EXTENSION OF THE SAN FRANCISCO AND SAN PABLO BAY TRAIL AT LONE TREE POINT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Town of Rodeo Contra Costa County California December 2015
Prepared For:
2950 Peralta Oaks Court
Oakland, CA 94605-0381
Prepared By BKF Engineers
300 Frank Ogawa Plaza, Suite 380 Oakland, CA 94612 Robert Stevens, PE 510.529.0336
LSA Associates 157 Park Place
Richmond, CA 94801 Laura Lafler 510.236-6810
Engeo San Ramon 2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250 San Ramon, California 94583 Jeff Fippin, GE 925.837-2973
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...... 2 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ...... 5 TRAIL ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES ...... 12 COST TO IMPLEMENT ...... 17 APPROVALS ...... 19 RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS ...... 19
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 – LOCATION MAP ...... 3 FIGURE 2 – SITE PLAN ...... 3 FIGURE 3 – BANK STABILIZATION ...... 4 FIGURE 4 – TOPOGRAPHY ...... 6 FIGURE 5 – VEGETATION MAP ...... 9 FIGURE 6 – ALTERNATE 1 ...... 13 FIGURE 7 – ALTERNATE 2 ...... 15 FIGURE 8 – PACIFIC AVENUE STREET CROSSING ...... 16
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Preliminary Geologic Exploration Appendix B: Flood Zone Mapping Appendix C: Land Use Analysis Appendix D: Biological and Cultural Resources Technical Memorandum Appendix E: Shoreline Protection Appendix F: Project Description
INTRODUCTION The San Francisco Bay Trail is a non- motorized alternative transportation and recreational corridor proposed to encircle San Francisco and San Pablo Bays with a continuous 500-mile network of bicycling and walking trails. The idea for a trail began in 1987 when State Senator Bill Lockyer authored Senate Bill 100 directing the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) to develop a plan for this “ring around the Bay.” The Bay Trail Plan adopted by ABAG in July 1989 included a trail alignment; a set of policies to guide future selection; design and Existing picnic grounds at Lone Tree Point located below a blue implementation routes; and strategies for gum eucalyptus tree; Contra Costa County’s Protected Tree implementation financing. When Ordinance protects this tree species. complete, the trail will connect the shoreline of all nine bay area counties, link 47 cities and eventually cross all the major toll bridges in the region.
Throughout the Bay Area, cities, counties, park districts, and private developers have completed about 340 miles of Bay Trail. The East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) is currently planning an extension of the Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point as shown in Figure 1. This trail segment is consistent with the East Bay Regional Park District Master Plan (2013) as illustrated in map 1: San Francisco Bay Trail - Point Pinole to Carquinez Straight.
As shown in Figure 2, this new trail will be about 1,800 feet in length commencing at an existing section of the Bay Trail installed in support of the Victoria by the Bay private residential development and ending at an existing EBRPD parking lot just east of Pacific Avenue in the Rodeo, an unincorporated district of Contra Costa County. Currently, Contra Costa County’s Department of Public Works is studying options to reconfigure San Pablo Avenue extending the Bay Trail to the north.
According to the “San Francisco Bay Shoreline Guide” published by the State Coastal Conservancy, during California’s Spanish era, ranchers rounded cattle up from the hills and led them to the Lone Tree Point shoreline where herders loaded them onto ships and transported to Vallejo for further grazing. This practice ended in the late 19th century with the construction of the railroad tracks. While the southerly segment of the trail was the former Pacific Refining Company, much of Lone Tree Point remained untouched.
EBRPD intends to design the trail as a multi-use facility serving bicyclists and pedestrians. Not only does the trail afford users with stunning vistas of San Pablo Bay, it will continue to close the gap to the future intermodal transit facility in Hercules.
In addition to the trail improvements, EBRPD plans to stabilize the shoreline along a segment of trail that commences at the end of Pacific Avenue and leads to a sandy beach on San Pablo Bay. Since 1993, Park staff have observed that a 280-foot segment as shown in Figure 3 has eroded about 15 feet exposing concrete rubble. The District plans to install additional riprap along the shoreline to limit further erosion.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 2
FIGURE 1 – LOCATION MAP
To Future Hercules Intermodal Transit Station
FIGURE 2 – SITE PLAN
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 3
FIGURE 3 – BANK STABILIZATION
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 4
OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Introduction. The new trail alignment is located along the San Pablo Bay shoreline from the City of Hercules to the Town of Rodeo in western Contra Costa County parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad. Commencing at an existing section of the Bay Trail constructed by the Victoria by the Bay residential development, the new trail will head north and easterly to Pacific Avenue all within assessors’ parcel numbers 357- 371-001 and 404-030-045; the East Bay Regional Park District (EBDRD) owns the former parcel and has an easement in the latter.
Topography. The existing ground slopes up from San Pablo Bay to the Water collects in the large swale located within Lone Tree Point existing residential development with during winter months; this was likely a tidal slough prior to rolling terrain generally following the construction of the railroad. trail’s alignment as shown in Figure 4. Elevations range from 14 to 30 feet based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. Near the center of the trail, there is a large swale, which based upon a review of historic maps, appeared to be once connected to San Pablo Bay likely functioning as a tidal slough. There are several ditches and gullies that flow from the residential areas to San Pablo Bay, most are no more than 48 inches wide and 24 inches deep.
Based upon a review of existing utility records and field reconnaissance, there appears to be a 12 inch and 8 inch in diameter, Kinder Morgan owned pipelines located with the Union Pacific Railroad right of way. These pipelines convey petroleum products from nearby The end of the Bay Trail at Victoria Bay; the extension into refineries to terminal and airports. Lone Tree Point is in the background Pacific Gas and Electric has a utility pole carrying overhead conductors between
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 5 FIGURE 4 - TOPOGRAPGHY
Garrelson and San Pablo Avenues within the trail area.
The trail alignment is not located in the 1- percent annual chance flood (Zone A) as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency; see Appendix B for additional information.
Geological Resources. Generally, bedrock consisting of the north-dipping Later Tertiary sedimentary rocks, including Miocene-age marine sandstone of the Cierbo and Neroly formations, tuffaceous sandstone of Pinole tuff and Pliocene- Pleistocene age non-marine siltstone claystone and sandstone of the Montezuma Formation underlay the Union Pacific Railroad owns the right of way between San extension of the Bay Trail at Lone Tree Pablo Bay and future trail alignment. The Capitol Corridor Point. The site is not within a known commuter line and freight trains heavily use the corridor. active fault zone. The nearest active fault Union Pacific’s addition of a third track to serve the future is the Hayward fault located about 5.4 Hercules Intermodal Station may affect the trail alignment at miles to the southwest of the site. Site Lone Tree Point. soils likely do not create the conditions for liquefaction.
There is about two to four feet of moderately to highly plastic clay soils atop the bedrock along most of the trail’s alignment. In addition, certain areas have undocumented fill placed by previous parties, which the trail’s construction will need remove and replace within its alignment to prevent settlement. Planners should give attention that the surface soils have a high expansion potential, which can damage the trail’s pavement if not properly mitigated.
The swale appears to have about 10 to 14 feet of alluvium deposits atop a Bay Margin deposit. These soils have low strength and are likely highly compressible. Filling or constructing bridge foundations in these areas will require deepened foundations to prevent settlement.
Conventional construction equipment can excavate site soils and bedrock. Excavations in excess of 10 feet in the sandstones of the Cierbo, Neroly and Pinole Tuff may generate some oversize fragments. The ability to drill holes for bridge foundations require further evaluation.
See Appendix A for a detailed evaluation of geotechnical information.
Land Uses in the Project Vicinity. Land uses immediately adjacent to the project area include parkland, residential and industrial uses. The Rodeo Marina (boat and recreational vehicle storage yard), Rodeo Sewage Treatment Plant and the Conoco Phillips San Francisco Refinery are located to the north along the shoreline. San Pablo Bay borders the Shoreline Parcel to the west. Residential development associated with the unincorporated town of Rodeo is located to the east. The southern terminus of the proposed trail alignment abuts the Victoria by the Bay residential subdivision in the City of Hercules, which includes
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 7
single-family homes, a commercial center, and an elementary school. See Appendix C for additional information.
Biological Resources. There are several vegetation types in the area of the new trail alignment as shown in Figure 5 including sensitive natural communities including beardless wild rye turfs, semi-natural herbaceous stands, fields of fat hen (seasonal wetland), and arroyo willow thickets. Tree and shrub species identified on the site include black acacia (Acacia melanoxylon), Tasmanian blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), English walnut (Juglans regia), shiny privet A colony of California ground squirrels (Spermophilus (Ligustrum japonicum), Horticultural beecheyi) live along the riprap of San Pablo Bay. While not rose (Rosa sp.), Himalayan blackberry seen within the future trail area, ground squirrel’s holes offer (Rubus armeniacus), Monterey pine habitat for burrowing owls. As burrowing owls are a special- (Pinus radiata), Washington fan palm status species, prior to construction, the district should (Washingtonia robusta), and coast live complete a take avoidance survey. oak (Quercus agrifolia). With the exception of coast live oak, willow, and toyon, all of these species are non-native ornamentals.
The region includes habitat for five special-status species including the Suisun marsh aster, fragrant fritillary, longfin smelt, California red-legged frog, and burrowing owl. Additionally there is the potential presence of nesting birds, including white-tailed kite, protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treatment Act and California Fish and Game Code
Based on field observation, the swale is likely a seasonal wetland under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. For the Corps to designate it as a wetland of the United States, three indicators must be present: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. A biologist confirmed the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, they did not assess the latter two indicators. A formal delineation would be required to confirm the jurisdictional status and boundary of the seasonal wetland. The wetland would also fall under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Kinder Morgan maintains two which is responsible for issuing State water quality certification pipeline parallel the trail’s pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. alignment.
Appendix D illustrates Additional information regarding biological resources.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 8
FIGURE 5 – VEGETATION MAP
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 9
Cultural Resources. The trail includes three known cultural resources within 500 feet of the study area, consisting of prehistoric archaeological site CA-CCO-258, the Southern Pacific Railroad (P-07-000813), and steel pipes (P-07- 004530). During trenching for a fiber optic cable in 1998, archeologists identified shells associated with CA-CCO-258 east of the Lone Tree Point.
In 2010, the Federal Transit Administration recorded P-07- 004530 for the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center project. The resource is south of the study area and consists of “a cluster of at least seven steel pipes extending from a cut bank above the [Union Pacific] railroad.” The historical association of the pipes is unknown, but this feature likely dates to the early 20th century development of the area. An A historic U.S. Coast Survey Map of San evaluation of the feature indicated that it does not appear Francisco Bay illustrates a tidal slough near eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places Lone Tree Point due to a lack of a significant historical association.
The Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR), P-07-000813, was constructed adjacent to the study area between 1876 and 1878. Others evaluated this segment of the SPRR and are of the opinion it is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to numerous alterations that have compromised the resource’s integrity of materials, design, workmanship, feeling, and association.
Appendix D illustrates additional information regarding cultural resources.
