of Applegate Road, between the existing tracks and Atwater Boulevard. Commercial uses and a few residences border the site. In addition, the Bloss Mansion is located in close proximity to the site. The remaining proposed stations are the same for both alternatives. The existing alternative environment is mostly compatible with the natural and cultural environments, resulting in moderate longer-term improvements site coherence. The overall visual quality of this alternative is moderately low to moderate

51 Light and Glare Daytime light and glare levels associated with the Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b longerterm improvements sites and vicinities range from moderately low to moderately high due to the rural and suburbanized and industrial settings. Nighttime light and glare levels associated with the longer-term improvements site and vicinity also range from moderately low to moderately high because of low lighting levels in rural areas and higher lighting levels in suburbanized and industrial. Lighting along the alignment corridor primarily comes from street lighting associated with SR 99 and local roadways, vehicle headlights, and light coming from developed areas Impact Analysis This section describes the environmental impacts of the ACEforward near-term and longer-term improvements on aesthetic resources. It describes the thresholds used to determine whether an impact would be significant and identified impacts applying those thresholds. Measures to mitigate (i.e., avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, eliminate, or compensate for) significant impacts are provided, where appropriate Thresholds of Significance The State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (14 California Code of Regulations [Cal. Code Regs.] et seq.) has identified significance criteria to be considered for determining whether a project could have significant impacts on aesthetic resources and visual quality. An impact would be considered significant is construction or operation of the project would have any of the following consequences. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the near-term and longer-term improvement sites and its surroundings, including scenic vistas. Substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views near the near-term and longer-term improvements Near-Term Improvements Impacts and Mitigation Measures No near-term improvements would occur in the Centerville to Union City or Modesto to Merced geographic segments. Therefore, there would be no construction or operation impacts within these segments associated with near-term improvements and these segments are not discussed further in this section. As noted above, the addition of up to 4 daily freight trains (in 2020) and up to 6 daily freight trains (in 2040) due to certain Centerville/Niles/Sunol alternatives would not introduce any new visual features along the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction nor would they change the visual character of this existing railroad. Thus, there is no potential for a significant visual impact along the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction and this segment is not discussed further below. For impacts related to noise or air quality along the Niles Subdivision north of Niles Junction, please see Section 4.3 and Section

52 Impact AES-1 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Construction of near-term improvements could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the alternative site and its surroundings, including scenic vistas, scenic highways and could create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Potentially significant AES-1.1: Install visual barriers between construction work areas and sensitive receptors AES-1.2: Limit construction near residences to daylight hours AES-1.3: Minimize fugitive light from portable sources used for construction AQ-2.5: Implement fugitive dust controls Less than significant Impact Characterization Visual changes resulting from introducing construction activities and equipment into the viewsheds of all user groups would be temporary. Construction of the alignments would generally occur in a linear fashion and migrate along the corridor of each alignment alternative. Construction would affect all viewers adjacent to or in the construction corridor. Impacts would be greater where there are more viewers and where larger portions of the alternative would be visible. Construction may be visible from some locations with scenic vista views such as from elevated roadways and bridges that cross or parallel the existing rail corridor or adjacent multilevel buildings. The view from elevated roadways and bridges would be fleeting for passing motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and construction would not affect scenic vistas because viewers would be elevated above the rail corridor and construction activities. The view from adjacent multilevel buildings of the surrounding hillsides would not be blocked by construction activities. The following construction impacts would be common to all alternatives. Introduce Industrial-Looking Elements into the Viewshed All viewer groups are likely to be accustomed to seeing machinery, trucks, and vehicles within the near-term improvements area because roadway improvement projects, development projects, agriculture and ranching, and rail maintenance activities require the use of such equipment. However, construction of the proposed alternatives would involve, in certain limited cases, construction of a major transportation facilities where none presently exist (such as the Lyoth- Banta, Lammers, and Midway Crossovers) or where construction is not a common activity (such as within Niles Canyon). Construction activities for any alternative would introduce heavy equipment and associated vehicles such as dozers, graders, scrapers, and trucks, into the viewshed. Depending on location, viewers could see staging areas, worker parking, and equipment and materials storage areas, which would add industrial-looking elements into viewsheds. Such features would be less pronounced in urban and suburban areas but more pronounced in rural areas. Increase Fugitive Dust and Noise in the Viewshed Construction activities involving heavy equipment use, soil and material transport, and land clearing in the ROW, along public roadways, and at construction staging areas would create fugitive dust and would introduce noise. The aesthetic disruptions would be less pronounced in urban areas but more pronounced in rural areas

53 Invade Privacy of Residential Viewers Residential viewers could have construction activities occurring adjacent to their homes, or nearby, evoking a sense of invaded privacy. Remove and Trim Vegetation Vegetation clearance within the existing rail corridors is a current and ongoing activity conducted for physical safety of passing trains. While evidence of construction activity would be noticeable to area residents and others in the vicinity, such visual disruptions would be short-term and are a common and accepted feature of the urban environment. Several of the station option alternatives would require vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. Lighting and Glare Construction activities for all alternatives would temporarily increase daytime glare resulting from reflections off construction vehicle windows. However, such reflections are already common in all segments due to the presence of existing roadway traffic. Construction glare would be nominal compared to existing conditions and would not increase glare near the alternative. If nighttime construction activities occur, lighting equipment could create light and glare that might affect sensitive viewers adjacent to the ROW. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Visual changes resulting from introducing construction activities and equipment into the viewsheds of all user groups would be temporary. Construction activities for any alternative would introduce heavy equipment and associated vehicles such as dozers, graders, scrapers, and trucks, into the viewshed. Depending on location, viewers could see staging areas, worker parking, and equipment and materials storage areas, which would add industrial-looking elements into viewsheds. Construction activities involving heavy equipment use, soil and material transport, and land clearing in the ROW, along public roadways, and at construction staging areas would create fugitive dust. Dust clouds could hinder views, including impacting views from scenic vista and scenic roadways, and would result in a potentially significant impact. Significance with Application of Mitigation Residential viewers could have construction activities occurring adjacent to their homes, or nearby, evoking a sense of invaded privacy and would result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1.1, AES-1.2, AES-1.3, and AQ-2.5 (See Section 4.3) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level by installing visual barriers between construction and sensitive receptors, limiting work to daylight hours adjacent to sensitive receptors, limiting construction lighting near sensitive receptors and limiting fugitive dust. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements for construction aesthetic impacts

54 Mitigation Measure AES-1.1: Install visual barriers between construction work areas and sensitive receptors The SJRRC will install visual barriers between stationary construction work areas and sensitive receptors to reduce the impact on sensitive receptors from invasions of privacy and the change in existing visual quality. Barriers will be placed to obscure views of stationary work areas (e.g., staging areas or areas of fixed construction) where construction activity and equipment would be disruptive and lower the existing visual quality. These efforts will include the following actions and performance standards. The SJRRC will install visual barriers to minimize sensitive receptors (i.e., residents and recreational areas) views of construction work areas. The visual barriers will be placed to protect residents and recreational areas that are located within 0.25 mile of a ACEforward near-term improvements construction site where the residences or recreationalists would have an unobstructed view of the construction area. The visual barrier may be chain link fencing with privacy slats, fencing with windscreen material, wood barrier, or other similar barrier. The visual barrier will be a minimum of 6 feet high to help to maintain the privacy of residents and block ground-level views toward stationary construction activities. While the visual barriers would introduce a visual intrusion, they would greatly reduce the visual effects associated with visible construction activities, and screening construction activities and protecting privacy is deemed desirable. The visual barriers are an effective means of reducing the visibility of active construction work areas, thereby minimizing the impact on existing localized visual quality. Mitigation Measure AES-1.2: Limit construction near residences to daylight hours Construction activities scheduled to occur between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. will not take place before or past daylight hours (which vary according to season). This will reduce the amount of construction experienced by viewer groups because most construction activities would be occurring during business hours (when most viewer groups are likely to be at work) and eliminate the need to introduce high-wattage lighting sources to operate in the dark near residences. Mitigation Measure AES-1.3: Minimize fugitive light from portable sources used for construction At a minimum, the construction contractor will minimize project-related light and glare to the maximum extent feasible, given safety considerations. Color-corrected halide lights will be used. Portable lights will be operated at the lowest allowable wattage and height and will be raised to a height no greater than 20 feet. All lights will be screened and directed downward toward work activities and away from the night sky and nearby residential areas to the maximum extent possible. The number of nighttime lights used will be minimized to the greatest extent possible. Mitigation Measure AQ-2.5: Implement fugitive dust controls Refer to measure description under Impact AQ-2a in Section

55 Impact AES-2 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Operation of near-term improvements could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the alternative site and its surroundings, including scenic vistas. Potentially significant (Alternatives SJF-2, CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, TV-1, TV-2, TL-2a, TL-4a, West Tracy Station A-1, West Tracy Station A-2, West Tracy Station A-3, Existing Tracy Station, Downtown Tracy Station, River Islands Station, Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station, LS-1 [variant 1], MMO-1a, and MMO-1b) Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives) AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain AES-2.4: Underground new utilities AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways Significant and unavoidable (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, TL-2a, TL-4a, and West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2) Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives) Impact Characterization Visual changes resulting from operation would affect residential viewers, roadway travelers, and recreationists adjacent to all alternatives. The intensity of the impact would vary depending on number of viewers present, proximity of viewers to the alternative, degree of physical change in the landscape, visibility of the physical change and alternative, volume of train traffic, and required maintenance. As identified in Table 4.1-1, there are several Caltrans-designated landscaped freeways within view of alternatives. Table I-3.1 in Appendix I-3, Caltrans Designated Landscaped Freeway Screening, includes a preliminary screening of near-term alternatives within 3 miles of landscaped freeways to determine the alternatives requiring further analysis. No alternatives would introduce billboards or signs along segments of landscaped freeways. Therefore, an alternative would need to directly impact vegetation along a landscaped freeway segment in order to affect its designation. Alternatives that would not directly affect vegetation along landscaped freeway segments have been excluded from the analysis below and are identified in Appendix I-3. New bridges would typically be similar to adjacent and nearby bridges. Bridge surfaces and facades would not be exposed to viewers, in most cases, because there is no access provided below the bridges. In such cases, replacing existing bridges would not substantially alter visual resources because the structures would be replaced in the same location and would be in keeping with the existing visual environment because the new bridge would be of similar width and made of similar materials. Expanding existing bridges would also not substantially alter visual resources because the new bridges would be located directly adjacent to existing bridge structures and would be of similar width and made of similar materials

56 Relocated railroad signals, safety gates, signal houses, and power poles would not affect visual resources or the existing visual quality, as these are existing visual elements that will be shifted slightly in the landscape. Relocating railroad crossing and stop bar pavement markings would shift existing pavement markings and would not affect visual resources or visual quality. Installing concrete crossing panels adjacent to existing concrete crossing panels in the roadway surface would be consistent with the existing roadway conditions and would not alter visual resources or affect visual quality. New signal houses could stand out in and detract from the landscape, depending on the color of materials used to construct the signal houses. All alignment alternatives would require routine vegetation maintenance in the ROW, along the rail line footprint. Viewers may see vegetation-clearing activities. Because farming, rail, and road maintenance are prevalent in the study area, these activities and equipment within the ROW would not likely constitute a visual impact. Key viewpoints representative of Centerville/Niles/Sunol, Tri-Valley, and Tracy to Lathrop segment s visual character are identified on Figures 4.1-1a and 4.1-1b. Figures through show the photographs taken from these KVP. Impact Differences by Segment San Jose to Fremont Alternative SJF-1 would be built along an existing rail segment adjacent to SR 87 at a location with a current rail yard and would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Alternative SJF-2 would require minor vegetation removal in existing parking lots to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. Removal of existing commercial structures would occur with Alternative SJF-2 to construct the new 4-story parking structure for the station, as shown in the After Project view of KOP 1 in Figure A pedestrian bridge would also be built over the tracks. The existing buildings that would be removed due to Alternative SJF-2 site do not have a distinct architectural style and their removal and replacement with a parking structure would not result in degradation of the existing visual character. However, new parking structures and a pedestrian bridge may be perceived adversely unless properly designed. In addition, the structures would create a visual intrusion into the landscape, due to the structure scale and massing because of the number of stories and the pedestrian bridge that would block existing background views of the Walpert Ridge, which contribute to the existing visual setting and quality of views from the Fremont Station. This would reduce the visual quality of KOP 1 from Moderate to Moderately Low (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1, Terminology, Methodology, and Rating System). Centerville/Niles/Sunol The alignment alternatives in this segment would require vegetation removal, tree trimming, landform changes in hilly areas, intersection and driveway modifications, new or modified culverts, and new or modified bridge structures. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would all be built along existing rail segments

57 The Centerville line expansion and Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection at Industrial Parkway and track upgrade alignments would be built alongside existing rail corridors that pass through suburban, urban, and rural landscapes and would result in a minor visual expansion of existing conditions that would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. The replaced bridge deck over Alameda Creek would not alter views under Alternative CNS-1c. The new bridge over Alameda Creek constructed under Alternative CNS-1a, would disrupt and visually segment views of the creek and increase the amount of bridge infrastructure that is concentrated at this location, as shown in the After Project view of KOP 2 in Figure The new bridge would intensify and further clutter views available from SR 238/Mission Boulevard, which is an Alameda County and City of Fremont designated scenic route (refer to Impact AES-3). There is a direct correlation and overlap between the existing visual character and quality of a surrounding landscape and scenic route designation. Being a scenic route, Alameda County and the City of Fremont have determined that SR 238/Mission Boulevard is valued and protected due to the quality of views that are available from this corridor. Alameda County and the City of Fremont have, thus, established protection measures to ensure that projects affecting SR 238/Mission Boulevard, and other scenic routes, contribute to the character and quality of views along protected corridors (Appendix H, Regional Plans and Local General Plans). These protections also ensure that projects do not degrade the existing visual character and quality of views available from scenic routes. The new bridge over Alameda Creek with Alternative CNS-1a would be much more prominent and visible than the Niles Subdivision tracks that skirt the creek on a vegetated berm because the bridge would introduce a new viaduct structure with piers and decking that crosses the open creek corridor, intensifying the amount of rail infrastructure at this location. In addition to intensifying the amount of rail infrastructure at this location, the new bridge over Alameda Creek would also be nearly twice as tall as the low-profile SR 238/Mission Boulevard Bridge over Alameda Creek, as seen in the simulation, conflicting with the existing visual character of rail and road infrastructure at this location. The resulting effect of the new bridge over Alameda Creek would be a reduction in the visual quality of KOP 2 from Moderate to Moderately Low (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). These changes would affect and be visible to recreational viewers on Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users on SR 238/Mission Boulevard, residents adjacent to the bridge, and rail passengers traveling by on adjacent tracks. Within Niles Canyon, Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would be built along existing rail segments that would need to be upgraded and the area is hilly and scenic with dense trees and shrubs. Changes associated with the NCRY upgrades (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b) would be visible in certain locations to drivers on SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, recreational viewers in Vallejo Mill Park, and recreational rail passengers on the NCRY. Changes associated with the northern connection (Alternative CNS-2b) would be visible primarily to drivers on SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road and residential and commercial viewers in Sunol. Changes associated with the southern connection (Alternative CNS-2b) would be visible primarily to drivers on SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and recreational rail passengers on the NCRY. Changes associated with the Sunol double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, and CNS-2b) would be visible primarily to drivers on SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road, and residential and commercial viewers in Sunol. Changes associated with the Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS- 1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c) would be visible primarily to drivers on Pleasanton Sunol Road and recreational viewers at the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course. SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road traverse through and serve as the entry to Niles Canyon and are

