DOCSLIB.ORG

TTAC Agenda 20200205

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TTAC Agenda 20200205 KERN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE KERN COG CONFERENCE ROOM Wednesday 1401 19TH STREET, THIRD FLOOR February 5, 2020 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 10:00 A.M. Dial +1 (786) 535-3211 https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/269963557 Access Code: 269-963-557 I. ROLL CALL: II. PUBLIC COMMENTS: This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons to address the Committee on any matter not on this agenda but under the jurisdiction of the Committee. Committee members may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed. They may ask a question for clarification; make a referral to staff for factual information or request staff to report back to the Committee at a later meeting. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PRIOR TO MAKING A PRESENTATION. Disabled individuals who need special assistance to attend or participate in a meeting of the Transportation Technical Advisory Committee may request assistance at 1401 19th Street, Suite 300; Bakersfield CA 93301 or by calling (661) 635-2900. Every effort will be made to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities by making meeting material available in alternative formats. Requests for assistance should be made at least three (3) working days in advance whenever possible. III. APPROVAL OF DISCUSSION SUMMARY: Minutes from meeting of November 6, 2019. IV. FEDERAL SAFETY PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT (PM1) “TOWARD ZERO” 2020 TARGET UPDATE (Flickinger) Comment: Required federal process to annually monitor transportation safety performance measure progress, including encouragement of member agencies to improve safety on our streets with their transportation expenditures. Action: Recommend that the Transportation Planning Policy Committee approve the 2020 Kern “Toward Zero” safety targets consistent with federal methodology and direct staff to work with member agencies and stakeholders to develop projects that will accelerate attainment of the targets. V. LOCAL ROAD SAFETY PLAN (LRSP) GRANTS UPDATE (Flickinger) Comment: On October 8, 2019, Caltrans announced a Call for Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) grants. Action: Information. VI. BIENNIAL LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS SURVEY – FEBRUARY 2020 (Flickinger) 1 Comment: All Kern COG member agencies, be watching for the statewide biennial local streets and roads survey scheduled to be emailed out in early February 2020 to be used to help direct road maintenance funding to local jurisdictions. Action: Information. VII. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3 OUTSTANDING PROJECT REPORT 2020 (Snoddy) Comment: On January 14, 2020, Kern COG staff hosted a Project Delivery Update meeting with project managers throughout Kern County which included an estimated $2,265,481 of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 projects (pedestrian and sidewalk projects). Action: Report latest Article 3 project information to staff at TTAC meeting. VIII. FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2019/20 FTA SECTION 5311 CALL FOR PROJECTS (Snoddy) Comment: Rural agencies providing public transportation services are eligible to apply for FY 2019/20 funding from the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) through the Section 5311 program. Nine local agencies are eligible to apply Action: Information. IX. KERN ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM - STATUS REPORT (Urata) Comment: To help meet more stringent air standards, Kern COG promotes early deployment of alternative fuel vehicle technologies such as plug-in electric vehicles (EVs) and compressed natural gas-fueled vehicles. This report provides staff activity information, updates the quarterly inventory of EV charging spaces in Kern County, and provides funding information. Action: Information. X. 2022 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT UPDATE (Stramaglia) Comment: Development of the Kern Council of Governments 2022 Regional Transportation Plan requires the review and update of the Capital Improvement Program Element. Action: Information. XI. CONGESTION MITIGATION AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) – FINAL PROGRAM OF PROJECTS (Invina) Comment: Kern COG staff developed a Draft CMAQ Program of Projects that was circulated to the TTAC via email December 26, 2019 and presented to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee on January 16, 2020. 