Bank Stabilization. A bridge crossing the Union Pacific Railroad tracks provides access to Rodeo Marina as well as Lone Tree Point’s shoreline where an unpaved trail leads to a sandy beach. Over the last 20 years, District staff have noted that the shoreline has eroded almost 15 feet potentially compromising access. Based upon field observation, eroded soil is exposing concrete, brick, and related construction debris likely placed as fill by previous development. Areas along the shoreline Erosion of the fill placed along the San Pablo shoreline where bedrock is exposed are not eroding. exposing construction debris likely used to fill the tidal slough.
From field observation, this area appears to be the fill of the tidal slough as previously described. Tidal action is slowly dislodging soil between the debris causing it to become unstable. The District proposes to reinforce the slope using rock riprap.
Appendix E illustrates proposed plans to install the riprap.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 10
Union Pacific Railroad. Union Pacific Railroad owns the right of way between the trail and San Pablo Bay. The railroad is currently designing track modifications to accommodate the future Hercules Intermodal Transit Center. These modifications may extend to the new segment of trail as it meets the existing trail at Victoria by the Bay. The work may require installation of walls or relocations of Kinder Morgan and telecommunication facilities outside of the current Union Pacific Railroad property
Contra Costa County’s Department of Public Works is studying options to modify San Pablo Avenue, which could accomodate the Bay Trail to the north and east. Planners of the Lone Tree Point trail will need to coordinate with the County especially related to the crossing at Pacific Avenue.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 11
TRAIL ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES General. Planners will design the Lone Tree Point in accordance to Bay Trail standards and those of a Class 1 trail as defined by the State of California Department of Transportation. In general, the trail will consist of an all- weather surface likely of asphalt concrete that is 10 feet in width. Similar to other sections of the Bay Trail in the East Bay, the Lone Tree Point trail will likely consist of 4 inches of asphalt concrete atop 6 inches of class II aggregate base. The trail will have shoulders on each side that are at least two feet wide, composed of decomposed granite. Additionally, the trail will need to meet accessibility guidelines meaning that along its Steep slopes at the south end of the Lone Tree Point will alignment, the grade will be less than require grading and installation of a crossing culvert to 5% and the cross slope will be no more accommodate drainage. This area also contains than 2%. undocumented fill, which the project will need to correct.
Trail Alternative 1. As illustrated in Figure 6, the trail will follow a direct alignment from the end of the existing Bay Trail at Victoria by the Bay to Pacific Avenue. To maintain an accessible path of travel, the trail’s construction will require several cuts and fills equaling about 20,000 cubic yards. To meet existing grades along the alignment, the trail’s construction will require additional earthwork to match existing elevations. Finally, as the trail’s grading will block natural drainage pathways, the project will need to install crossing culverts as indicated in the layout plan.
Given that the drainage swale is likely a Steep topography and limited clearance between the seasonal wetland, filling it to construct residential parcel and the Union Pacific Railroad right of way the trail is likely a significant constrain the trail’s alignment. To avoid acquiring an environmental impact and regulatory easement, the trail will likely require a section of small agencies would not permit. Routing retaining walls. the trail to the east to avoid the swale would require easements from private property owners.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 12
Thus, the most direct route is to install a bicycle and pedestrian bridge. The bridge in this alternative is about 315 feet in length and 10 feet wide; it could be a prefabricated unit such as those produced by Contech or Pioneer Bridge. Given the length, a single span would be expensive to construct. Thus, the bridge will likely have a single or multiple piers placed mid span within the swale. The total number of piers would depend on bridge loading and soil conditions. Assuming a single pier was 36 inches in diameter, it would affect an area of about 10 square feet. Should the swale be a wetland, the regulatory agencies will require compensation for the loss of wetland, and the project will need to add 30 square feet potentially by expanding the swale assuming a 3:1 replacement ratio.
As the trail approaches Pacific Avenue, its alignment will cross the intersection as shown in Figure 8. We believe an at-grade crossing using high visibility crosswalk markings is reasonable given the low traffic volume at the intersection. The final design will require an investigation of sight distance of trail users especially from vehicles traveling from the Rodeo Marina in the southbound direction.
The slope of the trail as it travels to the east after the crossing of Pacific Avenue exceeds accessibility guidelines. In the configuration illustrated, it follows the existing topography. Planners could potentially reduce this slope to less than 5% in coordination with the future planned improvements to San Pablo Avenue as well modifications to the Lone Tree Point staging area. Placing the trail closer to San Pablo Avenue would not only enhance accessibility but also improve sight distance of trail users from oncoming motorists.
Trail Alternative 2. The second alternative as illustrated in Figure 7 is not the shortest path as the previous alternative; rather, it follows the existing topography to minimize grading. However, limited right of way and steep topography challenge the trail at its south end requiring a partial retaining wall similar to Alternative 2. The total sum of earthwork is 23,000 cubic yards, which is slightly more than Alternative 1.
The revised alignment offers the opportunity to cross the swale where it is narrower. Thus, similar to Alternative 1, the project will construct a prefabricated bridge that is 220 feet long. Given the length, the bridge will likely not be a single span requiring a single or multiple piers placed within the swale.
If the large swale at Lone Tree Point is a seasonal wetland, the trail could install a prefabricated bridge to avoid affecting jurisdictional waters. As the length of crossing is large, a single span bridge is expensive to construct. Thus, the project could install a multiple span bridge with piers located within the swale minimizing impact and reducing construction cost.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 14
COST TO IMPLEMENT The following are estimated costs to construct the two trail alignments based upon East Bay bid data in the year 2015. For future dates, planners should escalate costs by 4% per year.
TRAIL ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 1 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS UNIT COST CONT. QTY COST 100 MOBILIZATION LS$ 169,217 0% 1.00$ 169,217 101 LAYOUT AND STAKING LS$ 10,000 15% 1.00$ 11,500 102 WATER POLLUTION CONTROL LS$ 20,000 15% 1.00$ 23,000 103 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LS$ 25,000 15% 1.00$ 28,750 104 WETLAND MITIGATION LS$ 50,000 20% 1.00$ 60,000 105 HYDROSEED SF $ 0.15 15% 58,800$ 10,143 106 SITE CLEARING SF $ 0.16 15% 84,000$ 15,456 107 EARTHWORK - CUT CY $ 3.00 15% 11,000$ 37,950 108 EARTH WORK - FILL CY $ 3.50 15% 8,000$ 32,200 109 UNDOCUMENTED FILL CORRECTION CY $ 10.00 25% 1,000$ 12,500 110 EXPORT CY $ 20.00 15% 3,000$ 69,000 111 FINE GRADING SF $ 1.00 15% 84,000$ 96,600 112 AGGREGATE BASE TON $ 30.00 15% 1,300$ 44,850 113 ASPHALT CONCRETE TON $ 130.00 15% 800$ 119,600 114 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SF $ 220.00 20% 3,150$ 831,600 115 STRIPING LS$ 10,000.00 15% 1 $ 11,500 116 FENCE LF $ 32.00 15% 585$ 21,528 117 STORM DRAIN CULVERT LF$ 150.00 15% 190$ 32,775 118 RETAINING WALL (CUT OR FILL) SF $ 85.00 15% 680$ 66,470
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST TRAIL ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 1 (2015) $ 1,692,000
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 17
TRAIL ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 2 ITEM DESCRIPTION UNITS UNIT COST CONT. QTY COST 200 MOBILIZATION LS$ 125,957 0% 1.00$ 125,957 201 LAYOUT AND STAKING LS$ 10,000 15% 1.00$ 11,500 202 WATER POLLUTION CONTROL LS$ 20,000 15% 1.00$ 23,000 203 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LS$ 25,000 15% 1.00$ 28,750 204 WETLAND MITIGATION LS$ 50,000 20% 1.00$ 60,000 205 HYDROSEED SF $ 0.15 15% 65,300$ 11,264 206 SITE CLEARING SF $ 0.16 15% 90,500$ 16,652 207 EARTHWORK - CUT CY $ 3.00 15% 11,000$ 37,950 208 EARTH WORK - FILL CY $ 3.50 15% 12,000$ 48,300 209 UNDOCUMENTED FILL CORRECTION CY $ 15.00 25% 1,000$ 18,750 210 IMPORT CY $ 10.00 15% 1,000$ 11,500 211 FINE GRADING SF $ 1.00 15% 90,500$ 104,075 212 AGGREGATE BASE TON $ 30.00 15% 1,400$ 48,300 213 ASPHALT CONCRETE TON $ 130.00 15% 900$ 134,550 214 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SF $ 220.00 20% 2,200$ 580,800 215 STRIPING LS$ 10,000.00 15% 1 $ 11,500 216 FENCE LF $ 32.00 15% 565$ 20,792 217 STORM DRAIN CULVERT LF$ 150.00 15% 170$ 29,325 218 RETAINING WALL (CUT OR FILL) SF $ 85.00 15% 640$ 62,560
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST TRAIL ALTERNATIVE NUMBER 2 (2015) $ 1,260,000
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 18
APPROVALS To construct this segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point, the EBRPD will need to secure grading permits from Contra Costa County and the City of Hercules for work within their respective jurisdictions. The District will need to seek an administrative permit from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission as the trail is within 100 feet of the shoreline band. Finally, to complete the crossing of the swale, the District will likely need to secure approvals from the following regulatory agencies:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers A future extension of the Bay Trail south of Victoria by the Bay (Federal Clean Water Act [CWA] in nearing completion; this trail segment will serve the future Section 404 Permit) Hercules Intermodal Transit Center.
• Regional Water Quality Control Board (CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (possible Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation or “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” concurrence) It will likely require about one year obtaining all the approvals for the trail’s construction.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS Based on a review of the existing conditions and opportunities, our team recommends pursuing Alternative Number 1. This provides the shortest distance through Lone Tree Point, which will expedite future commuters travels to the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center. Furthermore, this alternative places the trail further from residential uses. We recommend the completing the following to finalize the trail’s design: 1. Complete a field geotechnical exploration at the wetland area to confirm the depth to bedrock and bridge foundation strategy. 2. Obtain topography to optimize trail alignment to balance earthwork 3. Conduct a formal delineation to confirm the jurisdictional status and boundary of the seasonal wetland. 4. Complete a special-status plant survey 5. Coordinate with Kinder Morgan to define the location and depth of their pipelines 6. Meet with Union Pacific Railroad to define the extent of track modification to support the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center. 7. Evaluate sight distance at the trail’s crossing of Pacific Avenue. 8. Coordinate with Contra Costa County Department of Public Works for the future expansion of the Bay Trail along San Pablo Avenue.
Extension of the San Francisco and San Pablo Bay Trail at Lone Tree Point Feasibility Study | 19 APPENDIX A Preliminary Geologic Exploration
PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION
LONE TREE POINT SEGMENT EBRPD SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL
Submitted to: Robert Stevens Vice President BKF Engineers 255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200 Redwood City, CA 94065
Prepared by: ENGEO Incorporated
February 25, 2015
Project No:
Copyright © 2015 By ENGEO 11633.000.000
Incorporated. This Document May Not Be Reproduced In Whole Or In Part By Any Means Whatsoever, Nor May It Be Quoted Or Excerpted Without The Express Written Consent Of ENGEO Incorporated
GEOTECHNICAL ENVIRONMENTAL WATER RESOURCES CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
Project No. 11633.000.000
February 25, 2015
Robert Stevens Vice President BKF Engineers 255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200 Redwood City, CA 94065
Subject: Lone Tree Point Segment EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail Rodeo, California
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
Dear Mr. Stevens:
With your authorization, we have completed this preliminary geotechnical exploration report for the proposed East Bay Regional Park District Lone Tree Point segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The accompanying report presents our findings together with our conclusions and preliminary recommendations for the proposed trail.