58 Alameda County designated scenic routes, like SR 238/Mission Boulevard. SR 84/Niles Canyon Road is also an officially designated State Scenic Highway. As such, the State and Alameda County have determined that the SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road corridors are valued due to the quality of views that are available from them and have protections in place to ensure that projects do not degrade the existing visual character and quality of views available from these scenic routes. Vegetation along the SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and Pleasanton Sunol Road corridors would obscure a large portion of visual changes resulting from the alternatives. Minor landform alterations and swaths of vegetation clearing would be needed to accommodate construction equipment and the proposed alternative modifications, such as retaining walls, bridge replacements, and rock fall and debris flow fencing, which can be seen in the After Project view of KOP 3 in Figure and KOP 4 in Figure This would result in small areas of cut and fill to accommodate changes on sloped lands and would also remove portions of plant cover on hillsides, including grassland areas, shrubs, and mature trees, altering the visual character of scenic resources along the corridors. Vegetation is a scenic resource that improves visual quality and helps screen built features in the landscape. Vegetation removal permanently removes scenic resources by cutting down mature trees and shrubs, which would degrade views seen from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, Sunol, NCRY, and recreational areas associated with Vallejo Mill Park and the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course, in an area that is noted for its scenic resources and views. As seen in the After Project views for KOP 3 and KOP 4, this would open up views to the vegetation and hillsides that are currently beyond and screened from view by existing vegetation, altering views from ones that are more densely vegetated or enclosed to views of a more open nature. The removal of vegetation would make landscape scars from landform alterations and the proposed built features associated with the alternatives more visually prominent where the alternatives directly parallel or cross SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, residences and businesses in Sunol, and recreational land uses. The use of retaining walls would aid in minimizing impacts to vegetation, compared to a construction approach that would create larger areas of cut or fill and vegetation removal to accommodate rail line upgrades. However, as seen in the After Project views for KOP 3 and KOP 4, retaining walls would introduce long, vertical wall surfaces that would range from 5- to 20-foot-tall. These wall surfaces would make the NCRY corridor stand out more than existing conditions, where the corridor blends fairly well into the existing landscape. These large wall surfaces would range from being moderately to highly visible from the Vallejo Mill Park parking lot (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), along the segments of Niles Canyon Road that are just north of the park (KOP 3) (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), and at the retaining wall location that is just east of the NCRY Brightside Yard (KOP 4) (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b). Because the roadside vegetation is already fairly sparse at these locations, vegetation removal would open up and more directly expose views to the affected areas. Retaining walls would also be visible where the Sunol double track crosses Pleasanton Sunol Road, just before its northern terminus (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, and CNS-2b), and where the northern connection (Alternative CNS-2a) and Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c) parallel Pleasanton Sunol Road because there would be little to obscure views of the walls. Retaining walls associated with the Hearst double track would also be visible from the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c). Tall, utilitarian-looking walls that emphasize the presence of the rail line would likely be perceived as a negative addition to the visual landscape given the existing scenic

59 nature of views associated with Niles Canyon, especially when compounded with vegetation removal. In addition, sections of a 20-foot-tall rock fall fence or 10-foot-tall debris flow fence would be installed at grade, behind a 3-foot-tall concrete barrier, and anchored into the hillside with cables, as shown in Figure 2-12 (Chapter 2, Description of Near-Term Improvements), and would also be visible along portions of SR 84/Niles Canyon Road that parallel closely to the NCRY upgrades (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b). Views of rock fall and debris flow fencing would be obscured where the alternative is located farther away from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and a vegetative buffer would remain between the alternative and SR 84/Niles Canyon Road. However, rock fall and debris flow fencing would be visible where it would be located in closer proximity to SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, especially where vegetation removal opens up and presents views toward affected sites, as seen in the After Project views for KOP 3 and KOP 4. This fencing would stand out in this naturalized setting if not properly designed, further degrading the character and quality of existing views that are available from the roadway. The resulting effect of changes associated with vegetation removal and installation of retaining walls, rock fall and debris flow fencing, and the concrete barrier would be a reduction in the visual quality of KOP 3 from High to Moderately High and KOP 4 from High to Moderate (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). These changes would affect and be visible to recreational viewers at Vallejo Mill Park and along SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, roadway users on SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, and rail passengers traveling by on adjacent tracks. New bridges would typically be made of steel and concrete and be similar to existing, adjacent and nearby bridges. Bridge surfaces and facades would not be exposed to viewers, in most cases, because there is no access provided below the bridges. In such cases, replacing existing bridges would not substantially alter visual resources because the structures would be replaced in the same location and would be in keeping with the existing visual environment because the new bridge would be of similar width and made of similar materials. Expanding existing bridges would also not substantially alter visual resources because the new bridges would be located directly adjacent to existing bridge structures and would be of similar width and made of similar materials. However, there are several proposed bridges, including new and replaced structures, which would be visible to sensitive viewers. Visible proposed bridge structures include the Paseo Padre Parkway underpass (Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b), Alameda Creek Bridge (Alternative CNS-1a), SR 84/SR 238/Mission Boulevard underpass (Alternative CNS-1a), Dresser Bridge (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), Farwell Bridge (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), Pleasanton Sunol Road underpass for the Sunol double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, and CNS-2b), Pleasanton Sunol Road underpass for the Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c), and the Castlewood Golf Club underpass (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c). In addition, while replaced bridges would look visually similar to existing structures, replacing existing bridges would require removal of the existing structure and replacement with a new structure. This would require vegetation removal and grading to accommodate the replacement which, along with new materials that are not weathered, are likely to make bridge replacements stand out in the visual landscape for several years until the structures weather and plants recolonize disturbed areas. Alternative CNS- 2b would also require modification to SR 84/Niles Canyon Roadway to bridge the roadway for the southern connection as shown in the After Project view of KOP 5 in Figure This structure would lower the elevation of SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and introduce new retaining walls and a bridge to cross the roadway corridor. However, the structure would be at roughly the same elevation as the existing roadway so it would not stand out a great deal if it is properly designed because vegetation removal would be minimal and views of the canyon and surrounding hillsides

60 would not be affected. This would reduce the visual quality of KOP 5 from Moderate to Moderately Low (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b would contribute to redistributing freight to the NCRY, which will also change visual perceptions of the NCRY; however the addition of freight trains to an existing railroad alignment, while different than at present, would introduce a compatible visual element to the railroad alignment. Tri-Valley Parking improvements associated with Alternatives TV-1 and TV-2 would require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. The most notable features would be parking areas associated with the station alternatives. At the Pleasanton Station, Alternative TV-1 would include a new surface parking lot on the south side of the tracks, a new 4-story parking structure in the existing surface parking lot on the north side, as shown in the After Project view of KOP 6 in Figure The new surface parking lot would be located on a vacant lot that is vegetated with grasses and trees and would be adjacent to the railroad, residences, and a public library and across the street from Pleasanton Middle School. New parking on the south side of the tracks would change the current visual context from vacant/open space. The new 4-story parking structure would be placed in the existing surface parking lot on the north side of the tracks and would be adjacent to the railroad, office building, and the fairgrounds and would be across the railroad tracks from residential areas. The current view of a surface parking lot is not a high value aesthetic resources; however, views to Pleasanton and Sunol ridges in the background to the west increase the quality of views to the west seen from the Pleasanton Station. Replacement with a parking structure (three stories above ground; one below ground) would change the visual character by creating a visual intrusion into the landscape, due to the structure scale and massing because of the number of stories, which would block existing background views of the Pleasanton and Sunol Ridges but would not substantially degrade the existing visual character. However, the new structure could be perceived adversely without proper design treatments. This would reduce the visual quality of KOP 6 from Moderate to Moderately Low (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). At the Vasco Road Station, Alternative TV-2 would include a new 2 or 3-story parking structure. The alternative environment comprises the existing Vasco Road Station, which consists of one through-track, a station platform, and the station parking lot that are located north of the tracks, between industrial development and a multi-family residential development that is being constructed. The new parking structure would be placed within the existing surface parking lot and a vacant lot that is adjacent to commercial and industrial structures on the south, west, and east and the residential development being completed on the north. While a new structure would not change the visual character, which is dominated by commercial and industrial development, with the new residential development, the area will have a mixed visual character. However, the new structure could be perceived adversely by new residents without proper design treatments. Altamont Alternative A-1 would require minor vegetation removal, tree trimming, and landform changes in hilly areas. Alternative A-1 would be built along an existing rail segment in a rural area and would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality

61 Tracy to Lathrop Station Options Most station alternatives would be built on agricultural lands or on vacant parcels of land that are either grassy or paved lots. Station Alternatives Existing Tracy Station, Downtown Tracy Station, and River Islands Station would require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. The remainder of station alternatives would be built on grassy or agricultural lands with no trees or shrubs. Station platforms would not be a prominent visual feature associated with new station alternatives, and the most notable features would be parking areas associated with the station alternatives. The West Tracy Station A-3, Existing Tracy Station, River Islands Station, and Relocated Lathrop Manteca Station alternatives would also have pedestrian bridges crossing the tracks and would have similar impacts. Most of the station alternatives are located on flat parcels of land and would require minor earthwork. However, the West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 would result in a higher degree of landform alteration, compared to other alternatives, because they are located in a hilly environment. As shown in the After Project view of KOP 7 in Figure 4.1-8, the access road to the station would be fairly wide and visible from different vantages along the curvilinear Patterson Pass Road. While the station platform is not readily visible, the parking lot creates a dark surface that may be noticeable to viewers. As shown in the After Project view of KOP 8 in Figure 4.1-9, the access road to the station is not readily apparent from I-580. However, the station platform and parking lot are much more visible and, while the parking lot generally conforms to the terrain, the pavement creates a dark surface that is likely to be noticeable to viewers. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by adding transportation infrastructure to the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail station. This would reduce the visual quality of both KOP 7 and KOP 8 from Moderately High to Moderate (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). Many of the new stations, such as West Tracy Stations A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, B-1, and B-2, would require the installation of utility lines to carry electricity to power the facilities. This would introduce new vertical utility features that would disrupt the visual landscape from sensitive vantages. Stations would also require fence installation for safety. Chain link fencing is light gray and the color acts to limit views. Coloring the barrier in a dark color improves visibility through the barrier compared with a standard gray metal surface. Alignments The alignment alternatives would require minor vegetation removal, tree trimming, and landform changes in hilly areas, intersection and driveway modifications, new or modified culverts, and new or modified bridge structures. Alternatives TL-2a and TL-4a would be built along existing rail segments for most of the alternatives length, but would require new segments of rail line to be constructed through hilly terrain to connect the existing rail line to the proposed stations. These alignment alternatives are required to connect West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 to existing rail segments and would result in a higher degree of landform alteration, compared to other alignment alternatives. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by adding transportation infrastructure to the landscape and

62 breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail corridor. Alternatives TL-2b, TL-3, and TL-4b would also require new sections of rail line to be built, but through flat agricultural lands that would require less earthwork, to connect the Oakland Subdivision to the Tracy Subdivision, as shown in the After Project view of KOP 9 in Figure New alignments that pass through flat, rural landscapes where there is no existing rail line would not generally alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality because they would be low-profile and comparable to existing rail lines and roadway corridors that are located nearby and are common to the surrounding area. The rail line, signal gates, and passing trains would not stand out a great deal within the landscape, vegetation removal would be minimal, and views of the surrounding hillsides would not be affected. This would retain the existing visual quality of KOP 9 as Moderate (refer to Simulation Rating Forms in Appendix I-1). Landscaped Freeways Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-3, TL-4a, TL-4b, and Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station would all pass by landscaped freeway portions of SR 120. Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, and TL-3 would all replace existing tracks and would not impact vegetation along SR 120. Alternatives TL-4a and TL- 4b would install a new track that parallels SR 120 and could impact a few trees and grassy areas along the state ROW. The Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station new station track would merge to meet the existing track under SR 120, but all improvements would occur within the rail ROW and would not affect vegetation with the state ROW. Lathrop to Stockton Alternative LS-1 includes three variants to accommodate surface and street parking for the Stockton Station. Alternative LS-1 (variant 2) would construct the parking lots on vacant parcels. However, Alternative LS-1 (variant 1) and Alternative LS-1 (variant 3) would require the removal of the Western Pacific Railway Depot to construct the parking facilities for the station. The Western Pacific Railway Depot is vacant and in a deteriorated condition, due to fire damage, and its removal under Alternative LS-1 (variant 1) would reduce blight in the area. However, the building is a historical structure and retains much of its exterior architectural detailing and Alternative LS-1 (variant 2) would retain the building but would not restore the building. Alternative LS-1 (variant 3) would deconstruct the building and relocate the building to the west of its current location. Due to the building s condition, an intact relocation is not feasible. However, much of the exterior would be relocated and pieced back together and would be used in the future as a station for Amtrak San Joaquin. This would improve the visual quality of the site by retaining and restoring the structure. Its relocation would not affect visual resources. Manteca to Modesto Station Options The Downtown Manteca Station, Ripon Station, and Modesto Station (stations in both Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b) would require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. Station platforms would not be a prominent visual feature associated with new station alternatives, and the most notable features would be parking areas associated with the station alternatives. The Ripon Station alternative would also have a pedestrian bridge crossing the tracks

63 Alignments The alignment alternatives would require minor vegetation removal, tree trimming, intersection and driveway modifications, new or modified culverts, and new or modified bridge structures. Alternatives MMO-1a, and MMO-1b would be built along existing rail segments adjacent to SR 99. Alignments built alongside existing rail corridors that pass through flat landscapes in suburban, urban, and rural landscapes would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Landscaped Freeways Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b would both pass by landscaped freeway portions of SR 99 in San Joaquin County (segment post mile [PM] ). The Ripon Station also falls within this segment. This portion of freeway starts at the Stanislaus River and travels north. The alignment comes in close proximity to some existing mature trees and could affect those trees and ground covers along the ramp. The Ripon Station would not affect any trees or shrubs along the freeway or ramp but could affect some groundcovers planted along the ramp. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Stations Station Alternatives SJF-2, TV-1, TV-2, Existing Tracy Station, Downtown Tracy Station, River Islands Station, and stations in MMO-1a and MMO-1b (Downtown Manteca Station, Ripon Station, and Modesto Station) would require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking and would result in a potentially significant impact. Station platforms would not be a prominent visual feature associated with new station alternatives. However, visual changes resulting from surface parking lots and parking structures (all station alternatives) would alter the existing visual landscape and would result in a potentially significant impact. Alternatives SJF-2, West Tracy Station A-3, Existing Tracy Station, River Islands Station, Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station, and Ripon Station (part of Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b) would also have pedestrian bridges crossing the tracks that would also result in a potentially significant impact. Building removal associated with Alternative SJF-2 to construct the parking facilities for the station would have less than significant impacts as the buildings to would not be removed do not constitute important forms for the local visual character. Alternative LS-1 (variant 1) would remove the Western Pacific Railway Depot which would result in a potentially significant cultural resource impact due to its historic status. However, the building is currently blighted and detracts from the existing visual setting and this condition would be removed under Alternative LS-1 (variant 1). Alternative LS-1 (variant 2) would construct the parking facilities for the station and would have less than significant cultural resource impacts on the Western Pacific Railway Depot which would not be removed; visually, the blighted building would remain. Alternative LS-1 variant 3 would construct the parking facilities for the station and relocate the Western Pacific Railway Depot, resulting in less than significant cultural resource impacts. However, views of the Western Pacific Railway Depot would improve through building restoration with Alternative LS-1 (variant 3)