2 Action: Recommend approval of the Final CMAQ Program of Projects to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee. XII. CONGESTION MITIGATION AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) – CONTINGENCY PROJECT POLICY AND PROJECT LIST (Invina) Comment: Kern COG staff is proposing to add about $22 million of contingency CMAQ programming in FFY 22-23 and 23-24 in the event that projects for FFY 20-21 and 21-22 are not delivered. The draft was circulated to the TTAC via email December 26, 2019 and presented to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee on January 16, 2020. Action: Recommend approval of CMAQ Contingency Project Policy and Attachment A to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee. XIII. REGIONAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (RSTP) – FINAL PROGRAM OF PROJECTS (Invina) Comment: The Final RSTP Program of Projects includes $23.9 million for member agency projects. The draft program was circulated to the TTAC via email December 26, 2019 and presented to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee on January 16, 2020. Action: Recommend approval of the Final RSTP Program of Projects to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee. XIV. FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FTIP) - AMENDMENT PROCEDURE UPDATE (Pacheco) Comment: The Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) is a dynamic short-range list of transportation projects that is subject to change. The FTIP amendment process was last revised April 16, 2015. Additional revisions are needed to update language consistent with Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration revised procedures. Action: Recommend approval of the revised FTIP Amendment Policy to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee. XV. PROJECT DELIVERY LETTERS – ATP, CMAQ, RSTP (Pacheco) Comment: Presentation of project delivery letters for Active Transportation Program (ATP), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program, and Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP). 16 projects have not yet submitted for funding authorization representing $10 million in federal/state programming. Action: Information. 3 XVI. PROJECT ACCOUNTABILITY TEAM REPORT (Pacheco) Comment: January 7, 2020 Project Accountability Team meeting highlights and latest updates. Action: Information. XVII. FEBRUARY TDA PUBLIC TRANSIT AND STREETS AND ROADS CLAIMS FOR TEHACHAPI TOTALING $548,138 (Snoddy) Comment: Review and recommendation of Tehachapi’s FY 2019-20 Public Transit and Street and Roads claims totaling $548,138. Action: Review TDA Public Transit claims and Streets and Roads claims received by January 24, 2020, for $548,138 and recommend approval to the Transportation Planning Policy Committee. XVIII. PUBLIC WORKSHOP/PUBLIC COMMENT – 2020-2050 GROWTH FORECAST DRAFT REPORT (Raymond) Comment: The 2020-2050 Growth Forecast Draft Report is available for review and public comment on Kern COG’s webpage https://www.kerncog.org/estimates-and-projections/. The public workshop of the forecast is scheduled to be hosted at the Kern COG board meeting in February 2020. Action: Information. XIX. MEMBER ITEMS- • Letters appointing TTAC officers and alternates for the calendar year 2020 have not been received from the following agencies: • Arvin • California City • Caltrans • CTSA • Delano • McFarland • Wasco • Please e-mail your document to [email protected]. A template for the letter will be provided upon request. XX. ADJOURNMENT - The next meeting will be held on March 4, 2020. 4 KERN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE KERN COG CONFERENCE ROOM Wednesday 1401 19TH STREET, THIRD FLOOR November 6, 2019 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 10:00 A.M. Chairman Schlosser called the meeting to order at approximately 10:5 a.m. A “sign-in” sheet was provided. I. ROLL CALL, MEMBERS PRESENT: Jay Schlosser City of Tehachapi Bard Lower City of Ridgecrest Joe West NOR/CTSA Bob Neath County of Kern Ed Galero City of Delano Alex Gonzalez City of Shafter Stuart Patteson City of Bakersfield Steve Barnes GET Lorena Mendibles Caltrans Biridiana Bishop City of Wasco Shawn Monk City of California City Lorena Mendibles Caltrans Adam Ojeda City of Arvin Mario Gonzalez City of McFarland STAFF: Peter Smith Kern COG Becky Napier Kern COG Robert Snoddy Kern COG Raquel Pacheco Kern COG Rochelle Invina Kern COG Veronica McCulloch Kern COG Linda Urata Kern COG Ed Flickinger OTHER: Cindy Parra Bike Bakersfield Yolanda Alcantar County of Kern Nate Veeh Geotab Christine Viterelli City of Arvin II. PUBLIC COMMENTS: This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons to address the Committee on any matter not on this agenda but under the jurisdiction of the Committee. Committee members may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed. They may ask a question for clarification; make a referral to staff for factual information or request staff to report back to the Committee at a later meeting. SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PRIOR TO MAKING A PRESENTATION. Christine Viterelli phoned in for the meeting. Mr. Schlosser asked Ms. Viterelli if she would like to be the voting member today or Mr. Ojeda, since they were both present
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The 2014 Regional Transportation Plan Promotes a More Efficient