Our findings indicate that the project site is suitable for the proposed trail project provided the preliminary recommendations provided in this report incorporated in the project planning. Additional design-level exploration services will be needed to develop recommendations for grading, pavements, and design of foundations for the proposed bridge. We are pleased to have been of service to you on this project and are prepared to consult further with you and your design team as the project progresses.
Sincerely
ENGEO Incorporated
Philip J. Stuecheli, CEG Jeff Fippin GE
2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250 San Ramon, CA 94583 (925) 866-9000 Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.com BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter of Transmittal Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...... 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ...... 1 2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...... 1 2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING ...... 1 2.2 FAULTING ...... 2 3.0 HISTORIC MAPS AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 2 3.1 GEOLOGIC MAPPING ...... 2 3.2 BEDROCK FORMATIONS ...... 2 3.3 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS ...... 2 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 3 4.1 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY ...... 3 4.2 EXISTING FILLS ...... 3 4.3 SELECTION OF MATERIALS ...... 3 4.4 GRADED SLOPES ...... 3 4.5 EXPANSIVE SOILS ...... 4 4.6 SEISMIC HAZARDS ...... 4 4.6.1 Ground Rupture ...... 4 4.6.2 Ground Shaking ...... 4 4.6.3 Liquefaction ...... 5 4.7 BRIDGE DESIGN ...... 5 4.8 DESIGN-LEVEL GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION ...... 5 5.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS ...... 5 SELECTED REFERENCES FIGURES
BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this report is to provide a preliminary description of geologic conditions at the site and to provide planning level recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of the project. This study included the following scope of services:
• Review of published geologic maps and literature, including historic maps prepared by the USGS, and the Coastal Survey.
• Reconnaissance of the site by an ENGEO geologist.
• Examination of aerial photographs to identify geomorphic features that may be related to existing fills, slope stability, and other geologic conditions.
• Preparation of this preliminary report summarizing our findings, conclusions, and preliminary recommendations to assist in site planning.
We prepared this report exclusively for BKF Engineers and their design team consultants. We should review any changes made in the character, design or layout of the development to modify the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report, as necessary.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The site location is depicted on Figure 1. The proposed trail segment will extend for a distance of roughly 1,800 feet from Pacific Avenue in Rodeo to the end of an existing trail segment opposite Regatta Drive in the Victoria by the Bay development as shown on Figure 3. The proposed trail will cross an area of generally rolling topography on several undeveloped parcels adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railway right-of-way just east of the Bay Margin. The trail will cross an existing seasonally flooded swale/wetland that will require a bridge that will be roughly 250 feet in length. Proposed improvements will also include a paved trail surface and two trailheads.
2.0 REGIONAL GEOLOGY
2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING
The proposed trail segments are located on the northern Bay Margin south of the Carquinez straits in and area underlain by generally north-dipping Later Tertiary sedimentary rocks, including Miocene-age marine sandstone of the Cierbo and Neroly formations, tuffaceous sandstone of the Pinole Tuff and Pliocene-Pleistocene age non-marine silststone claystone and sandstone of the Montezuma Formation (Wagner, 1978, Graymer, 1994, Crane, 1995).
-1- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
2.2 FAULTING
The site is not within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone for known active faults. The nearest known active fault is the Hayward fault, which is located about 5.4 miles to the southwest of the site (Jennings, 2010). Other active faults in the region include the west Napa fault located about 8.5 miles to the northeast, the Concord-Green Valley fault located about 9.5 miles to the northeast, and the San Andreas fault located about 23 miles to the southwest.
3.0 HISTORIC MAPS AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
3.1 GEOLOGIC MAPPING
The field exploration for this study was conducted during November 2014, and consisted of a site visit by a California Engineering Geologist from our firm during which we observed available outcrops of rock and soil and the general site configuration. Based on our reconnaissance and review of published maps and aerial images we compiled the geologic map depicted in Figure 3. A description of relevant soil and bedrock units is presented below.
3.2 BEDROCK FORMATIONS
A small area of the northern portion of the trail alignment near Pacific Avenue is underlain by friable light-gray tuffaceous sandstone of the Pinole Tuff. The next two ridge areas to the south are underlain by sandstones of the Neroly and Cierbo Formations. Outcrops of the Cierbo Formation along the railway and in adjacent coastal bluffs are highly weathered and moderately-cemented to friable. The Neroly Formation was not observed in outcrops. The Monterzuma Formation, which underlies the areas generally west of Second Street and Sharon Avenue, consists of near flat-lying interbedded stiff claystones siltstones, and friable sandstone.
3.3 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS
Surficial soil consisting of approximately two to four feet of moderately to highly plastic clay overly the bedrock formations across most of the alignment. In swale areas, the surficial clay soil has accumulated in greater thickness, mapped as deposits of colluvium.
The floor of the seasonally flooded swale is underlain by alluvium that appears to consist of recently-deposited dark gray organic silty to sandy clay, generally obscured by vegetation. Based on the present elevation of 12 to 14 feet in the swale and the fact that historic Costal Survey maps show the swale at near sea level, we estimate the thickness of the alluvium to be approximately 10 to 14 feet.
Within the approximate limits of the former Bay shoreline depicted on Figure 3, we expect that the alluvium is underlain by Bay Margin deposits, which are likely to consist of compressible clays, and possibly lenses of loose sand or silt. The thickness of Bay margin soils could not be
-2- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
determined by our reconnaissance mapping, but is not likely to be extensive, given the relatively narrow extent of the former arm of the bay.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
From a geologic and geotechnical standpoint, the study area is generally suitable for the proposed trail project. The preliminary recommendations in this report should be considered in the initial planning for the trail. Design-level exploration will be required to develop recommendations for site grading, trail pavements, and bridge foundations.
4.1 LANDSLIDES AND SLOPE STABILITY
We did not observe evidence of past landslide activity within the proposed trail alignment. The adjacent cut and fill slopes along the railroad right-of-way are relatively steep and have experienced local sloughing, but the proposed trail alignment is not located close to existing slopes with evidence of instability. The north end of the alignment approaches exiting cut slopes in sandstone of the Pinole Tuff that appear to be relatively stable. We should review project grading plans when they become available to confirm that slope stability is adequately addressed in the design-level report.
4.2 EXISTING FILLS
The existing fill depicted on Figure 3 was placed as part of the older residential development of the area or in conjunction with construction of the railroad. In our opinion, the existing fill is not suitable for supporting the planned improvements and should be removed and replaced with engineered fill in conjunction with site grading operations.
4.3 SELECTION OF MATERIALS
With the exception of construction debris (wood, brick, asphalt, concrete, metal, etc.), organically contaminated materials (soil which contains more than 2 percent organic content by weight), and environmentally impacted soils (if any), we anticipate the site soils are suitable for use as engineered fill provided that any larger fragments derived from bedrock cuts are broken down to 6 inches or less in size. Other materials and debris, including trees with their root balls, should be removed from the project site.
4.4 GRADED SLOPES
For planning purposes, we recommend that graded slopes higher than 20 feet should be planned at gradients that are no steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical). Slopes less than 20-feet-high should be planned at gradient no steeper than 2:1. During the design-level geotechnical exploration, additional laboratory testing and engineering analysis should be performed to confirm that graded slopes will have acceptable long term stability under both static and seismic conditions.
-3- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
Depending on the results of this additional analysis, higher fill slopes (if planned) with gradients of 2:1 may need to be constructed as geogrid reinforced fills.
4.5 EXPANSIVE SOILS
Near-surface soil exposed at the site shows evidence of shrinkage cracking indicating that it likely has a moderate to high expansion potential. Expansive soil shrinks and swells as a result of moisture changes. This can cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundations.
Successful construction on expansive soil requires special attention during grading. It is imperative to keep exposed soil moist by occasional sprinkling. If the soil dries, it is extremely difficult to remoisturize the soil (because of the clayey nature) without excavation, moisture conditioning, and recompaction.
4.6 SEISMIC HAZARDS
Potential seismic hazards resulting from a nearby moderate to major earthquake can generally be classified as primary and secondary. The primary effect is ground rupture, also called surface faulting. The common secondary seismic hazards include ground shaking, ground lurching, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading and landsliding. The following sections present a discussion of these hazards as they apply to the site.
4.6.1 Ground Rupture
The site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone and no known active faults cross the site. The risk of surface fault rupture at the site is considered low.
4.6.2 Ground Shaking
An earthquake of moderate to high magnitude generated within the San Francisco Bay Region could cause considerable ground shaking at the site, similar to that which has occurred in the past. To mitigate the shaking effects, all structures should be designed using sound engineering judgment and the latest California Building Code (CBC) requirements, as a minimum.
Seismic design provisions of current building codes generally prescribe minimum lateral forces, applied statically to the structure, combined with the gravity forces of dead-and-live loads. The code-prescribed lateral forces are generally considered to be substantially smaller than the comparable forces that would be associated with a major earthquake. Therefore, structures should be able to: (1) resist minor earthquakes without damage, (2) resist moderate earthquakes without structural damage but with some nonstructural damage, and (3) resist major earthquakes without collapse but with some structural as well as nonstructural damage. Conformance to the current building code recommendations does not constitute any kind of guarantee that significant structural damage would not occur in the event of a maximum magnitude earthquake; however,
-4- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
it is reasonable to expect that a well-designed and well-constructed structure will not collapse or cause loss of life in a major earthquake (SEAOC, 1996).
4.6.3 Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, loose or medium dense, cohesionless soils are subject to a temporary, but essentially total, loss of shear strength because of pore pressure build-up under the reversing cyclic shear stresses associated with earthquakes. The relatively thin clayey soil over bedrock over most of the trail alignment is not considered susceptible to liquefaction. Liquefaction hazards may locally occur within the sediments filling the former tidal inlet. Potential liquefaction hazards should be addressed in a design-level geotechnical report.
4.7 BRIDGE DESIGN
As described above, the former tidal inlet at the location of the proposed bridge crossing is likely to be underlain by potentially compressible soils. It is likely that the bridge abutments can be supported on shallow foundations founded within bedrock. However, the portions of the bridge crossing the former tidal slough may require deep foundations such as cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles or driven piles. The depth of pile foundations could be reduced by designing the bridge with bents near the edges of the former slough where strong supporting soils or bedrock will be closer to the surface.
4.8 DESIGN-LEVEL GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
The final design of trail improvements should be based on a subsurface exploration that may include a combination of borings and exploratory test pits to identify the depth of bedrock or suitable foundation soils, as well as laboratory testing to measure the engineering characteristics of soil and bedrock and the compressibility and potential liquefaction susceptibility of soils in the former tidal inlet. We anticipate that the exploration will require that the drill rig gain access to the existing wetland in the slough area. We can prepare a fee estimate and scope for a design-level exploration when more detailed project plans are prepared.