64 West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 would result in a high degree of landform alteration within a hilly environment. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by adding transportation infrastructure to the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail station and would result in a significant impact. Utility lines going to new stations would create new, vertical visual intrusions into sensitive viewsheds and would result in a potentially significant impact. Alignments The Centerville line expansion and Oakland-Niles Subdivision connection at Industrial Parkway and track upgrade improvements would be alignments built alongside existing rail corridors that pass through flat landscapes in suburban, urban, and rural landscapes would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Impacts along these alignments would be less than significant. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would also be mostly built along existing rail lines and would affect views from scenic routes (SR 238/Mission Boulevard, SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, and Pleasanton Sunol Road). As described above, there is a direct correlation and overlap between the existing visual character and quality of a surrounding landscape and scenic route designation. These routes are valued and protected due to the quality of views that are available from those corridors and the State, Alameda County, and the City of Fremont have, thus, established protection measures to ensure that projects do not degrade the existing visual character and quality of views available from scenic routes. Under Alternative CNS-1a, the new bridge over Alameda Creek would be much more prominent and visible than the Niles Subdivision and the low-profile SR 238/Mission Boulevard Bridge over Alameda Creek. This would intensify the amount of rail infrastructure and conflict with the existing visual character of rail and road infrastructure at this location, lowering the existing visual quality of views associated with the Alameda County and City of Fremont designated scenic route. These changes would affect and be visible to recreational viewers on Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users on SR 238/Mission Boulevard, residents adjacent to the bridge, and rail passengers traveling by on adjacent tracks. East of SR 238/Mission Boulevard, the alternatives would be located within a hilly and scenic area where vegetation clearing to accommodate construction, creating areas of cut and fill, and installing retaining walls and rock fall and debris flow fencing would remove vegetation, create landscape scars, and make these four alternatives more visually prominent. Under all alternatives, vegetation removal would permanently remove scenic resources by cutting down mature trees and shrubs, which would degrade views seen from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, Sunol, NCRY, and recreational areas associated with Vallejo Mill Park and the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course, in an area that is noted for its scenic resources and views. This would result in significant impacts where the alternative alignments comes close the scenic routes and recreation areas. Vegetation removal would also make landscape scars more visible. Tall, utilitarian-looking retaining walls that emphasize the presence of the rail line would also be introduced under all alternatives and would likely be perceived as a negative addition to the visual landscape given the existing scenic nature of views associated with Niles Canyon, especially when

65 compounded with vegetation removal. These large, 5- to 20-foot-tall wall surfaces would range from being moderately to highly visible from the Vallejo Mill Park parking lot (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), along the segments of Niles Canyon Road that are just north of the park (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), and at the retaining wall location that is just east of the NCRY Brightside Yard (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b) because these roadside vegetation already fairly sparse at these locations or vegetation removal would open up and more directly expose views to the affected areas. Retaining walls would also be visible where the Sunol double track crosses Pleasanton Sunol Road, just before its northern terminus (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, and CNS-2b), and where the northern connection (Alternative CNS-2a) and Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS- 1b, and CNS-1c) parallel Pleasanton Sunol Road because there would be little to obscure views of the walls. Retaining walls associated with the Hearst double track would also be visible from the Castlewood Country Club Valley Golf Course (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c). Sections of 20-foot-tall rock fall fence or 10-foot-tall debris flow fencing, 3-foot-tall concrete barriers, and hillside anchor cables would also be visible along portions of SR 84/Niles Canyon Road that parallel closely to the NCRY upgrades (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b). These feature would stand out in this naturalized setting if not properly designed, further degrading the character and quality of existing views from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road. Under Alternative CNS-2b, the southern connection would physically and visually alter view of and from SR 84/Niles Canyon Roadway. The combination of vegetation removal and the inclusion of the proposed built features would affect sensitive viewers by removing and altering scenic resources associated with scenic routes and recreation areas, emphasizing the presence of the rail line, and degrading the existing visual landscape, which would likely be negative received given the existing scenic route protections and scenic nature of views associated with Niles Canyon. Therefore, impacts related to Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b are considered significant. New segments associated with Alternatives TL-2a and TL-4a would be constructed through hilly terrain would result in a high degree of landform alteration. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by adding transportation infrastructure to the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail corridor and would result in a significant impact. Bridge surfaces and facades that would be visible and exposed to sensitive viewers could result in potentially significant impacts by increasing the amount of transportation infrastructure present within sensitive, high-quality viewsheds and would result in a potentially significant visual impact. Relocated railroad signals, safety gates, signal houses, and power poles wound not affect visual resources or the existing visual quality, as these are existing visual elements that will be shifted slightly in the landscape. New signal houses could stand out in and detract from the landscape, depending on the color of materials used to construct the signal houses, and result in potentially significant visual impacts. Routine vegetation maintenance would have less than significant visual impacts. Landscaped Freeways The Ripon Station (part of Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b) could affect some groundcovers planted along the ramp Caltrans-designated landscaped freeway segment of SR 99 and result in potentially significant visual impacts

66 Significance with Application of Mitigation The mitigation value of proposed mitigation is reviewed below: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 will provide landscape treatment at all parking improvements and will reduce impacts associated with vegetation removal for parking improvements for all alternatives to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible bridge surfaces, parking structures, retaining walls, and pedestrian bridges to improve aesthetics and will reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level by ensuring that bridge surfaces, parking structures and pedestrian bridges are designed to be aesthetically pleasing and complementary to the surrounding cultural and natural environments. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will also ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to the Southern Connection to improve aesthetics and reduce impacts. The application of mitigation would likely reduced impacts associated with southern connection under Alternative CNS-2b to a less-than-significant level. However, impacts associated with the Alameda Creek Bridge under Alternative CNS-1a and impacts associated with the NCRY under Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b would not be reduced to a less-than-significant level and are considered significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.3 will ensure selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain and will reduce the visual impacts of grading in a hilly landscape but not to a less-than-significant level in association with Alternatives TL-2a, TL-4a and West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 where impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.4 will require undergrounding of new utilities and would reduce the impact of new utility lines for new stations to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, and signal houses to ensure that new features recede in the visual landscape and reduce impacts. However, impacts associated with landscape modifications and exposure due to vegetation removal associated with Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would not be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, this impact is significant and unavoidable for those alternatives. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.6 will replace any vegetation damaged by ACEforward facilities and ensure that visual quality and classification of landscaped freeways are not affected, resulting in less-than-significant impacts to landscaped freeways. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternatives SJF-2, CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, TV-1, TV-2, TL-2a, TL-4a, West Tracy Station A-1, West Tracy Station A-2,

67 West Tracy Station A-3, Existing Tracy Station, Downtown Tracy Station, River Islands Station, Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station, LS-1 (variant 1), MMO-1a, and MMO-1b. Mitigation Measure AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities Surface parking lots will be planted with trees and groundcovers to improve project aesthetics and to provide shade. Parking structures will also provide landscaping in planter beds that are located around the perimeter of the structure. If space allows, street trees will also be planted in associated with surface parking lots and parking structures. Shrubs may also be utilized, if space allows. All landscaping will be designed to ensure passenger safety (e.g., ensuring that security cameras and safety lighting are not obscured). No invasive plant species will be used under any circumstances. In addition, plant palettes will utilized drought-tolerant plant species and should have a strong emphasis on California native plant species that are appropriate for the given site. An irrigation and maintenance program will be implemented during the plant establishment period and carried on, as needed, to ensure plant survival. However, design of the landscaping plan will maximize the use of planting zones that are water efficient. Landscaped areas will be irrigated with a smart watering system that evaluates the existing site conditions and plant material against weather conditions to avoid overwatering of such areas. To avoid undue water flows, the irrigation system will be managed in such a manner that any broken spray heads, pipes, or other components are fixed within 1 2 days, or the zone or system will be shut down until it can be repaired. Mitigation Measure AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways Designs of parking structures will evaluate similar, local structures with historic value or that are well-designed and use these features as design precedent to develop designs for parking structures that complement the cultural and natural landscape, are aesthetically pleasing, and minimize the effects of visual intrusion of the ACEforward facilities on the landscape. Where no local design precedent exists, the designer will research structure designs outside of, but near, the local area. Attention will be paid to design details to ensure that parking structures are complementary to their surroundings do not create additional visual discordance in the landscape. The project will implement an aesthetic design treatment for new parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, and bridges and retaining walls with high visibility. Choosing earth-toned colors for the surfaces will be less distracting to viewers than light or brightly colored surfaces. The design motif applied to structures will reflect a combination of naturally colored surfaces and surfaces that are textured to appear as natural materials (e.g., rock or cobble) or that incorporates a design theme (e.g., wildlife and plants of local, native oak woodlands; traditional architectural elements such as inset panels; or other design reflecting local heritage or environment) using form liners. This will reduce visual monotony, soften verticality, reduce glare, and be more visually pleasing to viewers than plain surfaces for retaining walls, exterior facing barriers and girders on bridges that will be visible to traffic or recreational viewers passing under the overcrossing, decking, abutments and side supports, and columns. Nearby examples of such treatments include I-5/French Camp interchange in Stockton and SR 99/Sheldon Road overcrossing in Elk Grove. Non-local examples include Maryland

68 in Prince Georges County, Maryland; US 54/East Kellogg Drive and South Oliver Street Interchange in Wichita, Kansas; and Roberts Road Bridge in Los Gatos, California. Roughened retaining wall surfaces would soften the verticality of the wall faces by providing visual texture and reducing the amount of smooth surface that can reflect light. Furthermore, if possible, a plantable wall surface, such as a retaining wall structure that allows interstices for planting will be evaluated for use as a possible best management practice to help introduce more landscaping. A nearby example includes the slopes east and west of the Rocklin Road/I-80 undercrossing. However, a plantable wall surface will not be used if it would require more space and create a greater impact on adjacent natural landscape. The color of the wall will also be carefully considered. Studies have shown that structures 2 to 3 degrees darker than the color of the general surrounding area create less of a visual impact than matching or lighter hues (U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management 2008). In general, light buff/tan, brown, or gray colors stand out more than darker colors such as deep browns, deep red-browns, and deep warm grays that have the ability to complement the surrounding vegetation. Mitigation Measure AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain Prior to construction mobilization, the SJRRC will develop a grading and planting plan that identifies site-specific measures to remediate exposed soil and terrain to create a smooth transition between disturbed and natural habitats and to mitigate visual effects. The term construction mobilization is the moment approval has been given for any materials and supplies, construction equipment, construction facilities and staging, and staffing to be physically on-site and for site modifications to begin. Existing information, such as topographical maps, vegetative surveys or records, and photographs, that show preexisting, site-specific (or reference site) conditions prior to the construction will be evaluated and used as tools for restoring disturbed sites. In general, however, the majority of the sites will be evaluated for restoration to native habitat due to the amount of terrain alteration and vegetation and habitat loss that could result from construction of the alignment and station alternatives in hilly areas. At a minimum, the grading and revegetation plans will meet the following performance standards. Access roads to stations in hilly areas will utilize the existing terrain as an asset to create curvilinear roadways that locate the access roads parallel to slopes. Access roads running perpendicular to slopes will be avoided. For example, the West Tracy Station A-1 generally uses this approach. However, the access road would need to be shifted slightly west near where the access road enters the station parking lot, to run more parallel and less perpendicular to the small knoll. This would reduce the visibility of the access road and make it more harmonious with the natural terrain. This technique will not be used where doing so would constitute a negative impact on sensitive habitats or sensitive species that would outweigh the reduction of visual effects. Surface parking areas will utilize the natural terrain, as well, except where slopes would exceed American Disability Act access standards. This will create a subtle, gently undulating surface parking lots with visual variety. All terrain will be designed and graded to be rounded, avoiding sharp angles and steep or abrupt grade breaks

69 Special attention will be paid to transitions between undisturbed and disturbed terrains to ensure that the transition appears as natural as possible and to blend the lines between the two for a natural, organic appearance. In addition, the site will be visually surveyed prior to any vegetation removal for the presence of rock outcroppings, downed trees, or similar features. Features such as live and downed trees salvaged during site preparation and excavation activities will be placed to mimic natural patterns during reclamation to provide visual congruity once revegetation plantings mature and to restore the habitat values they provide. All plantings will be native and indigenous to the area, and no invasive plant species will be used under any conditions. Mitigation Measure AES-2.4: Underground new utilities Where feasible, the SJRRC will underground new utilities to minimize their visual intrusion upon the landscape. Undergrounding new utilities will not be used where implementation would constitute an adverse impact on sensitive habitats or sensitive species that would outweigh the reduction of visual effects. In such cases, the project engineer will identify site-specific location adjustments to avoid mature trees and to strategically locate new transmission lines along designated scenic routes in a manner that reduces the visual impacts to scenic resources and views along those routes. Implementation of this measure will minimize the effects on existing visual quality and character that would result from removal and pruning of mature vegetation along proposed new transmission lines. This measure will reduce the number of trees and shrubs that will be removed because of the installation of transmission lines and development of access roads. Mitigation Measure AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system New fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the poles associated with the overhead contact system associated with the alignments will be colored or painted a shade that is two to three shades darker than the general surrounding area. Colors will be chosen from the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Standard Environmental Colors Chart CC-001: June Because color selection will vary by location, the facility designer will employ the use of color panels evaluated from key observation points during common lighting conditions (front light versus backlighting) to aid in the appropriate color selection. Color selection will be made for the coloring of the most prevalent season. Panels will be a minimum of 3 feet by-2 feet in dimension and will be evaluated from various distances within 1,000 feet to ensure the best possible color selection. All paints used for the color panels and structures will be color matched directly from the physical color chart, rather than from any digital or color-reproduced versions of the color chart. Paints will be of a dull, flat, or satin finish to reduce potential for glare, and the use of glossy paints for surfaces will be avoided. Appropriate paint type will be selected for the finished structures to ensure longer durability of the painted surfaces. The appropriate operating agency or organization will maintain the paint color over time

70 Additional, aesthetic considerations will also be considered when selecting pole design for the overhead contact system. Different pole designs, including round poles, square poles, and multiface poles, have different characteristics. Some individuals find square poles to be aesthetically less desirable due to their angularity. In addition, the SJRRC will consider options to reduce pole diameter with increased pole thickness instead of wider poles with lesser thickness. Aesthetic considerations will be balanced with other considerations including cost, safety, maintenance, and durability. The SJRRC will also evaluate the potential to house overhead contact system wire-tensioning weights inside larger diameter poles. Mitigation Measure AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways The SJRRC will work with the appropriate Caltrans district landscape architect to determine if disturbed portions of landscaped freeways require replanting and to what extent. At a minimum, trees and shrubs will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio. Container sizes and species will be determined in coordination with the appropriate Caltrans district landscape architect. Disturbed groundcovers will be replanted to match existing groundcovers, unless the Caltrans district landscape architect specifies otherwise. Irrigation of replacement plants will also be coordinated with the appropriate Caltrans district landscape architect as watering may occur with existing irrigation systems or irrigation may need to be installed. Any irrigation lines that are damaged within the state ROW as a result of project construction will also be replaced per Caltrans standards and in coordination with the appropriate Caltrans district landscape architect. No invasive plant species will be planted under any circumstances. Impact AES-3 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Operation of near-term improvements could substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. Potentially significant (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, TV-2, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-1, West Tracy Station A-2, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2) Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives) AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain AES-2.4: Underground new utilities AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system Significant and unavoidable (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, and West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2) Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives) Impact Characterization Officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways and county- and city-designated scenic roadways are considered in this analysis. Table lists officially designated and eligible state scenic highways within 3 miles of the near-term improvements and Table lists county- and

