DOCSLIB.ORG

10-0T350 Angelscamps

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
10-0T350 Angelscamps [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 i Table of Contents 1. Summary ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.1. Project History ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.2. Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 2 2.3. Project Description .................................................................................................................... 2 3. Study Methods ............................................................................................................... 2 4. Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 3 4.1. Physical Conditions ................................................................................................................... 3 4.2. Biological Conditions in the BSA ............................................................................................. 3 4.3. Regional Species and Habitats of Concern ................................................................................ 3 5. Project Impacts .............................................................................................................. 5 6. Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................................... 5 7. Permits Required ........................................................................................................... 5 8. References ..................................................................................................................... 5 Appendix A USFWS Letter Appendix B California Natural Diversity Database/ RareFind Appendix C Project Maps List of Tables Table 1. Special-Status Species and Communities Potentially Occurring in the BSA ............................. 3 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 ii [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 iii 1. Summary The City of Angels Camp intends to install continuous sidewalks, upgrade designated crosswalks, and install Class II bicycle lanes along State Route (SR) 49/ South Main Street between Murphy’s Grade Road and Utica Park, using Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds. Compliance is required with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Executive Orders, and other federal laws, such as the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA). The Caltrans Local Assistance Program Manual (Caltrans 2004) describes the environmental procedures needed for local agencies to apply for federal funds and for compliance with Executive Orders and other federal laws including FESA and NEPA. Caltrans administers the TE program for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and is responsible for ensuring that appropriate technical studies have been prepared to support NEPA findings and compliance with Executive Orders and other federal laws. As the lead local agency, City of Angels Camp is responsible for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is along a high-traffic road and will impact existing paved road shoulders, disturbed shoulders that have been colonized by ruderal plant species, and landscaped areas. The Biological Study Area (BSA) does not provide suitable habitat for federal or state listed plant or wildlife species. The Angels Camp Sidewalk Enhancement Project (Project) will have no effect on federal- and state-listed special-status species. No sensitive natural communities occur in the BSA. No wetlands or waters occur in the BSA and no wetlands or waters will be affected by the Project. The project will require a Caltrans encroachment permit. 2. Introduction 2.1. Project History The Project is a Transportation Enhancement (TE) project that is federally and locally funded. The purpose of the project is to construct sidewalks and landscaping on South Main Street/ SR-49 south of Murphy's Grade Road. The new sidewalks will create a safe, continuous pedestrian corridor along South Main Street. 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 1 2.2. Project Location The approximately 0.76-ac biological study area (BSA) is located on SR-49/ South Main Street approximately 800 feet east of the intersection of SR-49 and Murphy Grade Road in the City of Angels Camp, CA (Figure 1). The BSA is on the Angels Camp, CA USGS 7.5’ topographic quad (T3N, R13E, Section 28 and 33). The BSA is in the Upper Stanislaus Watershed (hydrologic unit code 18040010), and its centroid is 38.076983°N latitude, 120.549447°W longitude (1983 NAD) (UTM Coordinates: 714,943 meters East, 4,217,192 meters North, UTM Zone 10 NAD83). 2.3. Project Description The City of Angels Camp intends to install continuous sidewalks, upgrade designated crosswalks, and install Class II bicycle lanes along State Route 49/ South Main Street south of Murphy’s Grade Road, using Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds. Work will be in Caltrans Right of Way with temporary construction easements for driveway conforms and slope. Landscaping will be included in the project where there is sufficient room for landscaping. Sidewalks are already present on most of South Main Street. Three sections along SR-49/ South Main Street will be constructed: Section 21 immediately east of Lee Lane, Section 24 between Stanislaus Ave and Mark Twain Road, and Section 25 immediately east of Mark Twain Road. Section 21 will add about 400 feet of sidewalk; Section 24 will add about 312 feet of sidewalk; and Section 25 will add 295 feet of sidewalk. 3. Study Methods File data on special-status species that potentially occur in the vicinity of the Project was made from USFWS (2010) . Their response is in Appendix A. A search of the DFG California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB/ RareFind report dated 1 May 2010; DFG 2010a; Appendix B) was conducted for the Angels Camp USGS topographic quad and eight adjacent quads to determine if there were any known occurrences of state- or federal-listed species in or near the BSA. Data received from USFWS, CNDDB/ RareFind records, and DFG (2010a) species lists were used to compile a table of regional species and habitats of concern (Appendix C). Site visits were conducted by Jeff Little and Jessica Easley, a biologist and certified arborist, on 30 April 2010, and 25 May and 14 June 2010 by Jeff Little. The BSA was surveyed by vehicle to determine if any special-status plant or wildlife species or their habitat were present. 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 2 4. Environmental Setting 4.1. Physical Conditions The BSA is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada in the City of Angels Camp along SR-49 (South Main Street). Elevation of the BSA is approximately 1,540 ft above sea level. Topography of the BSA consists of flat ground and gentle slopes of varying aspect. Land surrounding the BSA is mostly developed with residential and commercial uses. Pavement covers most of the BSA and the areas that will be impacted by the project are mostly paved. 