5.0 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner to transmit the information and recommendations of this preliminary report to developers, owners, buyers, architects, engineers, and designers for the project so that the necessary steps can be taken by the contractors and subcontractors to carry out such recommendations in the field. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this preliminary report are solely professional opinions . Our professional staff strives to perform its services in a proper and professional manner with reasonable care and competence but is not infallible. There are risks of earth movement and property damages inherent in land development. We are unable to eliminate all risks or provide insurance; therefore, we are unable to guarantee or warrant the results of our services.
-5- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
This preliminary report is based upon field and other conditions discovered at the time of preparation of our preliminary report. This document must not be subject to unauthorized reuse that is, reusing without our written authorization. Such authorization is essential because it requires us to evaluate the document’s applicability given new circumstances, not the least of which is passage of time. Actual field or other conditions will necessitate clarifications, adjustments, modifications or other changes to our documents. Therefore, we must be engaged to prepare the necessary clarifications, adjustments, modifications or other changes before construction activities commence or further activity proceeds. If our scope of services does not include on-study area construction observation, or if other persons or entities are retained to provide such services, we cannot be held responsible for any or all claims arising from or resulting from the performance of such services by other persons or entities, and from any or all claims arising from or resulting from clarifications, adjustments, modifications, discrepancies or other changes necessary to reflect changed field or other conditions.
-6- BKF Engineers 11633.000.000 Lone Tree Point Segment, EBRPD San Francisco Bay Trail February 25, 2015
SELECTED REFERENCES
Crane, R. C.; 1988, Geologic Map of the Mare Island 7.5 minute Quadrangle, NCGS Field Trip Guide to the Geology of the San Ramon Valley & Environs.
Graymer, R. W.; et al., 1994, Preliminary Geologic Map Emphasizing Bedrock Formations in Contra Costa County, California: Derived from the Digital Database Open-File 94-622, U.S. Geological Survey.
Jennings, C. W. and Bryant, W.A.; 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6.
Nilsen, T. H., 1975, Preliminary Photo Interpretation Map of Landslide and other Surficial Deposits of the Mare Island 7 and ½ Minute Quadrangle, Contra Costa County, California, USGS Open File Map 75-277-55.
Wagner, 1978, Late Cenozoic History of the Coast Ranges East of San Francisco Bay, PhD dissertation, UCB.
Google Earth, December 31, 1938 to February 22, 2014, various color and black and white imagery.
F I LIST OF FIGURES G
U Figure 1 - Vicinity Map Figure 2 - Regional Geologic Map Figure 3 - Preliminary Geologic Map R E S
APPENDIX B Flood Zone Mapping
APPENDIX C Land Use Analysis
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. F R E S N O R I V E R S I D E 157 PARK PLACE 510.236.6810 TEL B E R K E L E Y I R V I N E R O C K L I N PT. RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA 94801 510.236.3480 FAX C A R L S B A D PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 11, 2014
TO: April Malvino and Robert Stevens, BKF Engineers
FROM: Shanna Guiler, AICP and Laura Lafler
SUBJECT: Planning Consistency Technical Memorandum for the Lone Tree Point Segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail, Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California
This memorandum analyzes the above-referenced project’s consistency with applicable planning documents and identifies potential inconsistencies. The project area is located along the San Pablo Bay shoreline from the City of Hercules city limits to the town of Rodeo in west Contra Costa County. Therefore, LSA examined the project in relation to policies and provisions of the East Bay Regional Park District (District), Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), and Contra Costa County.
The determinations of consistency provided below represent LSA’s best judgment based on an objective, third-party interpretation of the policies examined. State law does not impose a requirement that a project completely satisfy every policy set forth in the general plan. The goals, objectives, and policies in a general plan set the stage for later decision making. As noted in the recent case of Sierra Club v. County of Napa,1 “A project is consistent with a county’s general plan… if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment. A given project need not be in perfect conformity with each and every general plan policy. To be consistent, a project must be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan.” Recognizing that plan provisions would ordinarily provide policy guidance on a range of issues, rather than mandatory, objective regulatory standards, the courts have recognized that decision-makers must weigh plan policies when applying them, and that the law does not require every policy to be completely satisfied.2 However, in some instances general plans contain fundamental, mandatory, and objective standards that do not allow any discretion in interpretation and application. A project will be found inconsistent with such a standard if it is clearly incompatible with it.3
LAND USE SETTING The following section describes existing land use conditions within the project site and vicinity.
Land Uses within the Project Site. The project area is located within the existing Lone Tree Point Regional Shoreline, a 20-acre park along the San Pablo Bay waterfront in unincorporated Contra Costa County that is owned and operated by the Distrct. The park is bisected by the Union Pacific
1 Sierra Club v. County of Napa et. al. (2004) 121 Cal. App. 4th 1490 2 Ibid. 3 Families Unafraid to Uphold Rural El Dorado Co. v. El Dorado County, 62 Cal. App. 4th 1332 (1998).
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Railroad (UPRR) tracks. The park is comprised of three parcels – two inboard parcels that contain a grassy marine terrace and a 20-space parking lot, and a 10-acre shoreline parcel that contains a narrow strip of land west of the railroad tracks. This shoreline area also includes a spur of the San Francisco Bay Trail that extends to a beach and picnic area.
Land Uses in the Vicinity of the Project Site. The project site is located at the northwestern edge of the town of Rodeo, adjacent to San Pablo Bay. Land uses in the areas immediately adjacent to the project area include park land, residential and industrial uses. The Rodeo Marina (boat and recreational vehicle storage yard), Rodeo Sewage Treatment Plant and the Conoco Phillips San Francisco Refinery are located to the north along the shoreline. San Pablo Bay borders the project site to the west. Residential development associated with the unincorporated town of Rodeo is located to the east. The southern terminus of the proposed trail alignment abuts the Victoria by the Bay residential subdivision in the City of Hercules, which includes single-family homes, a commercial center, and an elementary school.
APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Agencies and local governments having jurisdiction over the proposed project include the Park District, ABAG, MTC, BCDC, and Contra Costa County. Each of these entities has one or more planning documents relevant to the proposed project, as described below.
East Bay Regional Park District The District is responsible for planning and construction of the proposed project and is the lead agency for environmental review of the proposed project under CEQA. The District’s Master Plan contains policies that pertain to the proposed project, as described below.
East Bay Regional Park District Master Plan (2013): The District’s Master Plan1 defines the vision and mission of the District and sets priorities for at least the next decade. The policies set forth by the Master Plan help guide the stewardship and development of current and future parks to maintain a careful balance between the need to protect and conserve natural resources while offering recreational use of parklands for all to enjoy now and in the future. The District recently updated their Master Plan, which was adopted in July 2013.
The Master Plan Map2 identifies several future projects within the District’s jurisdiction. The proposed project is included on the map as 1K: San Francisco Bay Trail - Point Pinole to Carquinez Strait.
Association of Bay Area Governments ABAG has jurisdiction over the San Francisco Bay Trail project. The Bay Trail is a planned recreational corridor that, when complete, will encircle San Francisco and San Pablo Bays with a continuous 500-mile network of bicycling and hiking trails. The Bay Trail will connect the shoreline
1 East Bay Regional Park District, 1997. Master Plan 1997. Adopted December 17, 1996. Resolution No. 1996-12-349. Park District Headquarters, 2950 Peralta Oaks Court, P.O. Box 5381, Oakland, California, 94605. 2 East Bay Regional Park District, 2007. Existing and Potential Parklands and Trails. Amendment of the 1997 Master Plan Map as approved by the Board of Directors on 11/06/2007.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
of all nine Bay Area counties, link 47 cities, and cross the major toll bridges in the region. To date, approximately 338 miles1 of the alignment, over 67 percent of the Bay Trail’s ultimate length, have been completed. The proposed project is part of the Bay Trail. The following ABAG Bay Trail plans are relevant to the proposed project.
ABAG Bay Trail Plan (1989): The Bay Trail Plan2 was prepared by ABAG pursuant to Senate Bill 100, which mandated that the Bay Trail: provide connections to existing park and recreation facilities, create links to existing and proposed transportation facilities, and be planned in such a way as to avoid adverse effects on environmentally sensitive areas. The proposed project would help to complete the San Francisco Bay Trail, and thus is consistent with the overall goal of the plan.
ABAG Bay Trail Gap Analysis (2005): The Bay Trail is currently 67 percent complete. The Bay Trail Gap Analysis3 was commissioned by the ABAG Bay Trail Project and the California Coastal Conservancy to plan for the completion of the remaining portions of the Bay Trail. The report aims to: 1) identify the remaining gaps in the Bay Trail; 2) classify the gaps by phase, county and benefit ranking; 3) develop cost estimates for individual gap completion using a consistent methodology; 4) identify strategies and actions to overcome gaps; 5) identify long term funding needs; and 6) present an overall cost and timeframe for completion. The proposed project is identified as a planned trail segment (5086.0) on the map for Contra Costa County included in the Gap Analysis report.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the transportation planning, coordinating and financing agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. MTC functions as both the regional transportation planning agency — a state designation — and, for federal purposes, as the region’s metropolitan planning organization (MPO). As such, it is responsible for regularly updating the Regional Transportation Plan, a comprehensive blueprint for the development of mass transit, highway, freight, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
Transportation 2035, the Regional Transportation Plan update, is a comprehensive strategy to accommodate future growth, alleviate congestion, improve safety, reduce pollution and ensure mobility for all residents regardless of income. As a component of the Transportation 2035 plan, the Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area seeks to support individuals who choose to shift modes from automobile to bicycle by making investments in the regional bikeway network and other bicycling facilities, and focusing growth in Priority Development Areas (PDAs), which encourage growth in existing communities and promote connections between land use and transportation.
1 Association of Bay Area Governments. San Francisco Bay Trail project website. http://www.baytrail.org/overview.html (accessed 9 December 2014). 2 Association of Bay Area Governments, 1989. San Francisco Bay Trail Project Bay Trail Plan. Available online at: http://www.baytrail.org/baytrailplan.html, (accessed 9 December 2014). 3 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2005. The San Francisco Bay Trail Project Gap Analysis Study: A Report on Closing the Gaps in the 500-mile Regional Trail System Encircling San Francisco Bay. Prepared by Alta Planning + Design, Inc., Quest Engineering, Inc., and GreenInfo Network. September.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area 2009 Update (2009): The Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area1 seeks to: encourage, increase and promote safer bicycling; provide an analysis of bicycle tripmaking and collision data; summarize countywide bicycle planning efforts through the Bay Area; and document advances in bicycle parking and other important technologies. The proposed project is identified as an “unbuilt” segment of the Regional Bikeway Network in Contra Costa County (CC-40 Bay Trail – Contra Costa County Remainder).
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission BCDC has regulatory responsibility over development in the San Francisco Bay and along the Bay's nine-county shoreline. BCDC is guided in its decisions by its law, the McAteer-Petris Act, the San Francisco Bay Plan, and other plans for specific areas around the Bay. A BCDC permit is required prior to undertaking most work in the Bay or within 100 feet of the shoreline, including filling, dredging, shoreline development and other work. Prior to implementation of the proposed project, the District would have to obtain a permit from the BCDC.