    CHAPTER 5 STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS – VERSION 5 CHAPTER 5 STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS INTRODUCTION This chapter sets forth plans of action for the region to pursue and meet identified transportation needs and issues. Planned investments are consistent with the goals and policies of the plan, the Sustainable Community Strategy element (see chapter 4) and must be financially constrained. These projects are listed in the Constrained Program of Projects (Table 5-1) and are modeled in the Air Quality Conformity Analysis. The 2014 Regional Transportation Plan promotes Forecast modeling methods in this Regional Transportation a more efficient transportation Plan primarily use the “market-based approach” based on demographic data and economic trends (see chapter 3). The system that calls for fully forecast modeling was used to analyze the strategic funding alternative investments in the combined action elements found in this transportation modes, while chapter.. emphasizing transportation demand and transporation Alternative scenarios are not addressed in this document; they are, however, addressed and analyzed for their system management feasibility and impacts in the Environmental Impact Report approaches for new highway prepared for the 2014 Regional Transportation Plan, as capacity. required by the California Environmental Quality Act (State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126(f) and 15126.6(a)). From this point, the alternatives have been predetermined and projects that would deliver the most benefit were selected. The 2014 Regional Transportation Plan promotes a more efficient transportation system that calls for fully funding alternative transportation modes, while emphasizing transportation demand and transporation system management approaches for new highway capacity. The Constrained Program of Projects (Table 5-1) includes projects that move the region toward a financially constrained and balanced system.
    [Show full text]
  • FIS Report Template
    VOLUME 1 OF 3 KERN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER Arvin, City of 060076 McFarland, City of 060080 Bakersfield, City of 060077 Ridgecrest, City of 060081 California City, City of 060440 Shafter, City of 060082 Delano, City of 060078 Taft, City of 065063 Kern County, Unincorporated 060075 Tehachapi, City of 060084 Areas Maricopa, City of 060079 Wasco, City of 060085 PRELIMINARY: NOVEMBER 15, 2019 REVISED: To Be Determined FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 06029CV001B Version Number 2.6.3.6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume 1 Page SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The National Flood Insurance Program 1 1.2 Purpose of this Flood Insurance Study Report 2 1.3 Jurisdictions Included in the Flood Insurance Study Project 2 1.4 Considerations for using this Flood Insurance Study Report 12 SECTION 2.0 – FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS 25 2.1 Floodplain Boundaries 25 2.2 Floodways 31 2.3 Base Flood Elevations 32 2.4 Non-Encroachment Zones 33 2.5 Coastal Flood Hazard Areas 33 2.5.1 Water Elevations and the Effects of Waves 33 2.5.2 Floodplain Boundaries and BFEs for Coastal Areas 33 2.5.3 Coastal High Hazard Areas 33 2.5.4 Limit of Moderate Wave Action 34 SECTION 3.0 – INSURANCE APPLICATIONS 34 3.1 National Flood Insurance Program Insurance Zones 34 SECTION 4.0 – AREA STUDIED 34 4.1 Basin Description 34 4.2 Principal Flood Problems 36 4.3 Non-Levee Flood Protection Measures 39 4.4 Levees 40 SECTION 5.0 – ENGINEERING METHODS 53 5.1 Hydrologic Analyses 53 5.2 Hydraulic Analyses 59 5.3 Coastal Analyses 67 5.3.1
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Report Card Report Card for Kern County’S Infrastructure
    2009 2009 Report Card Report Card for Kern County’s Infrastructure Atmospheric Quality D Energy B Solid Waste A Waste Water B- Domestic Water B- Northern Calif. Delta D Schools B- Parks C- Kern County’s Infrastructure Transportation D+ A County at the Crossroads Airports B Roads D Highways D Transit C- Bridges C+ Rail C+ Flood Control D+ Kern County’s Infrastructure C- A Citizen’s Guide Leadership Messages on Restoring America’s Infrastructure: “We will rebuild and retrofit America to meet the demands of the Twenty-First Century. That means repairing and modernizing thousands of miles of America’s roadways and providing new mass transit options for millions of Americans. If we act boldly, A Few Words of Special Appreciation: we will emerge stronger and more prosperous than we were before.” The IRCC members are, of course, deeply indebted to the members of the local ASCE, ACEC and APWA organizations for Barack H. Obama their support of this Report Card project. Even though those organizations were the originators of the project, the continuing 44th President of the United States commitment of their memberships to it is still deserving of recognition as an important public service. Much volunteer time (Excerpted from ASCE's video, “2009 Report Card for America's Infrastructure”) has been spent, as well as considerable funding from lean organizational budgets. It is to be hoped that those citizens of Kern County who review this document will understand and appreciate such commitment, as well as the sense of genuine concern “Crumbling infrastructure has a direct impact on our personal and economic health, and the nation’s infrastructure crisis is underlying the efforts reported in these pages.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment ESA Endangered Species Act Exchanger the Cross Valley CVP Contractor Who Is Considered to Be the First Party in the Exchange