4.2. Biological Conditions in the BSA The BSA is occupied by paved roadways and disturbed and landscaped road shoulders. Ruderal species such as wild oat (Avena sp.) and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) occur along the road shoulders and in weak ditches. Landscaping occurs along much of the area where sidewalks are to be installed. No wetlands or waters of the U.S. occur in the BSA. One elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) shrub occurs on SR 49/S. Main Street opposite the Stanislaus Ave intersection. The shrub is outside of the Biological Study Area. No project activities occur within 100 ft of the shrub. This shrub does not occur in a riparian corridor and is located close to SR 49. The project will have no effect on this shrub. 4.3. Regional Species and Habitats of Concern Field surveys were conducted to determine if individuals or suitable habitat for special-status species occur in the BSA. Special-status species listed in the USFWS letter (Appendix A) and the CNDDB (Appendix B) are listed in Table 2. Species for which there is no habitat in the BSA, or whose range precludes their occurrence in the BSA, are not discussed further. Table 1. Special-Status Species and Communities Potentially Occurring in the BSA Habitat Federal State Present? / Special-Status Species Common Name Source c Status a, b Status a, b Species Observed? Invertebrates Branchinecta lynchi Vernal pool fairy shrimp T -- 1, 2 No/No Desmocerus californicus Valley elderberry longhorn beetle T -- 1, 2 No/No dimorphus Lepidurus packardi Vernal pool tadpole shrimp E -- 1 No/No Fish Hypomesus transpacificus Delta smelt T T 1 No/No 10-0T350_AngelsCampSidewalks_NESMI.doc 6/22/2010 3 Lavinia symmetricus ssp.1 San Joaquin roach -- SC 2 No/No Lavinia symmetricus ssp.3 Red Hills roach C SC 2 No/No Oncorhynchus mykiss Steelhead - Central Valley ESU T, CH -- 1 No/No (irideus) Winter-run chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha E, CH E 1 No/No Sacramento River Amphibians California tiger salamander, Ambystoma californiense T, CH SSC, C 1 No/No central population Bufo canorus (=Anaxyrus Yosemite toad C SSC 1 No/No canorus) Rana (aurora) draytonii California red-legged frog T, CH SC 1, 2 No/No Rana boylii
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biological Resources Evaluation Report for Pine Acres North
    Biological Resources Evaluation Report for Pine Acres North Amador County, CA Prepared by: Sycamore Environmental Consultants, Inc. 6355 Riverside Blvd., Suite C Sacramento, CA 95831-1143 Phone: 916/ 427-0703 Fax: 916/ 427-2175 Contact: R. John Little, Ph.D. Prepared for: Thomas Martin & Associates 120 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 4 Folsom, CA 95630 Phone: 916/ 985-6380 Contact: Mr. Thomas Martin 8 September 2006 Biological Resources Evaluation Pine Acres North Amador County, CA Biological Resources Evaluation Report For Pine Acres North Amador County, CA Table of Contents I. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS..................................................................1 II. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1 A. Purpose of Report ......................................................................................................................1 B. Project Location.........................................................................................................................1 C. Project Applicant .......................................................................................................................1 D. Project Description ....................................................................................................................1 III. STUDY METHODS.......................................................................................................................5 A. Studies Conducted .....................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Other Botanical Resource Assessment
    USDA Forest Service Tahoe National Forest District Yuba River Ranger District OTHER BOTANICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT Yuba Project 08/01/2017 Prepared by: Date: Courtney Rowe, District Botanist TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 TNF Watch List Botanical Species ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Summary of Analysis Procedure .................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Project Compliance ..................................................................................................................... 2 2 Special Status Plant Communities ....................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Project Compliance ..................................................................................................................... 5 3 Special Management Designations ..................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 6 3.2 Project Compliance ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3 Biological Resources
    4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES DRAFT EIR PINE ACRES NORTH NOVEMBER 2009 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION The Biological Resources chapter of the EIR evaluates the biological resources known to occur or potentially occur within the Pine Acres North project (proposed project) site. This chapter describes potential impacts to those resources, and identifies measures to eliminate or substantially reduce those impacts to less-than-significant levels. Existing plant communities, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and potential for special-status species and communities are discussed for the project site. The information contained in this analysis is primarily based on a Biological Resources Evaluation Report for Pine Acres North1 prepared by Sycamore Environmental Consultants (See Appendix G), a Jurisdictional Delineation and Special Status Species Evaluation2 prepared by Gibson & Skordal, LLC (See Appendix H), and an Oak Woodland Assessment3 prepared by Ronald P. Monk Consulting (See Appendix I). EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The following sections describe the regional setting of the site, as well as the existing biological resources occurring in the proposed project area. Regional Setting The proposed project site is located in the Sierra Foothills in the western portion of Amador County, approximately one mile southeast of the community of Pine Grove. The proposed site ranges from approximately 2,500 feet to 2,690 feet above mean sea level (MSL) and is located in the Upper Mokelumne watershed. The majority of soils within the project site were formed in material weathered metasedimentary rock and are well drained with medium to very rapid runoff. Project Setting Land uses located within Amador County are primarily agricultural and open space, with residential and commercial areas in existing cities (See Figure 4.3-1).