71 city-designated scenic routes within 3 miles of the near-term improvements. Table I-2.1 in Appendix I-2, Scenic Route Screening, includes a preliminary screening of near-term alternatives within 3 miles of officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways to determine the alternatives requiring further analysis. Similarly, Table I-2.2 in Appendix I-2 includes a preliminary screening of near-term alternatives within 3 miles of county- and city-designated scenic routes. Development, terrain, and vegetation often preclude views of the near-term alternatives from scenic routes that are within 3 miles. Because views are not available, there would be no impact resulting from those near-term alternatives to those scenic routes. Therefore, such cases have been excluded from the analysis and are identified in Appendix I-2. Scenic routes that could potentially provide views of the alternatives are also identified in Appendix I-2. The scenic routes that are evaluated in this analysis include the following, by segment. San Jose to Fremont: Alternative SJF-1 is directly adjacent to and would be visible from SR 87 in San Jose. Centerville/Niles/Sunol: Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b are within 0.2 mile of and would be visible from state-designed and eligible portions of I-680 in Alameda County. All alternatives are within 0.2 mile of and would be visible from officially designed and eligible portions of SR 84 in Alameda County. Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b cross and would be visible from Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b all cross and would be visible from SR 238/Mission Boulevard in Alameda County. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b all cross and run parallel to and would be visible from Pleasanton Sunol Road and Niles Canyon Road in Alameda County. Alternative CNS-2a crosses and would be visible from Kilkare Road in Alameda County. Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b parallel would be visible from Palomares Road in Alameda County. Tri-Valley: Alternative TV-1 is located within 0.84 mile of and may be fleetingly visible from state-designed and eligible portions of I-680 in Alameda County. Alternative TV-2 is approximately 0.08 mile away and would be visible from Vasco Road in Livermore and Alameda County. Alternative TV-2 is approximately 0.1 mile away and would be visible from Patterson Pass Road in Alameda County. Altamont: Alternative A-1 is located within approximately 0.25 mile of and would be visible from state eligible portions of I-580 in Alameda County. Alternative A-1 is also parallel to and would be visible from Altamont Pass Road in Alameda County. Tracy to Lathrop: Alternatives TL-1, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-2, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2 are located within 3 miles of state- and countydesignated scenic portions of I-580 in San Joaquin County and would be visible to some degree. Alternatives TL-2a and TL-4a are approximately 0.04 mile away and West Tracy Station A-1 access road connects to alignments and the station and would be visible from Patterson Pass Road in Alameda County. West Tracy Station A-4 is approximately 1.9 miles away, West Tracy Station A-5 is approximately 1.6 miles away, and Existing Tracy Station is approximately 2.1 miles away and the alternatives may be slightly visible from Corral Hollow Road, west of I-580, in San Joaquin County

72 Impact Differences by Segment San Jose to Fremont Alternative SJF-1 would add additional storage tracks that would be consistent with the existing storage tracks. Vegetation removal and trimming would be minimal. Because Alternative SJF-1 is located at a lower elevation than SR 87, these minimal changes would not be notable and the visual quality of views associated with the scenic route would not change. Centerville/Niles/Sunol Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b cross and would be visible from Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont. In addition, CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b all cross and would be visible from SR 238/Mission Boulevard in Alameda County. Bridge structures are already present at these locations. Replaced bridges would look visually similar to existing structures, but could result in vegetation removal and grading to accommodate the replacement which, along with new materials that are not weathered, and are likely to make bridge replacements stand out in the visual landscape. In addition, new bridges would increase the amount of bridge infrastructure present at these locations and could affect views if not properly designed. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b are built along existing rail segment. However, Niles Canyon is hilly and scenic with dense trees and shrubs. Vegetation would obscure a large portion of visual changes resulting from the alternative. However, as described under Impact AES-2, space needed for construction, areas of cut and fill, retaining walls, and rock fall and debris flow fencing would remove portions of plant cover on hillsides and create landscape scars and the proposed alternatives more visually prominent. Such views created by Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS- 1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, or CNS-2b would be visible from Pleasanton Sunol Road, SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Kilkare Road, and Palomares Road where the roadway comes close the alignment and vegetation is sparse. Rock barriers and debris fencing would also be visible and could stand out in this naturalized setting if not properly designed. Alternative CNS-2b would also require modification to SR 84/Niles Canyon Roadway to bridge the roadway for the southern connection. This structure would lower the elevation of SR 84/Niles Canyon Road and introduce new retaining walls and a bridge to cross the roadway corridor. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would be visible from I-680 but the alternatives are at a lower alignment than the roadway and visual changes would be minor along the segments of the alignment near I-680 because the rail corridor is on flatter terrain and straighter than the segments within the canyon. As described under Impact AES-2, relocated railroad signals, safety gates, signal houses, and power poles wound not affect visual resources or the existing visual quality, as these are existing visual elements that will be shifted slightly in the landscape. Relocating railroad crossing and stop bar pavement markings would shift existing pavement markings and would not affect visual resources or visual quality. Installing concrete crossing panels adjacent to existing concrete crossing panels in the roadway surface would be consistent with the existing roadway conditions and would not alter visual resources or affect visual quality. New signal houses could stand out in and detract from the landscape, depending on the color of materials used to construct the signal houses

73 Tri-Valley Alternative TV-1 is located in middleground views seen from I-680. The upper levels of the parking structure may be slightly visible, but due to distance, it is not likely that parking structure would stand out amongst other development in the foreground and middleground that can be seen from I- 680, nor would it alter the visual quality of views associated with the scenic route. Alternative TV-2 would introduce a parking structure into the viewsheds of Vasco Road and Patterson Pass Road. The two- to three-level parking structure would be located in an area that is already developed with large-scale warehouse facilities. The parking structure would be of a similar scale. Altamont Alternative A-1 would realign a small portion of the existing rail segment along Altamont Pass Road. The realignment crosses grasslands and a gravel access road that is located between the tracks and Altamont Pass Road. The realignment would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would appear visually similar to existing conditions, only slightly shifted. This change would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Tracy to Lathrop Impacts associated with Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-2, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2 are discussed under Impact AES-2. As discussed under Impact AES-2, the greatest impact would result from constructing in hilly areas associated with the Altamont Hills. Alternatives TL-2a and TL-4a and West Tracy Station A-1 would be visible from Patterson Pass Road. Given the rural setting the change in views from Patterson Pass Road could be noticeable. West Tracy Station A-1 and West Tracy Station A-2 would be visible from I-580. Views from I-580 of West Tracy Station A-1 would be distant (station is 1.4 miles from the freeway) and are not likely to be noticeable. Views from I-580 of West Tracy Station A-2 would be more prominent (station is 0.3 mile from the freeway) and would be more noticeable than views of West Tracy Station A-1. Impacts to views from Corral Hollow Road due to West Tracy Station A-4 and West Tracy Station A-5 may be noticeable if not properly designed, but the alternatives would be built on flat land and due to distance and surrounding development, it is not likely that the stations would stand out amongst other development in the middleground, nor would it alter the visual quality of views associated with the scenic route. Views of Alternatives TL-1, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2 that are east of I-580 could also negatively impact views from I-580 if they are not properly designed; however, impacts would not be as severe as West Tracy Station A-2 since the alternatives would be built on much flatter or flat land amongst other development. Manteca to Modesto No scenic highways would be affected along this segment

74 Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation San Jose to Fremont Alternative SJF-1 would result in minimal changes that would not be notable when seen from SR 87 and would have a less than significant impact. Centerville/Niles/Sunol Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would be visible from I-680 but visual changes would be minor because there would be less earthwork needed on the flatter terrain. If Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b are not properly designed, new bridges could negatively impact views associated with the Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont and result in potentially significant impacts by increasing the amount of transportation infrastructure present within sensitive, highquality viewsheds. Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b would be built mostly along existing rail lines and would affect views from scenic routes (SR 238/Mission Boulevard, SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, Kilkare Road, and Palomares Road). These routes are valued and protected due to the quality of views that are available from those corridors and the State, Alameda County, and the City of Fremont have, thus, established protection measures to ensure that projects do not degrade the existing visual character and quality of views available from scenic routes. Under Alternative CNS-1a, the new bridge over Alameda Creek would be much more prominent and visible than the Niles Subdivision and the low-profile SR 238/Mission Boulevard Bridge over Alameda Creek. This would intensify the amount of rail infrastructure and conflict with the existing visual character of rail and road infrastructure at this location, lowering the existing visual quality of views associated with the Alameda County and City of Fremont designated scenic route. These changes would affect and be visible to recreational viewers on Alameda Creek Trail, roadway users on SR 238/Mission Boulevard, residents adjacent to the bridge, and rail passengers traveling by on adjacent tracks. North of SR 238/Mission Boulevard, the alternatives would be located within a hilly and scenic area where vegetation clearing to accommodate construction, creating areas of cut and fill, and installing retaining walls and rock fall and debris flow fencing would remove vegetation, create landscape scars, and make these four alternatives more visually prominent. Under all alternatives, vegetation removal would permanently remove scenic resources by cutting down mature trees and shrubs, which would degrade views seen from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road, Pleasanton Sunol Road, Kilkare Road, and Palomares Road, in an area that is noted for its scenic resources and views. This would result in significant impacts where the alternative alignments comes close the scenic routes. Vegetation removal would also make landscape scars more visible. Tall, utilitarian-looking retaining walls that emphasize the presence of the rail line would also be introduced under all alternatives and would likely be perceived as a negative addition to the visual landscape given the existing scenic nature of views associated with Niles Canyon, especially when compounded with vegetation removal. These large, 5- to 20-foot-tall wall surfaces would range from being moderately to highly visible along the segments of Niles Canyon Road that are just north of the park (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b) and at the retaining wall location that is just east of the

75 NCRY Brightside Yard (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b) because these roadside vegetation already fairly sparse at these locations or vegetation removal would open up and more directly expose views to the affected areas. Retaining walls would also be visible where the Sunol double track crosses Pleasanton Sunol Road, just before its northern terminus (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS- 1b, CNS-1c, and CNS-2b), and where the northern connection (Alternative CNS-2a) and Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c) parallel Pleasanton Sunol Road because there would be little to obscure views of the walls. Sections of 20-foot-tall rock fall fence or 10-foottall debris flow fencing, 3-foot-tall concrete barriers, and hillside anchor cables would also be visible along portions of SR 84/Niles Canyon Road that parallel closely to the NCRY upgrades (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b). These features would stand out in this naturalized setting if not properly designed, further degrading the character and quality of existing views from SR 84/Niles Canyon Road. Under Alternative CNS-2b, the southern connection would physically and visually alter view of and from SR 84/Niles Canyon Roadway. The combination of vegetation removal and the inclusion of the proposed built features would affect sensitive viewers by removing and altering scenic resources associated with scenic routes and recreation areas, emphasizing the presence of the rail line, and degrading the existing visual landscape, which would likely be negative received given the existing scenic route protections and scenic nature of views associated with Niles Canyon. Therefore, impacts related to Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b are considered significant. Under Alternative CNS-2b, the southern connection would physically and visually alter view of and from SR 84/Niles Canyon Roadway which would be a significant impact. Tri-Valley Alternative TV-1 would not likely stand out amongst other development in the foreground and middleground that can be seen from I-680 would have a less than significant impact. Alternative TV-2 would introduce a parking structure into the viewsheds of Vasco Road and Patterson Pass Road and, if not properly designed, could result in potentially significant impacts. Altamont The realignment of Altamont Pass Road, due to Alternative A-1, would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would appear visually similar to existing conditions, only slightly shifted. These changes would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality of these scenic routes. Impacts to these scenic routes would be less than significant. Tracy-Lathrop As discussed under Impact AES-2, West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 would result in a high degree of landform alteration within a hilly environment. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by adding transportation infrastructure to the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail station in an area visible from Patterson Pass Road and/or I-580 and would be a significant impact. Impacts to Corral Hollow Road and to views east of I-580 would be potentially significant if not properly designed (due to Alternatives TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-3,

76 West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2). Utility lines going to new stations would create new, vertical visual intrusions into sensitive viewsheds and would result in a potentially significant impact. Manteca to Modesto No scenic highways would be affected along this segment. Significance with Application of Mitigation Centerville/Niles/Sunol Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible bridge surfaces and retaining walls associated with Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS- 1c to improve aesthetics and reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to rock barriers and debris fences associated with Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b to ensure they recede into views and reduce impacts. However, impacts associated with landscape modifications and exposure due to vegetation removal would not be reduced to a lessthan-significant level. Therefore, this impact is significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to the Southern Connection under Alternative CNS-2b, to improve aesthetics and reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Tri-Valley Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will ensure that impacts to scenic routes from the introduction of the parking structure with Alternative TV-2 would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Tracy-Lathrop Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.3 will reduce the impacts of grading in a hilly landscape for West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 but not to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level related to views from Corral Hollow Road and I-580 due to Alternatives TL-1, TL- 2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A- 5, West Tracy Station B-1, and West Tracy Station B-2 by ensuring that landscaping helps parking facilities to blend with the surrounding environment and that parking structures and pedestrian bridges are designed to be aesthetically pleasing and complementary to the surrounding cultural and natural environments. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.4 will reduce impacts related to new utility lines to new stations to a less-than-significant level by requiring new utilities to be underground

77 Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, CNS-2b, TV-2, TL-2a, TL-2b, TL-4a, TL-4b, West Tracy Station A-1, West Tracy Station A-2, West Tracy Station A-3, West Tracy Station A-4, West Tracy Station A-5, West Tracy Station B- 1, and West Tracy Station B-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.4: Underground new utilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Impact AES-4 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Operation of near-term improvements could create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Potentially significant AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-4.1: Apply minimum lighting standards Significant and unavoidable (West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2) Less than significant (all other near-term alternatives)

78 Impact Characterization Station Options Station option Alternatives SJF-2, TV-1, TV -2, Existing Tracy Station, Downtown Tracy Station, Existing Lathrop Manteca Station, and LS-1 would construct new parking areas in proximity to the existing station. West Tracy Stations A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, B-1, B-2, the River Islands Station, Relocated Lathrop/Manteca Station, and the Downtown Manteca Station, Ripon Station, and Modesto Station (part of Alternatives MMO-1a and MMO-1b) alternatives would construct new station platforms and parking areas where none presently exist. West Tracy Stations A-1 and A-2 would introduce stations in hilly areas where there is little to no development. None of the station alternatives would construct new station terminals or buildings; therefore, there would be no new interior building lighting associated with the alternatives. Parking garage, parking lot, access road, and platform lighting could include standard lighting or LED lighting for security purposes that could affect sensitive receptors if not properly designed. Such lighting could result in significant impacts if the lighting spilled outside the site boundaries, creating a new source of nuisance lighting or glare for adjacent sensitive viewers. LED lights can negatively affect humans by increasing nuisance light and glare, in addition to increasing ambient light glow, if proper shielding is not provided and blue-rich white light lamps (BRWL) are used (International Dark-Sky Association 2010a, 2010b, 2015). The use of BRWL LED lighting would amplify impacts and result in a substantial source of nighttime light and glare that could negatively impact nighttime views in the area. Alignments No nighttime lighting is proposed along the alignment corridors. Incremental increases in glare would occur along alternative segments where trees and shrubs are removed to accommodate construction of the alignments, such as along Alternative SJF-1 and Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS-1c, CNS-2a, and CNS-2b. However, these changes would not substantially increase glare because vegetation outside the ROW would remain to shade the corridor. The expansion of existing bridges would not increase glare, as bridge surfaces are a pre-existing condition. However, new bridge structures would create new surfaces to reflect light. New bridges would typically be made of steel and concrete that would not substantially increase glare due to the nature of the material and the bridge surfaces would not be exposed to viewers, in most cases. Visible bridge structures include the Paseo Padre Parkway underpass (Alternatives CNS-1a and CNS-1b), Alameda Creek Bridge (Alternative CNS-1a), SR 84/SR 238/Mission Boulevard underpass (Alternative CNS-1a), Dresser Bridge (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), Farewell Bridge (Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b), Pleasanton Sunol Road underpass for the Sunol double track (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, CNS- 1c, and CNS-2b), Pleasanton Sunol Road underpass for the Hearst double track (Alternatives CNS- 1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c), and the Castlewood Golf Club underpass (Alternatives CNS-1a, CNS-1b, and CNS-1c). The southern connection for Alternative CNS-2b would also introduce new retaining wall and bridge surfaces to SR 84/Niles Canyon Road that could increase glare if not properly designed. Safety lighting at at-grade crossings would only be used when trains are passing and would not result in a notable increase in lighting in the area of any alternative during the short activation time. All alignment alternatives would introduce a small source of light from the train headlights when traveling at night. Train headlights are a pre-existing condition along segments with existing tracks and would constitute a nominal increase in passing trains that would not increase light in any one