BCDC San Francisco Bay Plan (2008): The San Francisco Bay Plan2 was completed and adopted by the BCDC in 1968 and was transmitted to the California Legislature and the Governor in 1969, in accordance with the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965, which created the Commission and mandated that a study of the Bay be prepared and submitted to the California Legislature. The Bay Plan has been periodically amended since that date, with the most recent version updated in 2008. The Bay Plan includes policies to guide future uses of the Bay and its shoreline. Policies relate to the protection of the Bay including fish and wildlife, water quality, tidal marshes and flats, and the subtidal area; and Bay development including fills and dredging, airports, ports, transportation, commercial fishing recreation, public access, salt ponds, managed wetlands, and other uses. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to the Bay and shoreline are also recommended.
BCDC Shoreline Spaces: Public Access Design Guidelines for the San Francisco Bay (2005). The purpose of the Shoreline Spaces: Public Access Design Guidelines for the San Francisco Bay3 handbook is to provide the San Francisco Bay region with a design resource for development projects along the shoreline of the San Francisco Bay. The guidelines provide suggestions for site planning as well as recommendations for designing and developing attractive and usable public access areas. The guidelines are not legally enforceable standards but are an advisory set of design principles aimed at enhancing shoreline access while providing for the protection of Bay resources, regional livability and local economic prosperity. The Bay Plan policy recommends that development projects along the shoreline, including the proposed project, follow these guidelines. Guidelines relate to stormwater management, erosion control, avoidance of impacts to wildlife, trail design, signs, shoreline planting, and other types of shoreline development.
1 Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 2009. Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area. August. Available online at: http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/pdf/PlanDesign_SamplePlans_Region_SFBayArea2009.pdf (accessed 10 December 2014). 2 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, 2008. San Francisco Bay Plan. Adopted in 1968, amended through February, 2008. Available online at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/pdf/planning/plans/bayplan/bayplan.pdf, (accessed 19 August, 2010). 3 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, 2005. Shoreline Spaces: Public Access Design Guidelines for the San Francisco Bay. April. Available online at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/pdf/planning/PADG.pdf, (accessed 19 November, 2010).
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Contra Costa County The proposed project is located in unincorporated Contra Costa County from the City of Hercules city limits to the town of Rodeo in the unincorporated area of the County. Two Countywide plans are relevant to the proposed project, as well as the Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan, as described below.
Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2009): The Contra Costa Transportation Authority recognizes the contribution that walking and bicycling can make to mobility, environmental quality and community vitality. The Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)1 outlines strategies that support pedestrian-friendly developments and encourages a connected, coordinated network of bicycle facilities. To help carry out these strategies, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority adopted the first Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (CBPP)2 in 2003. The CBPP was updated in 2009 to reflect a number of important changes affecting walking and bicycling in Contra Costa County that have taken place since 2003. Policies in the 2009 CBPP relate to increasing bicycle and pedestrian trails in Contra Costa County, bicyclist and pedestrian safety, encouraging walking and biking, and helping local jurisdictions to adopt bicycle and pedestrian plans and policies. The proposed project is shown as a proposed facility in Figure 1: Countywide Bikeway Network, and is listed as an unbuilt segment of the Countywide bikeway network in Table 15 in the 2009 CBPP.
Contra Costa County General Plan (2005): The purpose of the Contra Costa County General Plan3 is to express the broad goals, policies, and specific implementation measures that will guide decisions on future growth, development, and conservation of resources through the year 2020. The goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan represent the hopes and concerns of the residents of the County in terms of defining and preserving a “quality of life.” The various elements or chapters of the plan are intended to provide objectives, principles and standards for decision-making bodies in the County, as well as numerous other public agencies, that will be making decisions about the development of private and public lands and the locations and extent of infrastructure improvements such as sewers and roadways. The General Plan consists of the following elements: land use, growth management, transportation and circulation, housing, public facilities/services, conservation, open space, safety, and noise.
The General Plan Land Use Map and Land Use Element depict and describe land use designations within the County, respectively. The project site is designated as Parks and Recreation (PR). This designation includes publicly owned city, district, County and regional parks facilities as well as golf courses, whether publicly or privately owned. Appropriate uses in this designation are passive and active recreation-oriented activities and ancillary commercial uses such as snack bars, and restaurants.
1 Contra Costa Transportation Authority, 2009. Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Adopted June 17, 2009. Available online at: http://www.ccta.net/assets/documents/CTP/2009%20CTP%20Final%20Version%202009-08- 19.pdf, (accessed 19 August, 2010). 2 Contra Costa Transportation Authority, 2009b. Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Adopted October 2009. Available online at: http://www.ccta.net/assets/documents/Bike~and~Ped/Final%20CBPP%20(with%20countywide%20maps)_June%2014 %202010.pdf, (accesed 19 August, 2010). 3 Contra Costa, County of, 2005. Contra Costa County General Plan 2005-2020. January. Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, 94553.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Construction of new privately owned residences or commercial uses, and the subdivision of land are inconsistent with this General Plan designation.
The proposed project is shown in Figure 9-5: Bicycle Trails of the General Plan as a proposed bike trail.
Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan (1997): The purpose of the Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan1 is to provide the community of Rodeo and Contra Costa County with the policies, design standards, and implementation directions necessary to shape the future image of Rodeo’s waterfront and downtown area. The planning area for the Specific Plan encompasses the central portion of Old Town Rodeo and extends from Railroad Avenue to the east, Pacific Avenue to the west, 4th Street to the south, and San Pablo Bay (including Rodeo Marina) to the north.
CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH RELEVANT PLANNING GOALS AND POLICIES Table A assesses the project’s consistency with the planning documents described above. The assessment indicates whether the project would or would not be consistent with goals and policies that are relevant to the project.
Table A: Project Consistency with Relevant Planning Documents
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY East Bay Regional Park District Master Plan Priorities Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Providing a variety of trails for all. trail segment, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The proposed trail would comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and accommodate both bicyclists and pedestrians.
Policy PA6 Consistent. The proposed project would be ADA The District will comply with the requirements of the compliant. It would also be consistent with the current Americans with Disabilities Act and use the current edition of California State Parks Accessibility Guidelines the California State Parks Accessibility Guidelines as its standard for making the improvements necessary to create accessible circulation, programs, and facilities throughout the Park District. Policy PA8 Consistent. As described above, the proposed project would The District will endeavor to assist individual and groups be designed and constructed in compliance with the who require special assistance with programs or facilities requirements of the ADA to create an accessible trail because of physical disability or economic circumstance. alignment.
1 Contra Costa Redevelopment Agency, Community Development Department, and Rodeo Redevelopment Advisory Committee, 1997. Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan. 12 August. Available online at: http://www.ccreach.org/ccc_redevelopment/Rodeo_SP/Rodeo%20SP.pdf (Accessed 10 December 2014).
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 6 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Policy RFA1 Consistent. The proposed project would be constructed on The District will provide areas and facilities that serve the land owned in fee by the District and would connect an recreational needs of park users, in accordance with the plans, existing segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail to the policies and park classifications adopted by the Board of Lone Tree Point staging area, a District-owned recreational Directors. The District will generally not develop or provide facility. Construction of this segment of the San Francisco facilities that area more appropriately provided by local Bay Trail is consistent with the District Master Plan and recreational and park agencies. Where possible and the Regional Shoreline designation, as identified by the appropriate, the District will provide multiple-use facilities to District. serve recreational needs. Policy RFA2 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I The District will provide a diverse system of non-motorized trail segment, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. A Class trails to accommodate a variety of recreational users, I trail provides a completely separated, paved right-of-way including hikers, joggers, people with dogs, bicyclists, and designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and equestrians. Both wide and narrow trails will be designed to pedestrians. A Class I trail is appropriate in this location accommodate either single or multiple users based on and consistent with the intent of the San Francisco Bay location, recreational intensity, environmental and safety Trail, of which the proposed project is a segment. considerations. The District will focus on appropriate trail planning and design, signage and trail user education to promote safety and minimize conflicts between users. Policy RFA5 Consistent. The proposed project would complete a The District will continue to plan for and expand the system segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail, a paved, multi-use of paved, multi-use regional trails connecting parklands and regional trail. major population centers. Policy KEP4 Potentially Consistent. As described in the cultural The District will participate in efforts to protect scenic or resources technical memorandum prepared by LSA, cultural resources, develop larger, multi-agency open space several cultural resources sites are located in proximity to preserves, provide recreational opportunities, protect the proposed trail alignment. Future study is needed to agricultural use, avoid hazards and plan for appropriate urban determine the presence or absence of subsurface in situ growth boundaries. The District will work with other archaeological deposits. Results of this study will assess jurisdictions to develop open space preservation plans and the potential for the proposed project to disturb policies that recognize the District’s public interest in open archaeological deposits and recommend future actions space preservation and that are consistent with Board policy. and/or mitigation requirements. The proposed project would provide a recreational amenity along the San Pablo shoreline. It would not affect scenic resources, but would provide greater access to scenic views of the San Pablo Bay. Policy PRPT9 Consistent. The proposed project is a segment of the San Regional Trails will connect regional parks or trails to each Francisco Bay Trail, a regional trail. The proposed trail other; to parks and trails of other agencies; or to areas of alignment would connect existing segments of the Bay unusual scenic beauty, vista points, San Francisco Bay, Delta Trail and provide access to Lone Tree Point park and the or lake shoreline, natural or historic resources, or similar San Pablo shoreline. areas of regional significance. Regional Trails may also connect regional parks and trails to important destinations such as transit centers, schools, colleges, civic centers, other major institutions, employment centers, large commercial complexes, or residential areas. Policy PRPT11 Consistent. The proposed project is part of the San Regional Trails may be part of a national, state, or Bay Area Francisco Bay Trail and would be designed and regional trail system. The District will cooperate with other constructed consistent with the Bay Trail Plan prepared by agencies and organizations to implement these multi- ABAG. jurisdictional efforts.