    [Show full text]
  • Oak Resources Management Plan
    EXHIBIT A El Dorado County Oak Resources Managenient Plan September 2017 El Dorado County Community Development Agency Long Range Planning Division 2850 Fairlane Court, Placerville, CA 95667 OAK RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... l 1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................1 1.2 Goals and Objectives of Plan .................................................................................2 1.3 Oak Resources in El Dorado County .....................................................................3 1.3.1 Oak Woodlands ........................................................................................... .3 1.3 .2 Oak Trees .................................................................................................... .4 1.4 Economic Activity, Land, and Ecosystem Values of Oak Resources ....................4 1.5 State-level Regulations ...........................................................................................4 2.0 Oak Resources Impact Mitigation Requirements .........................................................6 2.1 Applicability, Exemptions and Mitigation Reductions ..........................................6 2.1.1 Single-Family Lot Exemption...................................................................... 6 2.1.2 Fire Safe Activities Exemption ....................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Assessment the Ranch ±530- Acre Study Area City of Rancho Cordova, California
    Biological Resources Assessment The Ranch ±530- Acre Study Area City of Rancho Cordova, California Prepared for: K. Hovnanian Homes October 13, 2017 Prepared by: © 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Project Description ........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................................ 2 2.1. Federal Regulations .......................................................................................................... 2 2.1.1. Federal Endangered Species Act ............................................................................... 2 2.1.2. Migratory Bird Treaty Act ......................................................................................... 2 2.1.3. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ............................................................... 2 2.2. State Jurisdiction .............................................................................................................. 3 2.2.1. California Endangered Species Act ........................................................................... 3 2.2.2. California Department of Fish and Game Codes ...................................................... 3 2.2.3. Native Plant Protection Act .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sierra Nevada Framework FEIS Chapter 3
    table of contrents Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment – Part 4.6 4.6. Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Fungi4.6. Fungi Introduction Part 3.1 of this chapter describes landscape-scale vegetation patterns. Part 3.2 describes the vegetative structure, function, and composition of old forest ecosystems, while Part 3.3 describes hardwood ecosystems and Part 3.4 describes aquatic, riparian, and meadow ecosystems. This part focuses on botanical diversity in the Sierra Nevada, beginning with an overview of botanical resources and then presenting a more detailed analysis of the rarest elements of the flora, the threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plants. The bryophytes (mosses and liverworts), lichens, and fungi of the Sierra have been little studied in comparison to the vascular flora. In the Pacific Northwest, studies of these groups have received increased attention due to the President’s Northwest Forest Plan. New and valuable scientific data is being revealed, some of which may apply to species in the Sierra Nevada. This section presents an overview of the vascular plant flora, followed by summaries of what is generally known about bryophytes, lichens, and fungi in the Sierra Nevada. Environmental Consequences of the alternatives are only analyzed for the Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive plants, which include vascular plants, several bryophytes, and one species of lichen. 4.6.1. Vascular plants4.6.1. plants The diversity of topography, geology, and elevation in the Sierra Nevada combine to create a remarkably diverse flora (see Section 3.1 for an overview of landscape patterns and vegetation dynamics in the Sierra Nevada). More than half of the approximately 5,000 native vascular plant species in California occur in the Sierra Nevada, despite the fact that the range contains less than 20 percent of the state’s land base (Shevock 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region Sensitive Plant Species by Forest
    USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region 1 Sensitive Plant Species by Forest 2013 FS R5 RF Plant Species List Klamath NF Mendocino NF Shasta-Trinity NF NF Rivers Six Lassen NF Modoc NF Plumas NF EldoradoNF Inyo NF LTBMU Tahoe NF Sequoia NF Sierra NF Stanislaus NF Angeles NF Cleveland NF Los Padres NF San Bernardino NF Scientific Name (Common Name) Abies bracteata (Santa Lucia fir) X Abronia alpina (alpine sand verbena) X Abronia nana ssp. covillei (Coville's dwarf abronia) X X Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand verbena) X X Acanthoscyphus parishii var. abramsii (Abrams' flowery puncturebract) X X Acanthoscyphus parishii var. cienegensis (Cienega Seca flowery puncturebract) X Agrostis hooveri (Hoover's bentgrass) X Allium hickmanii (Hickman's onion) X Allium howellii var. clokeyi (Mt. Pinos onion) X Allium jepsonii (Jepson's onion) X X Allium marvinii (Yucaipa onion) X Allium tribracteatum (three-bracted onion) X X Allium yosemitense (Yosemite onion) X X Anisocarpus scabridus (scabrid alpine tarplant) X X X Antennaria marginata (white-margined everlasting) X Antirrhinum subcordatum (dimorphic snapdragon) X Arabis rigidissima var. demota (Carson Range rock cress) X X Arctostaphylos cruzensis (Arroyo de la Cruz manzanita) X Arctostaphylos edmundsii (Little Sur manzanita) X Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. gabrielensis (San Gabriel manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos hooveri (Hoover's manzanita) X Arctostaphylos luciana (Santa Lucia manzanita) X Arctostaphylos nissenana (Nissenan manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos obispoensis (Bishop manzanita) X Arctostphylos parryana subsp. tumescens (interior manzanita) X X Arctostaphylos pilosula (Santa Margarita manzanita) X Arctostaphylos rainbowensis (rainbow manzanita) X Arctostaphylos refugioensis (Refugio manzanita) X Arenaria lanuginosa ssp. saxosa (rock sandwort) X Astragalus anxius (Ash Valley milk-vetch) X Astragalus bernardinus (San Bernardino milk-vetch) X Astragalus bicristatus (crested milk-vetch) X X Pacific Southwest Region, Regional Forester's Sensitive Species List.
    [Show full text]
  • November 2009 an Analysis of Possible Risk To
    Project Title An Analysis of Possible Risk to Threatened and Endangered Plant Species Associated with Glyphosate Use in Alfalfa: A County-Level Analysis Authors Thomas Priester, Ph.D. Rick Kemman, M.S. Ashlea Rives Frank, M.Ent. Larry Turner, Ph.D. Bernalyn McGaughey David Howes, Ph.D. Jeffrey Giddings, Ph.D. Stephanie Dressel Data Requirements Pesticide Assessment Guidelines Subdivision E—Hazard Evaluation: Wildlife and Aquatic Organisms Guideline Number 70-1-SS: Special Studies—Effects on Endangered Species Date Completed August 22, 2007 Prepared by Compliance Services International 7501 Bridgeport Way West Lakewood, WA 98499-2423 (253) 473-9007 Sponsor Monsanto Company 800 N. Lindbergh Blvd. Saint Louis, MO 63167 Project Identification Compliance Services International Study 06711 Monsanto Study ID CS-2005-125 RD 1695 Volume 3 of 18 Page 1 of 258 Threatened & Endangered Plant Species Analysis CSI 06711 Glyphosate/Alfalfa Monsanto Study ID CS-2005-125 Page 2 of 258 STATEMENT OF NO DATA CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIMS The text below applies only to use of the data by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) in connection with the provisions of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) No claim of confidentiality is made for any information contained in this study on the basis of its falling within the scope of FIFRA §10(d)(1)(A), (B), or (C). We submit this material to the United States Environmental Protection Agency specifically under the requirements set forth in FIFRA as amended, and consent to the use and disclosure of this material by EPA strictly in accordance with FIFRA. By submitting this material to EPA in accordance with the method and format requirements contained in PR Notice 86-5, we reserve and do not waive any rights involving this material that are or can be claimed by the company notwithstanding this submission to EPA.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS DDS-43, Status of Rare and Endemic Plants
    JAMES R. SHEVOCK U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region San Francisco, California 24 Status of Rare and Endemic Plants ABSTRACT The Sierra Nevada represents nearly 20% of the California land base INTRODUCTION yet contains over 50% of the state’s flora. Approximately 405 vascu- For more than 100 years, the flora of the Sierra Nevada has lar plant taxa are endemic to the Sierra Nevada. Of this total, 218 fascinated botanists even beyond the borders of the United taxa are considered rare by conservation organizations and/or state States. Visions of Yosemite, giant sequoias, and extensive and federal agencies. In addition, 168 other rare taxa have at least mixed conifer forests have added to an awareness of this one occurrence in the Sierra Nevada. Five monotypic genera are magnificent mountain range. The Sierra Nevada, part of the endemic to the Sierra Nevada (Bolandra, Carpenteria, Orochaenactis, California Floristic Province, is characterized by high rates of Phalacoseris, and Sequoiadendron). Information on rarity and ende- plant endemism (Stebbins and Major 1965; Raven and Axelrod mism for lichens and bryophytes for the Sierra Nevada is very specu- 1978; Messick 1995). For most of this century, plant collecting lative and fragmentary due to limited fieldwork and the small number and floristic research remained the pursuits of professional of available collections. Two mosses are endemic to the Sierra Ne- botanists with ties to major scientific and educational centers vada. Parameters obtained for each rare and/or endemic taxon in- (Shevock and Taylor 1987). Floristic studies have as one of clude habitat type and distributions by county, river basin, and their primary goals documentation of all the taxa (species, topographic quadrangle.