79 location for more than a few moments as the trains pass. In locations where pre-existing tracks are not present, vehicle lights moving on local roadways are common and in close proximity and, in many cases, development along the corridor currently provide nighttime lighting. In addition, the trains would move through the study area at a high speed and would not introduce a fixed source of new lighting that would impact sensitive viewer groups. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Station Options Parking garage, parking lot, access road, and platform lighting associated with the station option alternatives would result in potentially significant increases in nighttime lighting if not properly designed, creating light spill and a new source of nuisance lighting and glare for adjacent sensitive viewers. BRWL LED lighting would amplify impacts. Alignments Incremental increases in glare would occur along alternative segments where trees and shrubs are removed to accommodate construction of the alignments would not substantially increase glare because vegetation outside the ROW would remain to shade the corridor. Proposed bridges would not substantially increase glare due to materials uses and the bridge surfaces would not be exposed to viewers, in most cases. Visible bridge structures would also introduce new retaining wall and bridge surfaces that could increase glare seen by sensitive viewers and result in potentially significant impacts. Safety lighting at at-grade crossings and train headlights would not result in a notable increase in lighting in the area of any alternative. Significance with Application of Mitigation Station Options Mitigation Measures AES-4.1 will ensure that the change to existing nighttime light and glare levels relative to parking garage, parking lot, and platform lighting at stations are nominal and will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level for all alternatives except West Tracy Station A-1 and A- 2. West Tracy Station A-1 and A-2 would introduce stations in hilly areas where there is not a great deal of development and result in significant and unavoidable impacts. Alignments Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible bridge structures and would serve the dual purpose of decreasing glare and reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to all near-term improvements

80 Mitigation Measure AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-4.1: Apply minimum lighting standards All artificial outdoor lighting will be limited to safety and security requirements, designed using Illuminating Engineering Society s design guidelines and in compliance with International Dark- Sky Association approved fixtures. All lighting is designed to have minimum impact on the surrounding environment and will use downcast, cut-off type fixtures that direct the light only towards objects requiring illumination. Shielding will be utilized, where needed, to ensure light pollution is minimized. Therefore, lights will be installed at the lowest allowable height and cast low-angle illumination while minimizing incidental light spill onto adjacent properties, open spaces, or backscatter into the nighttime sky. The lowest allowable illuminance level will be used for all lighted areas and the amount of nighttime lights needed to light an area will be minimized to the highest degree possible. Light fixtures will have non-glare finishes that will not cause reflective daytime glare. Lighting will be designed for energy efficiency and have daylight sensors or be timed with an on/off program. Parking garage lighting will be designed to meet safety requirements but will use locational motion activated sensing to use regular intensity lighting while a person is near a row of vehicles that relays to lower intensity lighting after a period of inactive movement, when there are no persons near the vehicles. Lights will provide good color rendering with natural light qualities with the minimum intensity feasible for security, safety, and personnel access. Lighting, including light color rendering and fixture types, will be designed to be aesthetically pleasing. All LED lighting will avoid the use of blue-rich white light lamps and use a correlated color temperature that is no higher than 3,000 Kelvin (International Dark-Sky Association 2010a, 2010b, 2015). Wherever possible and pragmatic, the District will use fixtures and lighting control systems that conform to International Dark-Sky Associations Fixture Seal of Approval program. In addition, LED lights will use shielding to ensure nuisance glare and that light spill does not affect sensitive residential viewers. Luminaires will be chosen for the ability to provide horizontal and vertical beam control for better control in directing what is illuminated. Luminaires will also incorporate photometric reflector systems that are designed to reduce light pollution. Lights in parking lots and along pathways and station platforms will employ shielding to minimize offsite light spill, ambient light glow, and glare and be screened and directed away from residences and adjacent uses to the highest degree possible. The amount of nighttime lights used will be minimized to the highest degree possible to ensure that spaces are not unnecessarily over-lit, while still maintaining minimum adequate lighting to provide necessary visibility for security. For example, the amount of light can be reduced by limiting the amount of ornamental light posts to higher use areas and by using bollard lighting on travel way portions of pathways. Technologies to reduce light pollution evolve over time and design measures that are currently available may help but may not be the most effective means of controlling light pollution once the Project is designed. Therefore, all design measures used to reduce light pollution will employ

81 the technologies available at the time of Project design to allow for the highest potential reduction in light pollution Longer-Term Improvements Impacts and Mitigation Measures No longer-term improvements would occur in the Centerville/Niles/Sunol geographic segments. Therefore, there would be no construction or operation impacts within this segment associated with longer-term improvements. Longer-term improvement impacts in this segment is not discussed further. Impact AES-5 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Construction of longer-term improvements could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the alternative site and its surroundings, including scenic vistas, scenic highways and could create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Potentially significant AES-1.1: Install visual barriers between construction work areas and sensitive receptors AES-1.2: Limit construction near residences to daylight hours AES-1.3: Minimize fugitive light from portable sources used for construction AQ-2.5: Implement fugitive dust controls Less than significant Impact Characterization Construction impacts associated with longer-term improvements impacts would be the same as described for near-term improvements impacts under Impact AES-1. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Visual changes resulting from introducing construction activities and equipment into the viewsheds of all user groups would be temporary. Construction activities for any alternative would introduce heavy equipment and associated vehicles such as dozers, graders, scrapers, and trucks, into the viewshed. Depending on location, viewers could see staging areas, worker parking, and equipment and materials storage areas, which would add industrial-looking elements into viewsheds. Construction activities involving heavy equipment use, soil and material transport, and land clearing in the ROW, along public roadways, and at construction staging areas would create fugitive dust. Dust clouds could hinder views, including impacting views from scenic vista and scenic roadways, and would result in a potentially significant impact. Significance with Application of Mitigation Residential viewers could have construction activities occurring adjacent to their homes, or nearby, evoking a sense of invaded privacy and would result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1.1, AES-1.2, AES-1.3, and AQ-2.5 (see Section 4.3) will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level by installing visual barriers between construction

82 and sensitive receptors, limiting work to daylight hours adjacent to sensitive receptors, limiting construction lighting near sensitive receptors and limiting fugitive dust. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to all longer-term improvements. Mitigation Measure AES-1.1: Install visual barriers between construction work areas and sensitive receptors Refer to measure description under Impact AES-1. Mitigation Measure AES-1.2: Limit construction near residences to daylight hours Refer to measure description under Impact AES-1. Mitigation Measure AES-1.3: Minimize fugitive light from portable sources used for construction Refer to measure description under Impact AES-1. Mitigation Measure AQ-2.5: Implement fugitive dust controls Refer to measure description under Impact AQ-2a in Section 4.3. Impact AES-6 Operation of longer-term improvements could substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the alternative site and its surroundings, including scenic vistas. Level of Impact Potentially significant (Alternatives P-SJF-3, P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P- TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, P-BART-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV-5, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P- TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-DT, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, P-LS-1, P-MMO- MAN, P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b) Less than significant (all other longer-term alternatives) Mitigation Measures AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain AES-2.4: Underground new utilities AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways Level of Impact after Significant and unavoidable (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV- Mitigation 2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P- TL-DT [variant 3], and P-MME-1a/P-MME-1b re: Merced Station) Less than significant (all other longer-term alternatives)

83 Impact Characterization Like near-term improvements, visual changes resulting from operation and maintenance of longerterm improvements would affect residential viewers, roadway travelers, and recreationists adjacent to all alternatives. The intensity of the impact would vary depending on number of viewers present, proximity of viewers to the alternative, degree of physical change in the landscape, visibility of the physical change and alternative, volume of train traffic, and required maintenance. As identified in Table 4.1-2, there are several Caltrans designated landscaped freeways within view of alternatives. Table I-3.1 in Appendix I-3 includes a preliminary screening of near-term alternatives within 3 miles of landscaped freeways to determine the alternatives requiring further analysis. No alternatives would introduce any billboards or signs along segments of landscaped freeways. Therefore, an alternative would need to directly impact vegetation along a landscaped freeway segment to affect its designation. Alternatives that would not directly affect vegetation along landscaped freeway segments have been excluded from the analysis and are identified in Appendix I-3. The impacts associated with relocated railroad signals, safety gates, signal houses, and power poles; relocating railroad crossing and stop bar pavement markings; installing concrete crossing panels; and installing new signal houses would be the same as those discussed for the near-term improvements under Impact AES-2. All alignment alternatives would require routine vegetation maintenance in the ROW, along the rail line footprint. Viewers may see vegetation-clearing activities. Because farming, rail, and road maintenance are prevalent in the study area, these activities and equipment within the ROW would not likely constitute a visual impact. Impact Differences by Segment San Jose to Fremont Alternative P-SJF-1 would be built along an existing rail segment and SR 87 at the location of a current rail yard and would not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d would all cross landscaped freeway portions of US 101 (segment PM ) and SR 237 (segment PM ) in Santa Clara County. These alternatives may require that trees near the rail overpass, along the state ROW, be trimmed to accommodate the new tracks. However, the trees would likely not need to be removed. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d would all be built along existing rail segments in Santa Clara and Newark passing through flat landscapes in suburban, urban, and rural landscapes. Outside of the Alviso Baylands, the second track would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d would be built along existing rail segment through the adjacent Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge which is an area of high visual sensitivity. The Coyote Creek and Mud Slough Bridges would also be visible to waterbased recreationists and hikers on nearby trails, but their design is comparable with other bridges in the Baylands. Alternative P-SJF-2a would expand the existing berm, which would result in a

84 notable but less noticeable visual change. Alternative P-SJF-2b would raise and expand the existing berms for the existing and proposed tracks. Alternatives P-SJF-2c would remove the existing track and berms and all tracks would be built on a low-profile trestle structure through the wetlands. Alternative P-SJF-2d combines the approaches of Alternatives P-SJF-2b and P-SJF-2d and would raise and expand the existing berms for the southern half of the tracks and would replace the existing track and berms with a low-profile trestle for the northern half. This area is visually sensitive with scenic views over the Baylands. Raising the berms or constructing trestles would make the rail line more visually prominent, but these changes would not substantially alter the existing visual character or quality of Baylands views. Replacing the berms with a trestle structure may act to partially open and enhance views by removing a solid physical barrier with a semitransparent structure and reconnecting wetland habitats. Alternative P-SJF-3, at the existing Fremont Station, would require minor vegetation removal in an existing parking lot to accommodate construction of the expansion of the 4-story parking structure proposed as part of the near-term improvements. As discussed under Impact AES-2, the addition of a new parking structure just south of the Fremont Station would not substantially degrade the existing visual character which consists of commercial/light industrial buildings and parking lots. Similarly, the expansion of the near-term parking structure would also not substantially degrade the existing visual character. Centerville to Union City Stations All alternatives in this segment would include a new platform on the Oakland Subdivision just east of the BART Union City Station as well as a connecting pedestrian path. Alternatives P-UC-2a and P-UC-2b would also include trackwork and a platform at the Fremont Station for diesel multiple unit (DMU) use to allow transfer from DMU to regular ACE trains. The Union City Station already includes rail lines and BART infrastructure and the addition of a new platform along an existing rail line would only reinforce the existing transportation-dominated visual character. The Fremont Station already includes rail lines, platforms, and station infrastructure and the addition of a new platform along an existing rail line for Alternatives P-UC-2a and 2b would only reinforce the existing visual character. Alignments Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC-2b would include a small new segments of connecting rail line at the Shinn location and realignment of storage tracks at the Shinn Yard. Some alternatives would also include connecting track work if the near-term Centerville third track is built. The Shinn Yard is industrial in character and the BART route already traverses the area of the proposed connecting line and thus its addition would not degrade the visual quality of the surrounding area. Tri-Valley Alternative P-TV-2d would not involve new station or alignment improvements and would not result in aesthetic effects

85 Station Options Station impacts associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, and P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue segment), as well as Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, and P- BART-1 are discussed with the alignments below. Station improvements with Alternatives P-TV-3, P-TV-4 and P-TV-5 would include additional parking facilities at existing stations in Pleasanton, Livermore and Vasco. At the Pleasanton Station, Alternative P-TV-3 would include construction of a new four-story (three stories above ground; one below ground) parking structure at the location of the near-term surface parking lot on the south side of the tracks. The new parking structure would be located adjacent to the railroad, residences, and a public library and across the street from Pleasanton Middle School. New parking on the south side of the tracks would change the current visual context from vacant/open space and the near-term visual context of only a surface lot. The new structure could be perceived adversely without proper design treatments. At the Livermore Station, Alternative P-TV-4 would include construction of a new 4-story parking structure at the location of existing one -story commercial/light industrial buildings, parking and overhead utilities. The new structure would be adjacent to the railroad, existing two-story ACE Livermore Station parking garage, S. Livermore Avenue., and Railroad Avenue and would be across the street from the Bankhead Theater (which backs onto Railroad Avenue). Building removal would occur for Alternative P-TV-4. The buildings on Alternative P-TV-4 are light industrial and do not have a distinct architectural style. The area surrounding Alternative P-TV-4 has a unified architectural motif and removal of the buildings would remove the disjointed industrial land use. However, the new structure could be perceived adversely without proper design treatments. At the Vasco Road Station, Alternative P-TV-5 would consist of a 3-story parking structure (if the full build is not done in the near term). The alternative environment comprises the existing Vasco Road Station, which consists of one through-track, a station platform, and the station parking lot that are located north of the tracks, between industrial development and a multi-family residential development that is being constructed. The new parking structure would be placed within the existing surface parking lot and a vacant lot that is adjacent to commercial and industrial structures on the south, west, and east and the residential development being completed on the north. While a new structure would not change the visual character, which is dominated by commercial and industrial development, with the new residential development, the area will have a mixed visual character. However, the new structure could be perceived adversely by new residents without proper design treatments. Alternative P-TV-1d (shuttle bus connection to Isabel Avenue segment) would include a new BART station at Isabel. Alternative P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 would establish three stations (Isabel Avenue, Livermore, and Vasco Road stations) and a maintenance yard (Isabel Avenue Yard or Vasco Yard) along the extension route. These new stations and maintenance yard could be perceived adversely by new residents without proper design treatments. Alignments Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c would all be built and have a station platform in the median of I-580. The rail tracks for Alternatives P-TV-1a, P- TV-1c (DMU variant), P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, and P-TV-2c (DMU variant) would be built at-grade in the median and would be perceived as a visual continuation of the existing BART route