    Article 5 Exchange Draft EA TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Acronyms and Definitions………………………………………………………. ii Section 1 Purpose and Need…………………………………………………….. 1 Section 2 Alternatives…………………………………………………………… 8 Section 3 Affected Environment……………………………………………….. 11 Section 4 Environmental Consequences……………………………………….. 27 Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species……….. 36 Section 5 Environmental Commitments……………………………………….. 41 Section 6 References…………………………………………………………….. 42 Section 7 Consultation and Coordination……………………………………… 43 Section 8 List of Agencies and Persons Consulted…………………………….. 44 Appendix Appendix A Article 5 Language………………………………………………… 44 Appendix B Imbalanced Exchange Scenarios………………………………….. 48 Appendix C Cross Valley Contractors………………………………………….. 50 Appendix D Friant Division Potential Exchangees…………………………….. 58 Appendix E Other Non-CVP Water Districts and Potential Exchangees……. 68 Appendix F State Listed Species and Species of Concern……………………... 102 Appendix G Figures 3-1 thru 3-4 Maps………………………………………… 107 Tables Table 1.1 List of CV Contractors and CVP Supply……………………………. 2 Table 3.1 CV Contractors and Subcontractors………………………………… 12 Table 3.2 Potential Exchangees from the Friant Division CVP Contractors…. 13 Table 3.3 Deer Creek & Tule River Authority………………………………….. 14 Table 3.4 Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District…………………………. 14 Table 3.5 Kern County Water Agency…………………………………………... 15 Table 3.6 Kern Water Bank Authority………………………………………….. 16 Table 3.7 Kings River Conservation District…………………………………… 16 Table 3.8 Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District…………………………… 17 Table 3.9 Groundwater Basins and Subbasins…………………………….……. 19 Table 3.10 Threatened and Endangered Species that may Occur within the Action Area……………………………………………. 24 i Article 5 Exchange Draft EA LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Acronyms and Definitions AEWSD Arvin Edison Water Storage District AF Acre foot. The quantity of water required to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot (325,872 gallons).
    [Show full text]
  • Water Budgets for Major Streams in the Central Valley, California, 1961-77
    WATER BUDGETS FOR MAJOR STREAMS IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, 1961-77 By James R. Mullen and Paul Nady U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 85-401 Regional Aquifer-System Analysis oo i i l o o Sacramento, California 1985 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Services Section Federal Building, Room W-2234 Western Distribution Branch 2800 Cottage Way U.S. Geological Survey Sacramento, California 95825 Box 25424, Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 (Telephone: [303] 236-7476) CONTENTS Page Abstract--------- --------------------------------------------------- i Introduction----- ------------------------------------------ ______ i Method --- --- --- --- --- ------- -- - 4 Base period------------------------------------------------------ 5 Acknowledgments-------------------------------------------------- 5 Selected references--------------------------------------------------- 6 Schematics, explanations, and water-budget tables--------------------- 7 Kern River------------------------------------------------------------ 9 Tule River -- - - --- ------- 13 Kaweah River---------------------------------------------------------- 17 Main stem-------------------------------------------------------- 17 St. Johns River --- ------ 21 Kings River----------------------------------------------------------- 25 San Joaquin River-------------------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Conditional One Year Pre-Approval of Transfers and Exchanges Between Friant and Cross Valley Long-Term CVP Contractors and NCVP Contractors
    Draft Environmental Assessment 2008 Conditional One Year Pre-approval of Transfers and Exchanges between Friant and Cross Valley Long-Term CVP Contractors and NCVP Contractors EA-07-120 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid Pacific Region South Central California Area Office Fresno, California February 2008 This page intentionally left blank i Contents Section 1 Purpose and Need for Action...................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ............................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Potential Issues.................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Authorities for the Proposed Action ................................................................................... 4 Section 2 Alternatives Including Proposed Action..................................................................... 6 2.1 No Action Alternative......................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Proposed Action.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kern IRWMP Update\ DOCS\Plan Update\KIRWMP Update FINAL 2020-0311.Docx Tulare Lake Basin Portion of Kern County IRWMP Update