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Policy PRPT18 Consistent. As described above, the proposed project is The District will coordinate with other agencies and part of the San Francisco Bay Trail and would be designed organizations involved in planning for jointly managed and constructed consistent with the Bay Trail Plan prepared regional trails or trails that extend beyond the District’s by ABAG. jurisdiction. When applicable, the District will use planning and environmental studies done by or in cooperation with other agencies for trail planning and development. ABAG Bay Trail Plan Trail Alignment Policy 1 Consistent. The proposed project is a segment of the San Ensure a feasible, continuous trail around the Bay. Francisco Bay Trail. The proposed trail alignment would connect the San Pablo Bay Staging Area at Lone Tree Point and the northwest terminus of the existing Victoria By the Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. Trail Alignment Policy 2 Potentially Inconsistent. As described in the biological Minimize impacts on and conflicts with sensitive resources technical memorandum prepared for the environments. proposed project, the project site supports jurisdictional waters, special-status species habitat, sensitive natural communities, and nesting birds, which could be affected by the proposed trail alignment. Additional studies are needed to confirm the extent of wetlands and potential presence of special status species so that these resources can be avoided by the proposed project. Other protection measures should be implemented to mitigate potential effects to sensitive resources. The District will comply with the terms of the regulatory agency permits required for the proposed project. Trail Alignment Policy 3 Consistent. The proposed project would be located along the Locate trail, where feasible, close to the shoreline. San Pablo Bay shoreline on the upland parcels owned by the District. Trail Alignment Policy 4 Consistent. The proposed project would be located along the Provide a wide variety of views along the Bay and recognize San Pablo Bay shoreline and would provide views of the Bay. exceptional landscapes. Trail Alignment Policy 8 Potentially Inconsistent. As described above, the project Where existing trails through wetlands are well-maintained area supports jurisdictional waters and wetlands, including and well-managed, the Bay Trail can feasibly be routed San Pablo Bay and a seasonal wetland. A jurisdictional there. In these cases, trails should be used according to delineation is needed to confirm the extent of these current regulations. Alternate routes should be provided jurisdictional waters on the site and quantify potential wetland where necessary and additional buffering/transition areas impacts associated with the proposed project. Other designed to protect wetland habitats should be provided protection measures should be implemented to mitigate where appropriate to protect wildlife. potential effects to sensitive resources. Trail Alignment Policy 9 Consistent. The proposed project would bridge an existing In selecting a trail alignment, use existing stream, creek, wetland area. slough and river crossings where they are available. This may require bridge widenings in some locations. In selecting trail alignments, new stream, creek and slough crossings should be discouraged. Where necessary because acceptable alternatives do not exist, bridging may be considered. Trail Design Policy12 Consistent. As described above, the proposed project would Provide access wherever feasible to the greatest range of trail be designed and constructed in compliance with the users on each segment. requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act to create an accessible trail alignment. Trail Design Policy13 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Wherever possible, new trails should be physically separated trail segment, as part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. A from streets and roadways to ensure the safety of trail users. Class I trail provides a completely separated, paved right- of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 8 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Trail Design Policy14 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Create a trail that is as wide as necessary to accommodate trail segment, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. A Class safely the intended use, with separate alignments, where I trail provides a completely separated, paved right-of-way feasible, to provide alternative experiences. designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. Trail Design Policy16 Consistent. The proposed project is a segment of the San Incorporate necessary support facilities, using existing parks, Francisco Bay Trail. The proposed trail alignment would parking lots, and other staging areas wherever possible. connect the San Pablo Bay Staging Area at Lone Tree Point and the northwest terminus of the existing Victoria by the Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. Trail Design Policy17 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Design new segments of trail to meet the highest practical trail as part of the San Francisco Bay Trail, a regional trail standards and regulations, depending on the nature and facility with high anticipated use. As described above, the intensity of anticipate use, terrain, existing regulations, and proposed project would be designed and constructed in standards on existing portions of the trail. compliance with the requirements of the ADA to create an accessible trail alignment consistent with the intensity of use anticipated along the San Francisco Bay Trail. Trail Design Policy18 Consistent. As described above, the proposed project is Minimum and maximum standards by use, width, surface, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail and would be designed etc. should be developed, to ensure safe enjoyment of the trail and constructed consistent with the Bay Trail Plan prepared and compatibility with surroundings and existing facilities, by ABAG. and to encourage use and design of surfaces for which long- term maintenance will be cost-effective. Trail Design Policy19 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a trail Design and route the trail to discourage use of undesignated connection between the northwest terminus of the existing trails. Victoria by the Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail and the Lone Tree Point Park staging area, thereby discouraging the use of undesignated trails to connect these two facilities. Environmental Protection Policy 23 Potentially Inconsistent. As described above, the project The Committee is aware of the ecological value of wetlands; area supports jurisdictional waters and wetlands, including in many cases, they provide habitat for a variety of San Pablo Bay and a seasonal wetland. A jurisdictional endangered species. In the San Francisco Bay Area, these delineation is needed to confirm the extent of these areas serve as a vital link in the Pacific flyway for feeding, jurisdictional waters on the site and quantify potential wetland breeding, nesting and cover for migratory birds. To avoid impacts associated with the proposed project. Other impacts in wetlands habitats, the Bay Trail should not require protection measures should be implemented to mitigate fill in wetlands, and should be designed so that use of the trail potential effects to sensitive resources. avoids adverse impacts on wetland habitats. Environmental Protection Policy 27 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I The path should be designed to accommodate different modes trail as part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The proposed of travel (such as bicycling and hiking) and differing project would be designed and constructed consistent with intensities of use, possibly requiring different trail alignments the intensity of use anticipated along the San Francisco for each mode of travel, in order to avoid overly intensive use Bay Trail. of sensitive areas. Implementation Policy 45 Potentially Consistent. The District has undertaken a Local agencies should be sensitive to the natural environment biological resources study to identify biological resources not only in project planning to implement segments of the constraints on the project site that may affect the design Bay Trail, but also in maintaining and managing the trail once and construction of the proposed trail alignment. The study built. has identified several sensitive natural resources in the project area that require further survey/study and recommended protection measures to mitigate potential effects to sensitive resources.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 9 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area Goal 2.0: The Regional Bikeway Network (RBN) Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Define a comprehensive RBN that connects every Bay Area segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail, which will community; provides connections to regional transit, major ultimately connect the shoreline of all nine Bay Area activity center, and central business districts; and includes the counties, link 47 cities, and cross the major toll bridges in San Francisco Bay Trail. the region. Policy 2.1 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Develop a cohesive system of regional bikeways that provide segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. It would connect access to and among major activity centers, public an existing segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail to the transportation and recreation facilities. existing staging area at Lone Tree Point. Policy 2.2 Consistent. As described above, the proposed project would Ensure that the RBN serves bicyclists with diverse ability be designed and constructed in compliance with the levels who are bicycling for a range of transportation and requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act to create recreation purposes. an accessible trail alignment for varying ability levels. BCDC San Francisco Bay Plan Recreation Policy 3 Consistent. The proposed trail alignment would be located Recreational facilities, such as waterfront parks, trails, along the San Pablo shoreline and would extend the San marinas, live-aboard boats, non-motorized small boat access, Francisco Bay Trail from its existing terminus at Victoria fishing piers, launching lanes, and beaches, should be by the Bay in Hercules to the Lone Tree Point staging area, encouraged and allowed by the Commission, provided they an existing recreational facility. are located, improved and managed consistent with the following standards:
General Recreational facilities should:
• Be well distributed around the shores of the Bay to the extent consistent with the more specific criteria below. Any concentrations of facilities should be as close to major population centers as is feasible; • Not pre-empt land or water area needed for other priority uses, but efforts should be made to integrate recreation into such facilities to the extent that they are compatible; • Be feasible from an engineering viewpoint; and • Be consistent with the public access policies that address wildlife compatibility and disturbance. In addition: • Different types of compatible public and commercial recreation facilities should be clustered to the extent feasible to permit joint use of ancillary facilities and provide a greater range of choices for users. • Access to marinas, launch ramps, beaches, fishing piers, and other recreational facilities should be clearly posted with signs and easily available from parking reserved for the public or from public streets or trails. • Complete segments of the Bay and Ridge Trails where appropriate, consistent with policy 4-a-6.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Recreation Policy 4 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I To assure optimum use of the Bay for recreation, the trail on land owned and managed by the District as a following facilities should be encouraged in waterfront parks waterfront park. and wildlife refuges. In waterfront parks. (2) To capitalize on the attractiveness of their bayfront location, parks should emphasize hiking, bicycling, riding trails, picnic facilities, swimming, environmental, historical and cultural education and interpretation, viewpoints, beaches, and fishing facilities. (6) Trails that can be used as components of the San Francisco Bay Trail, the Bay Area Ridge Trail or links between them should be developed in waterfront parks. San Francisco Bay Trail segments should be located near the shoreline unless that alignment would have significant adverse effects on Bay resources; in this case, an alignment as near to the shore as possible, consistent with Bay resource protection, should be provided. Public Access Policy 4 Potentially Inconsistent. The preliminary biological Public access should be sited, designed and managed to resources study prepared for the proposed project identified prevent significant adverse effects on wildlife. To the extent habitat for common wildlife (including native nesting necessary to understand the potential effects of public access birds) as well as low-quality habitat for several special- on wildlife, information on the species and habitats of a status fish (anadromous species migrating through San proposed project site should be provided, and the likely Pablo Bay) and terrestrial wildlife species (California red- human use of the access area analyzed. In determining the legged frog, burrowing owl) in the project area. Avoidance potential for significant adverse effects (such as impacts on and minimization measures (e.g., preconstruction nest endangered species, impacts on breeding and foraging areas, surveys, work windows for shoreline stabilization work) or fragmentation of wildlife corridors), site specific should be implemented to mitigate potential effects to information provided by the project applicant, the best sensitive resources. The District would also need to comply available scientific evidence, and expert advice should be with the terms of the regulatory agency permits required used. In addition, the determination of significant adverse for the proposed project. It is anticipated that any effects may also be considered within a regional context. potentially significant impacts to common and special- Siting, design and management strategies should be employed status wildlife resources on the project site can be avoided to avoid or minimize adverse effects on wildlife, informed by and/or mitigated to less than significant. the advisory principles in the Public Access Design Guidelines. If significant adverse effects cannot be avoided or reduced to a level below significance through siting, design and management strategies, then in lieu public access should be provided, consistent with the project and providing public access benefits equivalent to those that would have been achieved from on-site access. Where appropriate, effects of public access on wildlife should be monitored over time to determine whether revisions of management strategies are needed. Public Access Policy 5 Consistent. The proposed trail alignment would be located Public access should be sited, designed, managed and on the upland portion of the project area to avoid adverse maintained to avoid significant adverse impacts from sea impacts from sea level rise and shoreline flooding. level rise and shoreline flooding. Public Access Policy 9 Consistent. The proposed project would be located along Access to and along the waterfront should be provided by the San Pablo Bay shoreline. It would provide a needed walkways, trails, or other appropriate means and connect to trail connection to the larger San Francisco Bay Trail from the nearest public thoroughfare where convenient parking or the existing Lone Tree Point staging area. public transportation may be available. Diverse and interesting public access experiences should be provided which would encourage users to remain in the designated access areas to avoid or minimize potential adverse effects on wildlife and their habitat.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 11 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Public Access Policy 11 Potentially Consistent. The proposed project would Federal, state, regional, and local jurisdictions, special provide a segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail as districts, and the Commission should cooperate to provide identified in the Bay Trail Plan, the Contra Costa County appropriately sited, designed and managed public access, General Plan, the District Master Plan, and the Contra especially to link the entire series of shoreline parks, regional Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. As described above, the trail systems (such as the San Francisco Bay Trail) and project site supports wetlands, potential habitat for special- existing public access areas to the extent feasible without status species, and sensitive natural communities, which additional Bay filling and without significant adverse effects could be affected by the proposed project. It is anticipated on Bay natural resources. State, regional, and local agencies that significant adverse effects to natural resources on the that approve projects should assure that provisions for public project site can be avoided and/or mitigated to less than access to and along the shoreline are included as conditions of significant. approval and that the access is consistent with the Commission's requirements and guidelines. Public Access Policy 12 Consistent. The proposed project would be designed and The Public Access Design Guidelines should be used as a sited consistent with the Public Access Design Guidelines. guide to siting and designing public access consistent with a proposed project. The Design Review Board should advise the Commission regarding the adequacy of the public access proposed. Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan Goal 1 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Expand, Improve, and Maintain Facilities for Walking, and trail for pedestrians and bicyclists. Bicycling Objective Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new Increase the number of bikeway miles and pedestrian- trail segment for pedestrians and bicyclists in Contra Costa oriented districts in Contra Costa. County. Policy 1.1 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Describe a countywide system of non-motorized trail for pedestrians and bicyclists. transportation facilities and key destinations and other attractors of pedestrians and bicyclists. Policy 1.2 Consistent. The proposed project would construct a trail Identify significant gaps and barriers to walking and bicycling gap identified in the Contra Costa General Plan and the and define funding priorities for removing these obstacles and Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. implementing other needed pedestrian and bicycle projects and programs. Goal 3 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new Encourage More People to Walk and Bicycle trail segment for pedestrians and bicyclists in Contra Costa County. Objective Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new Increase the share of all trips made by walking and bicycling trail segment for pedestrians and bicyclists in Contra Costa in Contra Costa. County, thereby potentially increasing the share of all trips made by walking and bicycling. Contra Costa County General Plan Goal 5-L Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Expand, improve and maintain facilities for walking and trail for pedestrians and bicyclists. bicycling. Policy 5-36 Consistent. The proposed project would construct a trail Describe a system of bicycle facilities and key attractors of gap identified in the Contra Costa General Plan and the bicycle and pedestrian traffic so that all travelers, including Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. people with disabilities, can travel safely and independently.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 12 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Implementation Measure 5-ai Consistent. The proposed project would provide a needed Design a growing comprehensive and safe bicycle network trail connection between the Lone Tree Point staging area using a mix of existing local roads, collectors and bikeways and the Victoria by the Bay segment of the San Francisco which prioritizes bicycle movement from residences to key Bay Trail. attractors while minimizing automobile presence on the network. Coordinate with cities, transit agencies, community groups and public utilities. Implementation Measure 5-am Consistent. The proposed project would construct a trail Construct the bikeways shown in the Bikeway Network map gap identified in the Contra Costa General Plan and the and incorporate the needs of bicyclists in roadway Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. construction and maintenance projects and normal safety and operational improvements. Policy 5-37 Consistent. The proposed project would construct a trail Identify gaps in the bicycle network and needed gap identified in the Contra Costa General Plan and the improvements to pedestrian districts and key activity centers Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. The proposed and define priorities for eliminating these gaps and making project would be constructed consistent with ADA needed improvements. Facilities shall be designed to the best requirements. currently available standards and guidelines. Goal 5-M Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. trail segment, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. A Class I trail provides a completely separated, paved right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. Policy 5-39 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a Class I Reduce conflicts among motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists. trail segment, part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. A Class I trail provides a completely separated, paved right-of-way designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians. Implementation Measure 5-az Consistent. The proposed project would be located in the Provide buffers between train tracks and non-motorized vicinity of the UPRR tracks, but outside of the railroad facilities when necessary, utilizing distance, barriers, or grade right-of-way. At the Lone Tree Point staging area/Pacific separation. Avenue, a grade separation exists between the railroad tracks and the existing railroad. Policy 8-101 Consistent. The proposed project would construct a trail A safe, convenient and effective bicycle and trail system shall gap identified in the Contra Costa General Plan and the be created and maintained to encourage increased bicycle use Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. and walking as alternatives to driving. Policy 9-16 Consistent. The proposed project would provide a trail Providing public facilities for outdoor recreation should connection along the San Pablo Bay shoreline for remain an important land use objective in the County, as a recreation use. method of promoting high scenic quality, for air quality maintenance, and to enhance outdoor recreation opportunities of all residents. Policy 9-30 Consistent. The project site is located along the San Pablo Physical and visual public access to established scenic routes Bay shoreline, a scenic area identified in the Contra Costa shall be protected. County General Plan. The proposed project would provide access to this area of the shoreline. Policy 9-37 Consistent. The proposed project would construct a To develop a system of interconnected pedestrian, riding and segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail between the bicycling trails and paths suitable for both active recreational existing Victoria by the Bay segment of the Bay Trail and use and for the purpose of transportation/circulation. the Lone Tree Point staging area. The Bay Trail is intended to provide recreation access for the region, as well as an alternative transportation mode.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 13 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
GOALS/POLICIES CONSISTENCY Policy 9-47 Potentially Consistent. The proposed project has been Recreational development shall be allowed only in a manner designed to complement the site topography and to which complements the natural features of the area, including minimize effects to natural resources, including wetlands the topography, waterways, vegetation and soil and sensitive natural communities. As described above, characteristics. potential temporary and permanent impacts to these resources have not yet been quantified, but it is anticipated that any potentially significant impacts to such resources can be avoided and/or mitigated to less than significant. Implementation Measure 9-v Consistent. The proposed project would be constructed by Develop a comprehensive and interconnected series of the District on land owned in fee by the District. It would pedestrian, biking, and riding trails in conjunction with cities, be designed and sited consistent with the Bay Trail Plan, special districts, public utilities and county service areas. the Contra Costa County General Plan, and the Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle Plan. Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan Capitalize on Rodeo’s bayfront location. Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new trail facility along the San Pablo Bay shoreline for use by residents of Rodeo, Contra Costa County and the region. Improve Lone Tree Point Park Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new trail connection within Lone Tree Point Park. Improve access to both the marina and Lone Tree Point Park Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new for pedestrians pedestrian and bicycle connection to Lone Tree Point Park from the existing San Francisco Bay Trail. Enhance and create visitor-serving attractions. Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new visitor-serving attraction within the Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown planning area. Provide for visitor-serving attractions such as improvements Consistent. The proposed project would provide a new to Lone Tree Point Park, and a new marina green. visitor-serving attraction within Lone Tree Point Park.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Land Use Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 14
APPENDIX D Biological and Cultural Resources Technical Memorandum
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. F R E S N O R I V E R S I D E 157 PARK PLACE 510.236.6810 TEL B E R K E L E Y I R V I N E R O C K L I N PT. RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA 94801 510.236.3480 FAX C A R L S B A D PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 11, 2014
TO: April Malvino and Robert Stevens, BKF Engineers
FROM: Matt Ricketts and Tim Milliken
SUBJECT: Biological Resources Technical Memorandum for the Lone Tree Point Trail Segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail, Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) has completed a preliminary biological resources study for the above- referenced East Bay Regional Park District (District) project in Rodeo. The study area for this technical memorandum includes the proposed shoreline stabilization area within the District-owned parcel west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) (APN 357-020-023-2; Shoreline Parcel) and the entire District-owned parcel east of the UPRR (APN 357-371-001-3; Upland Parcel) in which the Bay Trail extension is proposed (see attached Figure 1). This memorandum includes the following: (1) a description of the methods used for our analysis; (2) a description of existing conditions on the site, including special-status plant and animal species potentially occurring in the vicinity and the presence of features potentially subject to regulatory jurisdiction (e.g., wetlands); and (3) a brief discussion of potential biological constraints to proposed trail construction and shoreline stabilization.
METHODS To identify special-status plant and animal species known to occur or potentially occurring in the study area vicinity, LSA queried the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2014) for species records within a 5-mile radius of the study area using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software (Esri ArcGIS 10.2). LSA also queried the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2014) for records of special-status plant species in the Benicia, Briones Valley, Cordelia, Cuttings Wharf, Mare Island, Petaluma Point, Richmond, San Quentin, and Sears Point 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangles. LSA wildlife biologist Matt Ricketts collected preliminary information on vegetation types, wildlife habitat, and potential jurisdictional features (e.g., seasonal wetland) during the pre-proposal meeting hosted by District staff on June 7, 2014. LSA botanist/arborist Tim Milliken visited the study area on November 14, 2014, to collect more detailed information on existing vegetation and to assess habitat suitability for special-status plants. Mr. Milliken also mapped the outer edge of hydrophytic vegetation at the seasonal wetland boundary using a Trimble® Geo7X receiver although a formal delineation was not conducted. Mr. Milliken also identified trees potentially subject to local tree protection ordinances. Observations of the Shoreline Parcel during both visits were limited to the proposed shoreline stabilization work area as depicted on draft District plans dated November 8, 2011 (see attached Figure 1).
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
EXISTING CONDITIONS Vegetation and Cover Types Upland Parcel. Vegetation types in the study area were classified, to the greatest extent possible, according to A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (Sawyer et al. 2009), which is based on the National Vegetation Classification Hierarchy. Four vegetation types occur on the study area: beardless wild rye (Elymus triticoides) turfs, semi-natural herbaceous stands, fields of fat-hen (Atriplex prostrata) (hereafter referred to as seasonal wetland), and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) thickets (see attached Figure 1). Several native and non-native trees and shrubs occur in the study area but are too sparsely distributed to categorize into distinct vegetation types, with the exception of arroyo willow thickets. A complete list of plant species observed during the November 14 site visit is attached.
On November 14, 2014, observations indicated that upland portions of the Upland Parcel had been mowed during the summer. The majority of upland vegetation on the study area is best classified as beardless wild rye turfs. The density and composition of the beardless wild rye turfs vegetation type is variable depending on its location; near the seasonal wetland and arroyo willow thickets, beardless wild rye comprises nearly 100 percent cover while in upland areas, beardless wild rye ranges in cover between 15 and 50 percent with non-native annual grass and forb species comprising the remaining cover. In these areas, beardless wild rye is co-dominant with wild oats (Avena fatua) and bromes (Bromus diandrus, B. hordeaceus). Other non-native herbaceous species observed within beardless wild rye turfs include milkweed (Asclepias fascicularis), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), filaree (Erodium cicutarium), poverty weed (Eva axillaris), prickly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), Bermuda buttercup (Oxalis pes-caprae), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), sorghum (Sorghum halipense), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), and salsify (Tragopogon porrifeus). Areas in which non-native plants dominate the grassland were mapped as semi-natural herbaceous stands.
During the November 2014 site visit, the soils in the seasonal wetland were not saturated and the majority of herbaceous vegetation was in senescence. The seasonal wetland was dominated by low- growing forbs including curly dock (Rumex crispus), smooth cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and fat-hen. Stands of cattails (Typha latifolia) and dense beardless wild rye dominated the perimeter of the wetland. Other species observed in the seasonal wetland include tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica), and fiddle dock (Rumex pulcher). Two stands of arroyo willow thickets were present within the seasonal wetland.
Tree and shrub species observed within the study area include black acacia (Acacia melanoxylon), Tasmanian blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), English walnut (Juglans regia), shiny privet (Ligustrum japonicum), horticultural rose (Rosa sp.), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), Washington fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). With the exception of coast live oak, willow, and toyon, all of these species are non-native ornamentals that were either planted on site or have colonized the site from adjacent landscaped areas.
Shoreline Parcel. Uplands within the proposed shoreline stabilization area are highly disturbed from regular trampling by informal recreational users and thus primarily support non-native species such as summer mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), wild oats, curly dock, horseweed, and Bermuda grass, although scattered individuals of
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
native gum plant (Grindelia camporum) are also present. Other less-disturbed portions of the Shoreline Parcel outside of the proposed work area support a greater density of native coastal prairie plants including poverty weed (Iva axillaris), purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), gum plant, and beardless wild rye.
The lack of a gradual topographic transition from the upland plateau to San Pablo Bay precludes the establishment of native transitional marsh and tidal salt marsh species within the Shoreline Parcel. There is a small rocky cliff, riprap, and mudflat. Vegetation within the sub-tidal zone is restricted to green, red, and brown marine algae. There are no vascular plants within the riprap or sub-tidal zone.