86 Alternatives P-TV-1a and P-TV-2a would require raising certain overpasses to provide a minimum 24-foot clearance to allow sufficient clearance for a standard railway underneath that would limit views from I-580 toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve. Alternatives P-TV- 1b and P-TV-2b would introduce elevated structures within the I-580 corridor to support the alignment and would be more visible to travelers on I-580 and to viewers adjacent to the corridor. The elevated structures would include a 20-foot-wide single-track concrete bridge that would be approximately 30 to 40 feet taller than the I-580 corridor. In addition, aerial structures would limit views toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve and would likely be more prominent when seen in views looking from the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve. Alternatives P-TV-1c (EMU variant) and P-TV-2c (EMU variant) would also use overhead contact system (OCS) to support electric multiple unit (EMU) technology. The OCS would constitute a new visual intrusion that detracts from the existing visual character of I-580 because there is no existing vegetation present to aid in screening the OCS, which would help to reduce the apparent scale of the OCS. Therefore, this new vertical element would increase the visual presence of utilities along the I- 580 corridor that would interrupt and detract from views. Alternative P-BART-1 would include at-grade BART tracks from Dublin-Pleasanton to an elevated structure at Isabel and then continue on in the I-580 median at-grade until the approach to the Greenville area at which point the alignment would elevate and reach an aerial station at Greenville. Elevated structures within the I-580 corridor to support the alignment and the elevated approach and station at Greenville and would be more visible to travelers on I-580 and to viewers adjacent to the corridor. In addition, aerial structures would limit views toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve and would likely be more prominent when seen in views looking from the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve. The Greenville Road viaduct and bridge over westbound I-580 (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P- TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c) and the elevated section of Alternative P-BART-1 near Greenville would be visible to sensitive viewers and would also likely result in a notable visual impact to I-580. Impacts resulting from Alternatives P-BART-2, P-BART-3, and P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue segment) are the same as those described above for Alternative P-BART-1 where the alignment and station are located along I-580. There would be no visual impacts where Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 continue subway underground because no above-ground views or visual resources would be impacted. Impacts to the existing rail line to between the Livermore ACE Station and the Vasco Road Station would be minimal because changes would occur within the existing rail right-of-way and would be visually consistent with existing conditions. Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel would be built along existing rail segments for most of the alternatives length, but would require new segments of rail line to be constructed through hilly terrain to connect the existing rail line to the other alternatives and existing rail lines. However, even though the area is hilly, it is already fairly disturbed from light industrial and off-road vehicle recreational land uses. Landscaped Freeways Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P- BART-2, and P-BART-3 would all pass by landscaped freeway portions of I-580 in Alameda County (segments PM and ). In addition, Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c,

87 P-BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 would also pass by landscaped freeway segments PM , , and along I-580 in Alameda County. Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV- 1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 would be located within the freeway median, which is paved, and would not impact any vegetation along the freeway. Altamont Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 would all require new segments of rail line to be constructed through hilly terrain that is protected by the Alameda County General Plan (Appendix H), in straighter lines, to shorten travel times associated with the existing rail line be reducing sinuosity. These alignment alternatives would construct tunnels under the Altamont Hills to create these straighter rail segments. The portions of the rail line that are in the tunnel would not be visible. Tunnel openings, areas of cut, retaining walls and cable railing would be seen where the tunnels daylight. This would be most obvious to rail users, but for travelers on I-580 and local roadways the portal areas would be visible in passing. Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-3 would also have segments built on a viaduct, where the deck would be approximately 65 feet above existing grade or less. In addition, Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2 would realign Altamont Pass Road to accommodate the new rail segments and would require vegetation removal. Although tunneling greatly reduces potential impacts, tunnel openings, areas of cut, retaining walls, cable railing, and viaduct structures would still result in a higher degree of landform alteration compared to other alignment alternatives. This would disrupt the visual quality of viewsheds by increasing rail and transportation infrastructure in the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail corridor. Like the near-term impacts discussed under Impact AES-2, new, replaced, and expanded bridges would not substantially alter visual resources because the structures would be replaced in the same location and would be in keeping with the existing visual environment. The Altamont Pass Road overhead (Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2), Carroll Road overhead (Alternative P-A-1), and Valley Retained Cut and Viaduct (Alternatives P-A-3) would be visible to sensitive viewers but would be similar to existing structures. Tracy to Lathrop Station Options All long-term improvements at stations in this segment consist of at-grade parking expansions with the exception of Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) which would include a multi-story parking structure associated with the Downtown Tracy Station. Alternative P-TL-A4 would also have a pedestrian bridge crossing the tracks that could block views to small degree. The majority of station alternatives are located on flat parcels of land and would require minor earthwork. However, Alternatives P-TL-A1 (improvements at West Tracy Station A-1) and P-TL- A2 (improvements at West Tracy Station A-2) would result in a higher degree of landform alteration compared to other alternatives because it is located in a hilly environment, and impacts would be the same as those discussed for West Tracy Station A-1 and A-2 under Impact AES-2 for near-term improvements. Building removal would occur for the Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) alternative to construct a parking structure for the Downtown Tracy Station. Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) would require

88 that a whole city block be demolished. This would degrade the existing visual character of cultural setting by replacing distinctive city development with a uniform parking structure. Station improvements with Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) would also require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of the parking structure. The remainder of station alternatives would be built on grassy or agricultural lands with no trees or shrubs. Lathrop to Stockton Building removal would occur for Alternative P-LS-1 to construct parking facilities at the North Lot 2 site for the Stockton station. The area surrounding Alternative P-LS-1 s North Lot 2 site consist of disjointed architectural styles and is somewhat blighted. Removal of the building at this site would remove the disjointed industrial and commercial land use. Manteca to Modesto Alternative P-MMO-RIP would be constructed on an undeveloped storage yard. Station Alternatives P-MMO-MAN and P-MMO-MOD would require building, parking lot, and vegetation removal to accommodate construction of the expanded station parking. Alternative P-MMO-MAN would remove the industrial Manteca Recycling Center and replace it with a surface parking lot. Alternative P-MMO-MOD would remove commercial uses associated with the Smart & Final grocery store and Taco Bell and replace it with a parking structure. Modesto to Merced Station Options Station platforms would not be a prominent visual feature associated with station alternatives, and the most notable features would be parking areas associated with the station alternatives. Building removal would occur for the Ceres Station and Merced Station (part of Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b) as well as for Atwater Station (part of Alternative P-MME-1b) to construct the parking facilities for the station. The areas surrounding the Ceres Station, and Atwater Station consist of disjointed architectural styles and are somewhat blighted. Removal of the building at these sites would remove the disjointed industrial and commercial land use. The area surrounding Merced Station is slightly blighted but there is a newer Dollar General store located on the site and new commercial construction is occurring on the adjacent lot, which are improving visual conditions in the area. The Merced Station alternative would require this newer development to be demolished and replaced with a parking structure. The Ceres Station and Turlock Station (part of Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b) elements would have pedestrian bridges crossing the tracks and would also require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking. The remainder of station alternatives would not have pedestrian bridges and would be built on grassy or agricultural lands with no trees or shrubs. Many of the new stations would require the installation of utility lines to carry electricity to power the facilities. This would introduce new vertical utility features that would disrupt the visual landscape from sensitive vantages. Stations would also require fence installation for safety. Chain link fencing is light gray and the color acts to limit views

89 Alignments The Modesto to Merced alignments (Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b) would be adjacent to residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses that border the tracks in Modesto, Bystrom, Ceres, Keyes, Turlock, Delhi, Livingston, Atwater, Fergus, Merced, and smaller rural development. SR 99 is a prominent transportation corridor that parallels the existing tracks. Local roadways, aboveground utility infrastructure (utility poles with lines), fencing, and sound barriers separating residences from the tracks and transportation corridors also contribute to the cultural environment. Residential, commercial, and rural development along the rail corridor is common to the valley cultural landscape. The industrial areas tend to be disjointed and detract from nearby suburban setting, The Modesto to Merced alignments would be mostly at-grade (except for waterbody crossings) within the UPRR ROW adjacent to SR 99. Thus, the tracks themselves would be consistent with and would not adversely change the existing visual character of the UPRR ROW and would not change the visual character of adjacent areas. The Modesto to Merced alignment would require modification of a number of at-grade crossings, existing overhead structures, and installation of new single-track bridge structures over waterbodies. Because the new track would be at the same-grade as the existing track, the top elevation of modified overhead structures would not be higher than existing overhead structures. New bridges would be installed mostly within the UPRR ROW and adjacent to existing bridges. The bridges would be more noticeable to motorists and other users in adjacent areas than the new track. Depending on design features, bridges could vary in aesthetic character from existing bridges. Landscaped Freeways Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would both pass by landscaped freeway portions of SR 99 in Stanislaus County (segment PM ) and would also cross landscaped freeway segments PM and in Stanislaus County and PM and in Merced County. Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would impact mostly grasses and potentially one tree along segment PM along the west side of the freeway in Stanislaus County. Landscaping on the east side of the freeway would not be impacted. Alternatives P-MME- 1a and P-MME-1b would impact mostly grasses and potentially one tree along segment PM along the west side of the freeway in Stanislaus County. However, Ceres Station also falls within this segment and would affect trees, shrubs, and groundcovers planted along the freeway and ramps. Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would impact mostly grasses along segment PM along the west side of the freeway in Stanislaus County. Landscaping on the east side of the freeway would not be impacted. Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would travel under the SR 99 Bridge over the rail line and would not impact trees or shrubs along segment PM in Merced County. Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would impact trees and shrubs along segment PM along the both sides of the freeway in Merced County to bridge the freeway. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Bridge surfaces and facades that would be visible and exposed to sensitive viewers could result in potentially significant impacts by increasing the amount of transportation infrastructure present within sensitive, high-quality viewsheds

90 Relocated railroad signals, safety gates, signal houses, and power poles wound not affect visual resources or the existing visual quality, as these are existing visual elements that will be shifted slightly in the landscape. New signal houses could stand out in and detract from the landscape, depending on the color of materials used to construct the signal houses, and result in potentially significant visual impacts. All alignment alternatives would require routine vegetation maintenance in the ROW, along the rail line footprint. Viewers may see vegetation-clearing activities. Because farming, rail, and road maintenance are prevalent in the study area, these activities and equipment within the ROW would not likely constitute a visual impact. San Jose to Fremont Station improvements Alternative P-SJF-3 would expand the parking structure constructed under Alternative SJF-2 in the near-term and would result in visual changes that would alter the existing visual landscape by requiring minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of additional station parking, resulting in a potentially significant impact. The addition of a second track along an existing track within the UPRR ROW would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Impacts along second-track alignments at the same grade as existing tracks in Newark and Santa Clara would be less than significant. However, the portions of Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d through the Alviso Baylands that are adjacent to the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge are more visually sensitive given the refuge, the open space setting, and value that recreationalists place on aesthetic character. Raising the berms (Alternatives P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d) would make the rail line more visually prominent, but these changes would not substantially alter the existing visual character or quality of Alviso Baylands views. Replacing the berms with a trestle structure (Alternatives P-SJF- 2c and P-SJF-2d) may act to partially open and enhance views by removing a solid physical barrier with a semi-transparent structure and reconnecting wetland habitats. The Coyote Creek and Mud Slough Bridges (all alternatives) would also be visible to water-based recreationists, but their design is comparable with other bridges in the Alviso Baylands and do not require mitigation. Because Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d would be built along existing rail segment through the Alviso Baylands and would not introduce railroad features inconsistent with existing railroad features, the visual impacts would be less than significant. Centerville to Union City The modifications at the Union City Station (Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC- 2b) and at the existing Fremont Station (Alternatives P-UC-2a and P-UC-2b) would be consistent with the current station visual character and would not result in significant impacts. The Shinn connection in all Union City alternatives would be built alongside an existing rail corridor that passes suburban landscape and would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality and impacts would be less than significant. Tri-Valley Visual changes resulting from parking structures (Alternatives P-TV-3, P-TV-4, and P-TV-5) a new pedestrian bridge for Alternative P-TV-3, and vegetation removal would alter the existing visual

91 landscape at the Pleasanton, Livermore, and Vasco Road Stations and would result in new prominent visual features which may result in potentially significant impacts if landscaping is not provided and if the structures are not properly designed. Building removal associated with Alternative P-TV-4 would remove the disjointed industrial and commercial land uses and would not be a significant impact. Alternatives P-TV-1a and P-TV-2a would require raising certain overpasses to provide clearance and result in potentially significant impacts by affecting the existing visual character of I-580 by increasing the visual prominence of overcrossing structures along the I-580 corridor that would interrupt and detract from views. Alternatives P-TV-1c (DMU variant) and P-TV-2c (DMU variant) would be at-grade and perceived as a visual continuation of the existing BART route beyond Dublin into east Livermore and would result in less-than-significant impacts. Alternatives P-TV-1c (EMU variant) and P-TV-2c (EMU variant) would also be at-grade; however, these alternatives would introduce OCS infrastructure and result in potentially significant impacts by affecting the existing visual character of I-580 by increasing the visual presence of utilities along the I-580 corridor that would interrupt and detract from views. The raised overpasses associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a and P-TV-2a, the aerial alignments associated with Alternatives P-TV-1b, P-TV-2b, and aerial structures near Greenville associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c and those associated with P-BART-1 would introduce dominant visual obstructions into views available from I-580, Altamont Hills, and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve and would limit views toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve from surrounding vantages and impacts are considered significant. Alternatives P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue segment), P-BART- 2 and P-BART-3 would have less than significant effects because they would be located in the I-580 median at-grade and then transition to an underground alignment to Downtown Livermore and be adjacent to existing railroad lines from downtown to Vasco. However, the new BART stations in downtown Livermore and along Isabel Avenue and the new BART station and maintenance yard along Isabel Avenue and Vasco Road that are associated with Alternatives P-TV-1d, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 could have significant effects if not properly designed. Connection from Existing Alignment, Connection from Altamont Tunnel, Connection from Long Tunnel Facilities with Existing Alignment, and Facilities with Altamont Tunnel or Long Tunnel would blend with the existing visual environment in an area that is already fairly disturbed and visual impacts would be less than significant. Altamont Tunneling greatly reduces potential impacts associated with Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3; however, tunnel openings, areas of cut, retaining walls, cable railing, and viaduct structures would still result in a high degree of landform alteration and result in potentially significant impacts by increasing rail and transportation infrastructure in the landscape and breaking up the compositional balance between natural landforms and vegetation and by changing natural landscapes to a rail corridor. Tracy to Lathrop Parking improvements associated with Alternatives P-TL-A1 (West Tracy Station A-1) and P-TL- A2 (West Tracy Station A-2) would result in a high degree of landform alteration within a hilly environment and impacts would be the same as those discussed for West Tracy Station A-1 and A

92 under Impact AES-2. Visual changes resulting from surface parking lots and parking structures for other alternatives would alter the existing visual landscape which would result in a potentially significant impact. Building removal and vegetation removal associated with parking improvements with Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) would result in a significant impact. Lathrop to Stockton Building removal associated with Alternative P-LS-1 s North Lot 2 would remove the disjointed industrial and commercial land uses but the new parking improvements could result in potentially significant impacts if not properly designed. Manteca to Modesto Alternative P-MMO-RIP would result in a less than significant impact because it would be constructed on an undeveloped storage yard. Alternative P-MMO-MAN would result in significant impacts because it would remove commercial buildings that contribute to the surrounding area because of their site landscaping and introduce a parking structure. Alternative P-MMO-MOD would remove the industrial land uses in an area that is fairly disjointed and would be a less than significant impact. Modesto to Merced Station Options Station platforms would not be a prominent visual feature associated with station alternatives. However, visual changes resulting from parking improvements (all stations) and pedestrian bridge overcrossings (Ceres Station, and Turlock Station alternatives) would alter the existing visual landscape which could result in potentially significant impacts if not properly designed. Building removal associated with Ceres Station and Atwater Station would remove the disjointed industrial and commercial land uses and would be a less than significant impact. Building removal associated with the Merced Station would, however, result in significant impacts because it would remove commercial buildings that have improved the aesthetics of the station site compared to prior vacant and blighted conditions. Ceres Station and Turlock Station would require minor vegetation removal to accommodate construction of station facilities and parking and would result in a potentially significant impact. Utility lines going to new stations would create new, vertical visual intrusions into sensitive viewsheds and would result in a potentially significant impact. Alignments The new rail alignments would be built alongside existing rail corridors that pass through flat landscapes in suburban, urban, and rural landscapes would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality. Visual impacts along these alignments would be less than significant. Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would impact small portions of trees and shrubs along Caltrans-designated landscaped freeway segment of SR