    [Show full text]
  • Profiles of California Vegetation. Berkeley, Calif., Pacific SW
    PACIFIC SOUTHWEST Forest and Range FOREST SERVICE U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE P.O. BOX 245, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94701 Experiment Station USDA FOREST SERVICE RESEARCH PAPER PSW- 76 /1971 CONTENTS Page Introduction .................................................... 1 Coverage and Arrangement ....................................... 1 Scale ofProfiles................................................. 3 Vegetation Types................................................ 3 Plant Names and Symbols ........................................ 4 Summary ....................................................... 5 Literature Cited ................................................. 6 Tables: 1—Index ofVegetation Profiles ................................. 7 2—Key to Vegetation Types .................................... 9 3—Alphabetical Key to LetterSymbols........................... 12 4—Plant Names andOccurrence on Profiles ...................... 13 Profiles ........................................................ 21 The Author WILLIAM B. CRITCHFIELD, a research geneticist, heads the Forest Service's Pioneer Research Unit on Hybridization and Evolution of Forest Trees, with headquarters in Berkeley, Calif. He is a native of Fargo, N.D. He earned a bachelor's degree (1949) in forestry and a doctorate (1956) in botany and genetics at the University of California, Berkeley. He then joined the Cabot Foundation for Botanical Research at Harvard University as a forest geneticist. From 1959 until his appointment as a pioneer research scientist in 1971, he was
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment for HUD-Funded Proposals Recommended Format Per 24 CFR 58.36, Revised March 2005 [Previously Recommended EA Formats Are Obsolete]
    U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development San Francisco Regional Office - Region IX 600 Harrison Street San Francisco, California 94107-1387 www.hud.gov espanol.hud.gov Environmental Assessment for HUD-funded Proposals Recommended format per 24 CFR 58.36, revised March 2005 [Previously recommended EA formats are obsolete]. Project Identification: Winterhaven Public Safety Facility Preparer: Kevin L. Grant, Ericsson-Grant, Inc. Responsible Entity: County of Imperial Month/Year: February/2017 1 Environmental Assessment Responsible Entity:_County of Imperial___ _____________________________________ [24 CFR 58.2(a)(7)] Certifying Officer:_Ralph Cordova, Jr. ___ ______________________________________ [24 CFR 58.2(a)(2)] Project Name: Winterhaven Public Safety Facility____________________________________ Project Location: 518 Railroad Avenue, Winterhaven, CA 92281________________________ Estimated total project cost: $2,870,446__________________________________________ Grant Recipient County of Imperial_______________________________________________ [24 CFR 58.2(a)(5)] Recipient Address: 940 W. Main Street, Suite 208, El Centro, CA 92243 Project Representative: Esperanza Colio Warren, Community & Economic Development Manager Telephone Number: (442) 265-1100 Conditions for Approval: (List all mitigation measures adopted by the responsible entity to eliminate or minimize adverse environmental impacts. These conditions must be included in project contracts and other relevant documents as requirements). [24 CFR 58.40(d), 40 CFR 1505.2(c)] Mitigation Measure AQ-1: During clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by the following techniques: Prepare a high wind dust control plan and implement plan elements and terminate soil disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph. Limit the simultaneous disturbance area to as small an area as practical when winds exceed 25 mph.
    [Show full text]