    KERN tRWMP Integrated Regional Water Management Plan .0 a?” FINAL - March 2020 Tulare Lake Basin Portion of Kern County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Final Update March 11, 2020 Plan Update Prepared by: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group 1800 30th Street, Suite 280 Bakersfield, CA 93301 G:\James Water Bank Authority-2884\288419001 Kern IRWMP Update\_DOCS\Plan Update\KIRWMP_Update_FINAL 2020-0311.docx Tulare Lake Basin Portion of Kern County IRWMP Update Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction to the Region ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Relationship with Neighboring IRWMPs ................................................... 1-2 1.2 Purpose of the Tulare Lake Basin Portion of Kern County IRWMP ......................... 1-5 1.3 Stakeholder Involvement ......................................................................................... 1-5 1.3.1 Regional Water Management Group ........................................................ 1-5 1.3.2 Executive Committee ............................................................................. 1-11 1.3.3 Stakeholders .......................................................................................... 1-11 1.4 Participation and Outreach .................................................................................... 1-16 1.4.1 Disadvantaged Community Outreach ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • School District Origins Kern County California
    SCHOOL DISTRICT ORIGINS IN KERN COUNTY CALIFORNIA BY JERRY KIR K LAND CREATED UNDER THE AUSPI C ES OF KERN COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SC HOOLS , 2010 James & Sarah Glenn sell 5.5 acres of land to Linns Valley School District, January 11, 1875. (Note that both signed with an “X”.) SCHOOL DISTRICT ORIGINS IN KERN COUNTY CALIFORNIA BY JERRY KIR K LAND CREATED UNDER THE AUSPI C ES OF KERN COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SC HOOLS , 2010 Kern County School - Summer 1890 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 9 ARVIN UNION SCHOOL DisTRICT ................................................................ 21 BAKERSFIELD CiTY SCHOOL DisTRICT .......................................................25 BEARDSLEY SCHOOL DisTRICT ....................................................................... 31 BELRIDGE SCHOOL DisTRICT ..........................................................................35 BLAKE SCHOOL DisTRICT ..................................................................................39 BUTTONWILLOW UNION SCHOOL DisTRICT ........................................45 CaLIENTE UNION SCHOOL DisTRICT .........................................................49 DELANO UNION SCHOOL DisTRICT ............................................................53 DiGiORGIO SCHOOL DisTRICT.......................................................................59 EDisON SCHOOL DisTRICT ...............................................................................63 ELK
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Monitoring Plan (SWMP) As Required Under the Regional Board Order No
    Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority Surface Water Monitoring Plan Kern County, California • February 2015 Prepared for: Prepared by: Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority Surface Water Monitoring Plan Revision 1 Kern County, California Initial Submittal: August 4, 2014 Resubmittal: February 2, 2015 Prepared for: Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority Kern County, California Prepared by: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Bakersfield, California COPYRIGHT 2015 by PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group expressly reserves its common law copyright and other applicable property rights to this document. This document is not to be reproduced, changed, or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to a third party without first obtaining the written permission and consent of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group In the event of unauthorized reuse of the information contained herein by a third party, the third party shall hold the firm of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group harmless, and shall bear the cost of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group's legal fees associated with defending and enforcing these rights. The Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority (KRWCA) shall have unlimited use of this work product. Certifications This Surface Water Monitoring Plan is signed by the following certified professionals: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Project Team This Surface Water Monitoring Plan was prepared by the following project team members: Provost
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment
    Draft Final EA 10/19/05 Conditional Pre-approval of Multiple Water Service Actions EA-02-35 Public Draft was available 8/2005 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Transfers and Exchanges of CVP Water from the Friant Division to Non-Central Valley Project Contractors and the Execution of Temporary, One-Year Contracts (Section 215) DRAFT FINAL EA EA-02-35 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation South Central California Area Office 1243 N Street Fresno, California 93721 1 Draft Final EA 10/19/05 Conditional Pre-approval of Multiple Water Service Actions EA-02-35 Public Draft was available 8/2005 This page intentionally left blank. 2 Draft Final EA 10/19/05 Conditional Pre-approval of Multiple Water Service Actions EA-02-35 Public Draft was available 8/2005 CHANGES FROM DRAFT TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT….. 7 BACKGROUND…………………………………………………………………… 8 SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………… 8 SCOPE……………………………………………………………………………… 9 1.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES………………………………. 12 Alternative 1………………………………………………………………………… 12 Alternative 2………………………………………………………………………… 12 Alternative 3………………………………………………………………………… 12 Alternative 4………………………………………………………………………… 13 2.0 MANAGEMENT DIRECTION AND AUTHORITIES……………………….. 15 Alternative 1………………………………………………………………………… 15 Alternative 2………………………………………………………………………… 16 Alternative 3………………………………………………………………………… 17 Alternative 4………………………………………………………………………… 18 3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED………………………………………………………… 19 Purpose and Need for Alternative 1………………………………………………… 20 Purpose and Need for Alternative 2…………………………………………………
    [Show full text]
  • Ieeioation Papees
    DEPABTMENT OF THE INTEKIOE WATER-SUPPLY IEEIOATION PAPEES UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY No. 17 WASHINGTON OOTEKNMENT PRINTING OFPIOB 1898 UNITED . STATES GEOLOGICAL SUBYEY CHARLES D. WALCOTT, DIBECTOB BY CARL EWALD GKRTJNSKY WASHINGTON GOVEENMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1898 CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittal........................................................ 11 Introduction................................................................ 13 San Joaquin Valley.................................I........................ 15 Water appropriation and irrigation districts................................. 19 Kraft irrigation district-..._ ...................................... 23 Orland South Side irrigation district ................................ 23 Central irrigation district........................................... 23 Colusa irrigation district............................................ 23 College City irrigation district (proposed) ...-..................- ..--- 23 Browns Valley irrigation district ..................................... 23 Modesto irrigation district.......................................... 24 Turlock irrigation district........................................... 24 Madera irrigation district........................................... 24 Selma irrigation district............................................. 24 Alta irrigation district.............................................. 24 Tulare irrigation district............................................ 24 Tule River irrigation district.......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kern County Integrated Regional Water Management
    Project Submittal Form To the extent possible this form should be electronically filled out and e-mailed to: [email protected]. Part 1. Lead Implementing Agency/Organizational Information Please provide the following information regarding the project sponsor and proposed project. Implementing Agency/ Organization / Individual: Kern County Water Agency – Improvement District No. 4 Agency / Organization / Individual Address: 3200 Rio Mirada Drive Bakersfield, CA 93308 Possible Partnering Agencies: Name: David Beard Title: Improvement District No. 4 Manager Telephone: Fax: 661-634-1493 661-634-1428 Email: [email protected] Website: www.kcwa.com Project Name: Improvement of Recharge Capacity to the Kern River off of the Cross Valley Canal Page 1 of 14 Either the latitude/longitude or a location description is required. To determine the latitude/longitude, use the closest address or intersection. If the project is linear, use the furthest upstream latitude/longitude. Project Latitude: Project Longitude: Various locations on the Cross Valley Canal (CVC) and CVC Extension. Location Description: Regional Grouping: Identify the Regional Grouping your agency is located in, and the Regional Grouping your project is located in. Agency Project Greater Bakersfield Agency Project Kern County Agency Project Kern County Water Agency Agency Project Kern Fan Agency Project Kern River Valley Agency Project Mountains/Foothills Agency Project North County Agency Project South County Agency Project West Side Project Cooperating Agency(ies)/Organization(s)/Individual(s): • • • • Project Status (e.g., new, ongoing, expansion, new phase): Existing Page 2 of 14 Part 2. Project Need It is important to understand the need(s) or issue(s) that the proposed project will address and the benefits that it will provide.
    [Show full text]