93 Significance with Application of Mitigation The mitigation value of proposed mitigation is reviewed below: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 will reduce impacts associated with vegetation removal for parking facilities to a less-than-significant level by ensuring that parking facilities are landscaped. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible bridge surfaces to improve aesthetics and reduce aesthetic impacts related to bridges to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.3 will help to reduce the impacts of grading and landform changes in hilly terrain, but not necessarily to a less-than-significant level (see discussion below). Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.4 will ensure that new overhead utilities are placed underground for new stations and would reduce visual impacts related to new overhead utilities to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic surface treatments are applied to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, cable railing, signal houses, and the OCS poles to help them blend with and recede in the visual landscape and reduce visual impacts related to these features to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.6 will ensure that any affected freeway landscaping vegetation is replaced and would reduce visual impacts related to these impacts to a less than significant level. San Jose to Fremont Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to parking improvements of Alternative P-SJF-3 to a less-than-significant level. Centerville to Union City As described above, no significant impacts are expected from longer-term improvements along this segment. Tri-Valley Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to parking improvements of Alternatives P-TV-3, P-TV-4, and P-TV-5 to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to the raised overpasses associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a and P-TV-2a and the aerial structures and stations associated with Alternatives P-TV-1b, P-TV-2b, and P-BART-1. However, even with mitigation aerial structures near Greenville associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV- 1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, and P-BART-1 would introduce dominant visual obstructions into views available from I-580, Altamont Hills, and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve and would limit views toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve from surrounding vantages and impacts are considered significant. There is no feasible mitigation available to reduce the scale and

94 prominence of these features near Greenville and thus these impacts are considered to be significant and unavoidable for this aspect of these alternatives. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to OCS poles but will not reduce impacts associated with Alternatives P-TV-1c (EMU variant) and P- TV-2c (EMU variant) to a less-than-significant level and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2, AES-2.4, and AES-2.5 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to station improvements and the maintenance yard under Alternatives P-TV-1d, P- BART-2, and P-BART-3 to a less-than-significant level because this mitigation would help the stations to blend with and be a cohesive part of the visual environment. Altamont Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-2.2 and AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible tunnel, retaining wall, viaduct, and cable railing surfaces to improve aesthetics but will not reduce impacts associated with Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 to a less-thansignificant level and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Tracy to Lathrop Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2, and AES-2.5 will reduce the impacts associated with new parking improvements and would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level for Alternatives P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL-DT (variants 1 and 2), P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM. Alternatives P-TL-A1 and P-TL-A2 would result in a high degree of landform alteration within a hilly environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.3 will reduce the impacts of grading in a hilly landscape but not to a less-than-significant level. Alternative P-TL-DT (variant 3) would require substantial building removal that would unalterably change the visual character of a city block in downtown Tracy and replace with a more monolithic 5-story parking structure. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2, and AES-2.5, the aesthetic impact would be significant and unavoidable. Lathrop to Stockton Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will result in landscaping and apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures to ensure that parking areas improve visual conditions and reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level associated with Alternative P-LS-1. Manteca to Modesto Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 will further reduce impacts associated with Alternative P-MMO-RIP and Alternative P-MMO-MOD and reduce impacts associated with vegetation removal for Alternative P-MMO-MAN to a less-than-significant level by ensuring that parking facilities are landscaped. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will apply aesthetic design treatments to all parking structures and pedestrian facilities to ensure that parking areas improve visual conditions and would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level for the Alternative P-MMO-MOD

95 Modesto to Merced Station Options Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 will reduce impacts associated with vegetation removal for the Ceres Station and Turlock Station to a less-than-significant level by ensuring that parking facilities are landscaped. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will apply aesthetic design treatments to all parking structures and pedestrian facilities to ensure that parking areas improve visual conditions and would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level for the Ceres Station, Turlock Station, Atwater Station, and Livingston Station. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.4 will ensure that new overhead utilities are placed underground for new stations and would reduce visual impacts related to new overhead utilities to a less than significant level. Merced Station would, however, result in significant and unavoidable impacts because, although implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2 and AES-2.3 will reduce the impacts associated with building parking and a new station, they would not reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. Alignments Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will replace any vegetation damaged by Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b along Caltrans-designated landscaped freeway segment of SR 99 resulting in less-than-significant impacts. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternatives P-SJF-3, P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV- 1c, P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, P-BART-3, P-TV-3, P-TV-4, P-TV- 5, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, P-TL-B2, P-TL- DT, P-TL-RI, P-TL-RLM, P-LS-1, P-MMO-MAN, P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b. Mitigation Measure AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain Refer to measure description under Impact AES

96 Mitigation Measure AES-2.4: Underground new utilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Impact AES-7 Operation of longer-term improvements could substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. Level of Impact Potentially significant (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-1d, P- TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, P-BART-3, P-A-1, P-A-2, P- A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, and P-TL-B2) Less than significant ( all other longer-term alternatives) Mitigation Measures AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain AES-2.4: Underground new utilities AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system Level of Impact after Significant and unavoidable (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV- Mitigation 2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, and P-TL-A2) Less than significant (all other longer-term alternatives) Impact Characterization State Scenic Highway Screening Officially designated and eligible state Scenic Highways are considered in this analysis. Table lists officially designated and eligible state scenic highways within 3 miles of the near-term or longer-term improvements. There are no officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways within 3 miles of the near-term or longer-term improvements in Stanislaus and Merced Counties. In addition, there are no affected alternatives within 3 miles of officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways in the Centerville to Union City, Lathrop to Stockton, and Modesto to Merced longer-term improvements. In addition, there are no alternatives within 3 miles of officially designated and eligible portions of SR 84 or officially designated portions of I-580 in Alameda County. Therefore, the analysis only covers eligible portions of I-580 in Alameda County. Table I-2.3 in Appendix I-2 includes a preliminary screening of longer-term improvements within 3 miles of officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways to determine the alternatives

97 requiring further analysis. Development, terrain, and vegetation preclude views of several alternatives from the scenic routes that are within 3 miles. Because views are not available, there would be no impact resulting from the longer-term improvements for those affected alternatives. Therefore, such cases have been excluded from the analysis. Affected alternatives within 3 miles of officially designated and eligible State Scenic Highways, with the associated county and route provided in parenthesis, that have been excluded from the analysis include the following: Alternative P-SJF-1 (I-280 in Santa Clara County) Alternatives P-TV-4 and P-TV-5 (I-580 in Alameda County) Alternative P-TL-4 (I-580 in San Joaquin County) No other alternatives are located within 3 miles of scenic portions of I-280. Therefore, the entire route is excluded from the analysis. Local Scenic Highway Screening In addition to State Scenic Highways, county- and city-designated scenic roadways are considered in this analysis. Table lists county- and city-designated scenic routes within 3 miles of the longerterm improvements area. Affected Scenic Routes by Segment Scenic routes that are evaluated in the longer-term analysis, by segment, include the following: San Jose to Fremont: Alternative P-SJF-1 is directly adjacent to and would be visible from SR 87 in San Jose. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d cross and are visible from US 101 and SR 237 in San Jose. Centerville to Union City: The alternatives in this segment would not affect any scenic roadways. Tri-Valley: Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c (in combination with applicable standard rail connection options or ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station options) all cross or connect to and would be visible from eligible and countydesignated portions of I-580 in Alameda County. The standard rail connection options with the tunnels are within approximately 0.5 mile of and may be partially visible from eligible portions of I-580 in Alameda County, though views would be limited and brief. Alternative P-TV-3 is located within 0.84 mile of officially designated and eligible portions and county-designated portions of I-680. Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c cross, parallel, or pass near and would be visible from Tassajara Road, Doolan Road, and Collier Canyon Road in Alameda County and Livermore and Fallon Road in Dublin; however all of these crossings are in areas with commercial development surrounding I-580 and thus additional elevated structures in the I-580 median would not substantially degrade scenic views from these roadways. Alternatives P-TV- 1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c parallel and would be visible from Vasco Road in Livermore (but only from a non-scenic portion of the road) and North Livermore Avenue in Alameda County (which is scenic north of I-580). Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P- TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c parallel and would be visible from Altamont Pass Road in Alameda County. Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue segment), P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART- 3, parallel within 0.2 mile and may be visible from Greenville Road in Alameda County; however, the portion of Greenville Road south of I-580 in the area of these improvements is not

98 considered particularly scenic due to existing commercial and industrial development. Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, and P-TV-1c are located approximately 0.1 mile away and Alternatives P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c cross and would be visible from Isabel Avenue in Livermore; however the views from Isabel at the I-580 crossing are not considered of high scenic value due to adjacent freeway and commercial development. Altamont: Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2 cross or connect to and would be visible from eligible portions of I-580 in Alameda County. Alternative P-A-3 is within approximately 0.05 mile of and would be visible from eligible and county-designated portions of I-580 in Alameda County. Alternatives P-A-1 crosses and would be visible from Flynn Road in Alameda County. Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2 parallel and would be visible from Altamont Pass Road in Alameda County. Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 parallel within 0.2 mile and may be visible from Greenville Road in Alameda County (as noted above, this portion of Greenville Road is not considered particularly scenic due to existing commercial and industrial development). Tracy to Lathrop: Alternatives P-TL-A2 (West Tracy Station A-2), P-TL-A3 (West Tracy Station A-3), P-TL-A4 (West Tracy Station A-4), P-TL-A5 (West Tracy Station A-5), P-TL-B1 (West Tracy Station B-1), and P-TL-B2 (West Tracy Station B-2) are located within 3 miles of stateand county-designated scenic portions of I-580 in San Joaquin County and would be visible to some degree. Alternatives P-TL-A1 (West Tracy Station A-1) access road connects to alignments and the station and would be visible from Patterson Pass Road in Alameda County. Alternative P-TL-A4 is approximately 1.9 miles away, Alternative P-TL-A5 is approximately 1.6 miles away, and Alternative P-TL-ET (Existing Tracy Station) is approximately 2.1 miles away and the alternatives may be slightly visible from Corral Hollow Road, west of I-580, in San Joaquin County. Modesto to Merced: Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b cross, parallel, or pass near and would be visible from First Street, Shaffer Road, Winton Way, Broadway from Winton Way to First Street, Buhach Road, Third Street, and entrances to the City in Atwater and M Street from 18th Street to Bear Creek in Merced. The Atwater Station would be visible from First Street, Winton Way, Broadway from Winton Way to First Street, and Third Street in Atwater. Impact Differences by Segment San Jose to Fremont Alternative P-SJF-1 would add additional storage tracks that would be consistent with the existing storage tracks. Vegetation removal and trimming would be minimal. Because Alternative P-SJF-1 is located at a lower elevation than SR 87, these minimal changes would not be notable and the visual quality of views associated with the scenic route would not change. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF- 2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d cross and are visible from US 101 and SR 237 in San Jose but would all be built along existing rail segments and would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality associated with these scenic routes. Centerville to Union City Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC-2b would not affect any scenic roadways

99 Tri-Valley Alternative P-TV-2d would not involve new station or alignment improvements and would not result in aesthetic effects to scenic roadways. Station Alternatives P-TV-3, P-TV-4 and P-TV-5 would include additional parking facilities at existing stations in Pleasanton, Livermore and Vasco. These improvements would not be apparent from any scenic roadways due either to intervening structures and development (Alternatives P- TV-4 and P-TV-5) or due to distance and the blending of structures into background vegetation and other development (Alternative P-TV-3). The rail tracks for Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1c (DMU variant), P-TV-2a, and P-TV-2c (DMU variant) would be built at-grade in the median and would be perceived as a visual continuation of the existing BART route. However, Alternatives P-TV-1a and P-TV-2a would require raising certain overpasses to allow sufficient clearance for a standard railway underneath that would limit views from I-580 toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve. Alternatives P-TV- 1b and P-TV-2b would introduce elevated structures within the I-580 corridor to support the alignment and would be more visible to travelers on I-580. In addition, aerial structures would limit views from I-580 toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve. Alternatives P-TV- 1c (EMU variant) and P-TV-2c (EMU variant) would also be at-grade; however, these alternatives would use OCS to support EMU technology. The OCS would constitute a new visual intrusion that detracts from the existing visual character of I-580 because there is no existing vegetation present to aid in screening the OCS, which would help to reduce the apparent scale of the OCS. Therefore, this new vertical element would increase the visual presence of utilities along the I-580 corridor that would interrupt and detract from views. Alternative P-BART-1 would include at-grade BART tracks from Dublin-Pleasanton to an elevated structure at Isabel and then continue on in the I-580 median at-grade until the approach to the Greenville area at which point the alignment would elevate and reach an aerial station at Greenville. Elevated structures within the I-580 corridor to support the alignment and the elevated approach and station at Greenville and would be more visible to travelers on I-580 and would limit views toward the Altamont Hills and Brushy Peak Regional Preserve from I-580. Impacts resulting from Alternatives P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue segment), P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 are the same as those described above for P- BART-1 where located along I-580. There would be no visual impacts to I-580 where Alternatives P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 continue subway underground because no above-ground views or visual resources would be impacted. Alternatives P-TV-1d, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 would establish three stations (Isabel Avenue, Livermore, and Vasco Road stations) and a maintenance yard (Isabel Avenue Yard or Vasco Yard) along the extension route. These new stations and maintenance yard could be perceived adversely by new residents without proper design treatments. Elevated structures associated with Alternatives P-TV-1b, P-TV-2b, and P-BART-1 alternatives would also affect views from scenic portions of scenic roadways adjacent to I-580 including North Livermore Avenue and Altamont Pass Road. Standard rail connection options or ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station options that would be paired with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2d, and P-TV-2c would be built along existing rail segments for most of the alternatives length, but would require new segments of rail line to be constructed through hilly terrain to connect the existing rail line to the other alternatives and existing rail lines. Portions of these alternatives would be visible and would affect views from I-580 and Altamont Pass Road

100 Altamont Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 would include tunnel openings, areas of cut, retaining walls and cable railing would be seen where the tunnels daylight that would be visible to travelers on I- 580, Altamont Pass Road and Flynn Road. The Altamont Pass Road overhead (Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2), Carroll Road overhead (Alternative P-A-1), and Valley Retained Cut and Viaduct (Alternatives P-A-3) would be visible to sensitive viewers along scenic roadways. Tracy to Lathrop Alternatives P-TL-A1 (West Tracy Station A-1) and P-TL-A2 (West Tracy Station A-2) would result in a higher degree of landform alteration compared to other station improvement alternatives because it is located in a hilly environments and is close to I-580. There is also potential to affect views east of I-580 due to Alternatives P-TL-A3 (West Tracy Station A-3), P-TL-A4 (West Tracy Station A-4), P-TL-A5 (West Tracy Station A-5), P-TL-B1 (West Tracy Station B-1), and P-TL-B2 (West Tracy Station B-2). Other longer-term parking improvements would be distant and would not affect views from scenic portions of I-580. Lathrop to Stockton Station parking improvements associated with Alternative P-LS-1 would not be visible from any scenic roadways. Manteca to Modesto No scenic highways would be affected along this segment. Modesto to Merced Alternatives MME-1a and MME-1b would all be built along existing rail segments. Alignments built alongside existing rail corridors that pass through flat landscapes in suburban, urban, and rural landscapes would be a minor visual expansion of existing conditions and would generally not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality associated with associated scenic roadways. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation San Jose to Fremont Alternative P-SJF-1 would result in minor visual changes consistent with existing railyard uses and would have a less than significant effect on the scenic character of SR 87. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2d would not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality associated with US 101 or SR 237 and would thus have a less than significant effect on scenic roadways. Centerville to Union City Alternatives P-UC-1a, P-UC-1b, P-UC-2a, and P-UC-2b would not affect any scenic roadways

101 Tri-Valley Alternative P-TV-2d would result in no physical improvements and thus would not affect any scenic roadways. Alternatives P-TV-1c (DMU variant), P-TV-2c (DMU variant), P-TV-3, P-TV-4 and P-TV-5 would not result in noticeable changes in views from any scenic roadways. However, the new BART stations in downtown Livermore and along Isabel Avenue and the new BART station and maintenance yards along Isabel Avenue or Vasco Road that are associated with P-TV-1d, P-BART-2 and P-BART-3 could have significant effects if not properly designed. Elevated structures or OCS infrastructure associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, and P-TV-1d (BART extension to Isabel Avenue), and Alternatives P- BART-1, P-BART-2, and P-BART-3 would affect views from I-580 and in locations may also affect views from scenic portions of other scenic roadways adjacent to I-580 including North Livermore Avenue (north of I-580) and Altamont Pass Road and the change in views of adjacent and distant hillsides would be a significant impact. Aboveground portions of the standard rail connection options or ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station options that would be paired with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2d, and P-TV-2c would be visible and would potentially significantly affect views from I-580 and Altamont Pass Road. Altamont Alternatives P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 would include tunnel openings, areas of cut, retaining walls and cable railing and overhead structures visible to travelers on I-580, Altamont Pass Road, and Flynn Road and would result in potentially significant impacts on views from these scenic roadways. Tracy to Lathrop Alternative P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, and P-TL-B2 would have potentially significant impacts on views of scenic portions of I-580. Other longer-term parking improvements would be distant and would not affect views from scenic portions of I-580. Other longer-term parking improvements would be distant and are too far away from scenic portions of I-580 or Corral Hollow Road to substantially affect scenic views from this roadway. Lathrop to Stockton Station parking improvements associated with Alternative P-LS-1 would not be visible and would have a less than significant impact on scenic roadways. Modesto to Merced Alternatives P-MME-1a and P-MME-1b would all be built along existing rail segments adjacent to SR 99, would not alter the existing visual landscape or affect the existing visual quality associated with associated scenic roadways and would have a less than significant impact on scenic roadways that cross or are adjacent to the UPRR ROW

102 Significance with Application of Mitigation Tri-Valley Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to OCS poles but will not reduce impacts associated with Alternatives P-TV-1c (EMU variant) and P- TV-2c (EMU variant) to a less-than-significant level and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2, AES-2.4, and AES-2.5 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to station improvements and the maintenance yard under Alternatives P-TV-1d, P- BART-2 and P-BART-3 to a less-than-significant level because this mitigation would help the stations to blend with and be a cohesive part of the visual environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 will reduce aesthetic impacts related to No mitigation is available to reduce the impacts of elevated structures near Greenville associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c and P-BART-1 and aboveground portions of the standard rail connection options or ACE and DMU/EMU Greenville Road Station options that would be paired with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2d, and P-TV-2c to reduce the scale and prominence of these features and thus impacts to scenic roadways would be significant and unavoidable. Altamont Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-2.2, AES-2.3 and AES-2.5 will ensure that aesthetic treatments are applied to visible tunnel, retaining wall, viaduct, and cable railing surfaces and selective grading and planting techniques would be used in hilly terrain to improve aesthetics and but will not reduce impacts to views from adjacent scenic roadways associated with Alternatives P- A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 to a less-than-significant level and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Tracy to Lathrop Alternatives P-TL-A1 (West Tracy Station A-1) and P-TL-A2 (West Tracy Station A-2) would result in a high degree of landform alteration within a hilly environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-2.1, AES-2.2, AES-2.3, and AES-2.5 will reduce the impacts associated with new parking improvements by requiring landscaping, design treatments for new parking improvements and for fencing and other appurtenances and selective grading and planting in a hilly landscape but would not mitigate all impacts to views from scenic portions of I-580 to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.1, AES-2.2 and AES-2.5 will reduce the impacts associated with new parking improvements by requiring landscaping, design treatments for new parking improvements, and for fencing and other appurtenances and would reduce impacts to scenic roadways to a less-than-significant level for Alternatives P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-4A, P-TL- B1, and P-TL-B2. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure would apply to Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c (EMU variant), P-TV-1d, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c (EMU variant), P-BART-1, P-BART-2, P-BART-3, P-A-1, P-A-2, P-A-3, P-TL-A1, P-TL-A2, P-TL-A3, P-TL-A4, P-TL-A5, P-TL-B1, and P-TL-B

103 Mitigation Measure AES-2.1: Landscape parking facilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.3: Utilize selective grading and planting techniques in hilly terrain Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.4: Underground new utilities Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.5: Apply aesthetic surface treatments to fencing, pedestrian bridge safety barriers, rock netting, cable railing, signal houses, and the overhead contact system Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Mitigation Measure AES-2.6: Replace disturbed vegetation along landscaped freeways Refer to measure description under Impact AES-2. Impact AES-8 Level of Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Impact after Mitigation Operation of longer-term improvements could create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Potentially significant AES-2.2: Apply aesthetic design treatments to parking structures, pedestrian bridges over tracks, aerial structures, tunnel openings, and bridges and retaining walls with visibility to residents, recreationalists, and viewers from scenic roadways AES-4.1: Apply minimum lighting standards Less than significant Impact Characterization Longer-term improvements would include the operation and maintenance of alignments and station facilities and parking in a similar manner as near-term improvements described under Impact AES- 3. Parking garage, parking lot, and platform lighting could include standard lighting or LED lighting for security purposes that could affect sensitive receptors if not properly designed. Such lighting could result in significant impacts if the lighting spilled outside the site boundaries, creating a new source of nuisance lighting or glare for adjacent sensitive viewers. LED lights can negatively affect humans

104 by increasing nuisance light and glare, in addition to increasing ambient light glow, if proper shielding is not provided and BRWL are used (International Dark-Sky Association 2010a, 2010b, 2015). The use of BRWL LED lighting would amplify impacts and result in a substantial source of nighttime light and glare that could negatively impact nighttime views in the area. Alternatives P-SJF-2a, P-SJF-2b, P-SJF-2c, and P-SJF-2c would introduce either berms or trestles to accommodate the new alignments but would not substantially increase glare because berms would be low-profile and would mimic existing conditions and trestles would also be low profile and the concrete would weather over time. In addition, steel channel bracing would be used for the piers over Coyote Creek and Mud Slough and would be visually similar to rail bridges elsewhere in the Baylands. These structures would not increase glare. Visible bridge structures include Altamont Pass Road overhead (Alternatives P-A-1 and P-A-2), Greenville Road viaduct and bridge over westbound I-580 (Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV- 1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, and P-TV-2c), Carroll Road overhead (Alternative P-A-1), and Valley Retained Cut and Viaduct (Alternative P-A-3). Alternatives P-TV-1b, P-TV-2b and P-BART-1 would also introduce elevated structures within the I-580 corridor to support the alignment. This could increase glare for travelers on I-580. These structures could increase glare in the same manner as that described under Impact AES-4. Significance Conclusion and Mitigation Measures Significance Prior to Mitigation Parking garage, parking lot, and platform lighting associated with the station option alternatives would result in potentially significant increases in nighttime lighting if not properly designed, creating light spill and a new source of nuisance lighting and glare for adjacent sensitive viewers. BRWL LED lighting would amplify impacts. Incremental increases in glare would occur along alternative segments where trees and shrubs are removed to accommodate construction of the alignments would not substantially increase glare because vegetation outside the ROW would remain to shade the corridor. Proposed bridges would not substantially increase glare due to materials uses and the bridge surfaces would not be exposed to viewers, in most cases. Visible bridge structures would also introduce new retaining wall and bridge surfaces that could increase glare seen by sensitive viewers and result in potentially significant impacts. Visible bridge structures associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 would result in potentially significant glare impacts. Safety lighting at at-grade crossings and train headlights would not result in a notable increase in lighting in the area of any alternative. Significance with Application of Mitigation Mitigation Measure AES-4.1 will ensure that the change to existing nighttime light and glare levels relative to parking garage, parking lot, and platform lighting at stations are nominal and will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level for all alternatives

105 Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 will reduce potentially significant impacts associated with visible bridge structures associated with Alternatives P-TV-1a, P-TV-1b, P-TV-1c, P-TV-2a, P-TV-2b, P-TV-2c, P-BART-1, P-A-1, P-A-2, and P-A-3 to a less-than-significant level

106 W Las Positas nta Rita Rd Olivina Av LEGEND Key Observation Point (KOP) Interstate Highway U.S. Highway State Route Local Road Existing Railroads County Line Note: This map shows all potential alternatives considered as part of ACEforward. Not all alternatives shown would be selected for implementation. Near-Term Improvements Existing ACE Operating Track (No Upgrades) Upgrade (Replacement/Rehabilitation) of Existing Track New Track (Adjacent to Existing Track) New Track (No Existing Track Right-of-Way) Name S S S S Near-Term Improvement Existing Station Proposed Station Potential Station Station with Near-Term Improvements Foothill Rd 680 Hopyard Rd Bernal Av Valley Av Valley Av Black Av KOP6 S Sunol Bl Peters Av Pleasanton Vineyard Av Kottinger Dr Bernal Av Busch Rd Pleasanton Station Improvements PLEASANTON Vineyard Av 84 Concannon Bl Vallecitos Rd L Hearst Double Track Oakland-Niles Subdivision Connection at Industrial Parkway Pleasanton Sunol Rd Mission Blvd Whipple Rd Alvarado Blvd UNION CITY 880 Alvarado-Niles Rd Paseo Padre Pky Decoto Rd Fremont Blvd 238 Alameda Ck. Niles Blvd Niles Canyon Railway Upgrades KOP3 KOP2 84 Alameda Creek Bridge KOP4 Niles Canyon Rd Southern Connection SUNOL KOP5 Paloma Way Sunol Double Track Calaveras Rd Vallecitos Rd 84 San Antonio Reservoir Centerville Line Expansion Industrial Blvd ICF Graphics ( ) 84 Thornton Ave Fremont S Central Ave KOP1 Paseo Padre Pky Mowry Ave FREMONT Walnut Ave Stevenson Blvd Mission Blvd Miles 2 Blacow Rd enson Blvd Figure 4.1-1a Key Observation Point Location Map (Sheet 1 of 2) ACEforward

107 Midway Rd Reeve Rd San Jose Rd Naglee Tracy Blvd Mac Arthur Dr Bird Rd LEGEND Bethany Reservoir SRA Altamont Pass Rd 580 Jess Ranch Rd Key Observation Point (KOP) Near-Term and Longer-Term Improvements Existing ACE Operating Track (No Upgrades) Interstate Highway Upgrade (Replacement/Rehabilitation) of Existing Track U.S. Highway New Track (Adjacent to Existing Track) State Route New Track (No Existing Track Right-of-Way) Local Road Existing Railroads County Line Note: This map shows all potential alternatives considered as part of ACEforward. Not all alternatives shown would be selected for implementation. Grant Line Rd N M Name S S S S idway Rd Near-Term Improvement MOUNTAIN HOUSE Existing Station Proposed Station Potential Station Station with Near-Term Improvements California Aqueduct Mountain House Rd Delta Mendota Canal 205 Hansen Rd Grant Line Rd Von Sosten Rd Schulte Rd Lammers Rd Bethany Rd. Middle Rd Corral Hollow Larch Rd Tracy Blvd TRACY S Arbor Ave Pescadero Ave Grant Line Rd Downtown Alignment Tracy Downtown Schulte Rd 205 Eleventh St Lyonth-Banta Crossover Banta Rd Canal Blvd Eleventh St KOP9 Cedar Ave Berry Ave 5 Kasson Rd R ICF Graphics ( ) Patterson Pass Rd 0 1 Miles 2 Midway Rd Alameda County San Joaquin County Midway Crossover S West Tracy (A1) KOP7 KOP8 West Tracy (B1) S S West Tracy (A2) S Lammers Crossover West Tracy (A3) 580 S West Tracy (B2) Corral Hollow S S West Tracy (A4) West Tracy (A5) Tracy S Tracy Municipal Airport Valpico Rd Mac Arthur Dr Chrisman Rd Linne Rd Lehman Rd Figure 4.1-1b Key Observation Point Location Map (Sheet 2 of 2) ACEforward Durham Ferry Rd

108 KOP 1 View from Fremont Station KOP 1 - Before Project - Looking southwest toward proposed project. Adjacent to existing Fremont Station. - New four-level parking garage with pedestrian bridge connecting to existing Fremont Station. Peralta Blvd. Fremont Blvd. KOP 1 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternative SJF-2 Simulated Conditions ACEforward

109 KOP 2 View from Alameda Creek Bridge KOP 2 - Before Project - Looking toward the pedestrian trail on the northwest bank of Alameda Creek. - New single track bridge crossing Alameda Creek. KOP 2 - After Project Alameda Creek Mission Blvd. N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternative CNS-1a Simulated Conditions ACEforward

110 HWY 84 KOP 31 Niles Canyon R KOP 31 - Before Project - Looking Southwest along Niles Canyon Road - Rock barrier and retaining wall improvements along track alignment Niles Canyon Rd. KOP 31 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b Simulated Conditions ACEforward

111 KOP 43 Niles Canyon R KOP 43 - Before Project - Looking Southwest along Niles Canyon Road - Rock barrier and retaining wall improvements along track alignment KOP 43 - After Project HWY 84, Niles Canyon Rd. N N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternatives CNS-2a and CNS-2b Simulated Conditions ACEforward

112 KOP 53 View from Southern Connection KOP 53 - Before Project - Looking northwest along highway SR-84 - New track connection bridge deck over scenic highway SR-84. SR-84 KOP 53 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternative CNS-2b Simulated Conditions ACEforward

113 KOP 64 View from Pleasanton Station KOP 64 - Before Project - Looking southwest along Pleasanton Avenue toward the exiting Pleasanton Station. - New four-level parking garage. Bernal Ave. Pleasanton Ave. KOP 64 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternative TV-1 Simulated Conditions ACEforward

114 KOP 75 View from West Tracy Station A-1 KOP 75 - Before Project - Looking southwest from Patterson Pass Road toward proposed project. - New station with parking lot and access road. Patterson Pass Road I-580 KOP 75 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and West Tracy Station Alternative A-1 Simulated Conditions ACEforward

115 KOP 86 View from West Tracy Station A-2 KOP 86 - Before Project - Looking southwest from I-580 toward proposed project. - New station with parking lot and access road. I-580 KOP 86 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and West Tracy Station Alternative A-2 Simulated Conditions ACEforward

116 KOP 97 View from Banta-Lyoth Crossover KOP 97 - Before Project - Looking southwest toward proposed project. Close to the intersection of 11th St and Lovely Rd. - New track connection through agricultural lands. KOP 97 - After Project N ICF Graphics ( ) Figure Existing View and Alternative TL-3 Simulated Conditions ACEforward