Other cover types within the shoreline stabilization area include artificial shoreline, rocky shoreline, and sandy beach. The majority of this area consists of artificial shoreline comprised of concrete blocks, riprap, and other hard debris likely installed in the early 20th century for shoreline stabilization purposes. A small outcrop of natural rocky shoreline comprised of sandstone and a small sandy beach are present at the western and eastern edges of the proposed work area, respectively.
Wildlife Upland Parcel. LSA detected the following wildlife species on or adjacent to the Upland Parcel on June 7, 2014: western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), rock pigeon (Columba livia), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota), and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). Trees and shrubs on the Upland Parcel provide nesting habitat for resident bird species such as red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdus migratorius), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), and California towhee (Melozone crissalis), and installed nest boxes and open terrain provide ideal conditions for nesting western bluebirds (Sialia mexicana). The open grassland provides habitat for ground-nesting passerines such as western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) and savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), although non-native predators from nearby developments and regular mowing may limit reproductive success. During the winter, the resident bird community may be supplemented by species that breed further north or at higher elevations such as merlin (Falco columbarius), American pipit (Anthus rubescens), yellow-rumped warbler (Setophaga coronata), fox sparrow (Passerella iliaca), golden-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia atricapilla), and Lincoln’s sparrow (Melospiza lincolnii).
The seasonal wetland provides seasonal breeding habitat for Pacific treefrog (Pseudacris regilla) and other common amphibians such as California slender salamander (Batrachoseps attenuatus) and arboreal salamander (Aneides lugubris) may also breed under rocks, leaf litter, woody debris, or other surface objects on or adjacent to the Upland Parcel. Nearby grassland provides foraging habitat for these species as well as common reptiles such as southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), western skink (Plestidon skiltonianus), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
Common mammal species expected to occasionally forage on and/or move through the study area include black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), northern raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). LSA observed sign of Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) (burrows) and California vole (Microtus californica) (runways) within the
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
grassland during the June 7 visit; other small mammal species expected to occur include house mouse (Mus musculus) and roof rat (Rattus rattus). The grassland also provides foraging habitat for common bat species such as big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) and Brazilian free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis), although roosting habitat (e.g., abandoned buildings or bridges, trees with large decaying hollows) is absent.
Shoreline Parcel. The artificial shoreline and adjacent uplands within the Shoreline Parcel support a small population of California ground squirrels and also provide foraging habitat for opportunistic scavengers such as western gull (Larus occidentalis), northern raccoon, and roof rat. Abundant crevices and hard surfaces created by the existing riprap and concrete debris are also favored by western fence lizards. Although the timing of the June 7 site visit prevented the documentation of wintering shorebird use of the shoreline stabilization area, common species likely to occur based on available rocky shoreline, riprap, and sandy beach cover types include willet (Tringa semipalmata), spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularius), black turnstone (Arenaria melanocephala), sanderling (Calidris alba), and least sandpiper (Calidris minutilla).
Special-status Species Based on the results of the database searches, observed habitat conditions, and LSA’s knowledge of biological resources in western Contra Costa Bay and adjacent San Pablo Bay waters, LSA identified 41 special-status species (20 plants, 21 animals) as potentially occurring in the study area vicinity (see attached Table A). The CNDDB and CNPS Inventory (CNPS 2014) identify 37 additional special- status plants as occurring within the nine-quad search region but these species were eliminated from consideration based on the lack of chaparral, vernal pools, or serpentine rock outcrops in the study area vicinity.
Plants. None of the special-status plant species in Table A were observed during LSA’s November 14 survey. The survey coincided with the blooming period for the following species, Bolander’s water hemlock (Cicuta maculata var. bolanderi), Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi subsp. congdonii), pappose tarplant (Centromadia parryi subsp. parryi), hayfield tarweed (Hemizonia congesta subsp. congesta), and Carquinez goldenbush (Isocoma arguta), but they were not observed. The November 14 survey occurred outside the blooming period for fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) and Suisun Marsh aster (Symphyotrichum lentum), both of which could occur based on the presence of suitable habitat. A species of Symphyotrichum was observed at the southern corner of the seasonal wetland, yet it was past blooming and the floristic features necessary to positively identify it to species were no longer present. Given the rarity of this species, which was believed extinct prior to its rediscovery in the 1990s, it’s unlikely that the observed species is S. lentum. Nevertheless, if future project plans indicate that this portion of the wetland could be impacted, further study would be needed to confirm the species’ absence from the work area.
Although regular mowing of the Upland Parcel reduces the likelihood that fragrant fritillary is present, this species occurs in mesic grasslands similar to those adjacent to the seasonal wetland and further surveys during the blooming period (February to April) are recommended to confirm its absence from the trail alignment.
Animals. Of the 21 special-status animal species identified in Table A, habitat is present for nine species: green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris), longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), central California coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), California Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
River winter-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), California Central Valley Chinook salmon, California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and white- tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). The five anadromous fish species may occasionally venture into the open waters of San Pablo Bay within and adjacent to the Shoreline Parcel during their respective migratory periods, but such occurrences are likely sporadic and rare. No spawning habitat is present within the Shoreline Parcel. Burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia) are unlikely to nest or winter in the study area due to the limited number of small mammal burrows or burrow surrogates (e.g., culverts, debris piles), although migratory individuals may rest or forage for brief periods and there are a few active California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) burrows in and adjacent to the shoreline stabilization area. There is potential for burrowing owls to occur more regularly if ground squirrels colonized the Upland Parcel in the future, however. White-tailed kites require shrubs or trees for nesting and the scattered trees and shrubs within the Upland Parcel provide suitable nest sites.
The seasonal wetland and associated arroyo willow thickets are physically suitable for foraging and resting California red-legged frogs but the shallow depth and limited hydroperiod of the wetland likely preclude breeding. Ponds and pools that are suitable for California red-legged frog breeding usually have a minimum depth of 20 inches, but California red-legged frogs do sometimes breed successfully in pools as shallow as 10 inches (Fellers 2005). Regardless of water depth, suitable breeding habitat must contain water during the entire development period for eggs and tadpoles, which is considered to be around 5 months. It is also unlikely that California red-legged frogs from nearby locations in Refugio (CNDDB Occurrence No. 407, 1.4 miles south) and Rodeo (CNDDB Occurrence No. 309, 1.9 miles southeast) Creeks could disperse to on-site seasonal wetland due to intervening development. Nevertheless, without additional documentation and/or evidence that California red-legged frogs are absent from the seasonal wetland (e.g., formal site assessment in accordance with USFWS [2005]), the USFWS or CDFW may consider the species as potentially present.
None of the remaining species are expected to occur due to a lack of habitat (e.g., tidal marsh) and/or the study area’s isolation from undeveloped lands with occupied habitat (e.g., lands east and southeast of Hercules and Pinole).
Jurisdictional Waters The seasonal wetland on the Upland Parcel is likely under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. For a given feature to be designated as a wetland of the United States, three indicators must be present: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Although LSA’s June 7 and November 14 site visits confirmed the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, the latter two indicators were not assessed, as a formal delineation conducted according to Corps methodology (Environmental Laboratory 1987) was not conducted. A formal delineation would be required to confirm the jurisdictional status and boundary of the seasonal wetland. The wetland would also fall under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), which is responsible for issuing State water quality certification pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
LSA did not observe any other depressions, ditches, ponds, streams, or other features potentially subject to Corps and/or RWQCB jurisdiction during its site visits. In addition, there are no rivers, streams, or lakes potentially subject to CDFW jurisdiction under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code on or adjacent to the site. The entire Shoreline Parcel is within jurisdiction of the San
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) since it includes waters of San Pablo Bay and uplands within 100 feet of the Bay shoreline. A limited portion of the Upland Parcel at its southern end may intrude into the BCDC’s 100-foot shoreline band, although the preliminary trail alignment is located outside the shoreline band.
Special-status Natural Communities The CDFW tracks the occurrences of natural plant communities that are of limited distribution statewide or within a county or region and are often vulnerable to environmental effects of projects. In the CDFW’s most recent Natural Communities List (CDFG 2010), vegetation alliances with State rarity rankings of S1–S3 are considered “highly imperiled” and project impacts to “high-quality occurrences” of these alliances could be considered significant under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Most types of wetlands and riparian communities are also considered special- status natural communities due to their limited distribution in California. The CNDDB identifies only one special-status natural community, northern coastal salt marsh, within 5 miles of the site. The study area does not contain any tidal salt marsh plant communities.
Beardless wild rye turfs have a State rarity ranking of S3 in the most recent CDFW Natural Communities List (CDFG 2011) and certain stands of this community within the study area (i.e., slopes adjacent to seasonal wetland) may qualify as “high-quality occurrences” due to the lack of non-native species.
Other sensitive natural communities within the study area include arroyo willow thickets, which comprise a native riparian plant community, and the seasonal wetland.
Protected Trees The blue gum eucalyptus and arroyo willows are considered protected trees as defined by Contra Costa County’s Protected Tree Ordinance (Contra Costa County Code [CCCC] Title 8, Chapter 816- 6)1. As currently proposed, construction of the trail on the Upland Parcel will not impact any protected trees.
BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The primary biological constraints to proposed trail construction and shoreline stabilization include (1) jurisdictional waters (San Pablo Bay) or wetlands (seasonal wetland) of the United States under Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction, (2) the presence of habitat for five special-status species (Suisun marsh aster, fragrant fritillary, longfin smelt, California red-legged frog, and burrowing owl), (3) the presence of three sensitive natural communities (beardless wild rye turfs, arroyo willow thickets, and seasonal wetland), and (4) the potential presence of nesting birds (including white-tailed kite) protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treatment Act and California Fish and Game Code. Finally, lists of recommendations for additional studies and anticipated regulatory permits is provided in bullet form.
1 Trees protected by ordinance - CCCC Title 8, Chapter 816-6 defines a protected tree as any native tree measuring 6.5-inches or greater diameter at breast height (DBH), any multi-stemmed tree with the sum of the circumferences measuring 13 inches or greater in diameter at DBH, or any significant grouping of trees, including groves of four or more trees.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 6 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Jurisdictional Waters The open tidal waters of San Pablo Bay within and adjacent to the shoreline stabilization area are regulated by the Corps as waters of the United States under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and by the RWQCB as waters of the State under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Bay waters are also regulated by the Corps under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, which prohibits the alteration of navigable waters of the United States. Corps jurisdiction of tidal waters extends to the high tide line (HTL). The shoreline stabilization area is also located within San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) jurisdiction under the McAteer-Petris Act. The proposed riprap installation will require permits from all three agencies.
The seasonal wetland and associated willow thickets on the Upland Parcel are likely subject to Corps jurisdiction as wetlands of the United States. Any temporary or permanent fill of the wetland would require a CWA Section 404 permit from the Corps and Section 401 water quality certification from the RWQCB. At a minimum, the project will need to implement erosion control best management practices (BMPs) (e.g., silt fencing and/or straw wattles) and construction avoidance fencing for all excavation and fill activities on the slopes adjacent to the wetland.
LSA recommends that a formal delineation of potential waters of the United States be conducted on both parcels to confirm the extent of Corps jurisdiction (i.e., HTL on Shoreline Parcel and Ordinary High Water Mark [OHWM] of seasonal wetland). A formal delineation would enable project engineers to confirm that proposed construction will remain outside the seasonal wetland on the Upland Parcel and calculate impacts to tidal waters of San Pablo Bay for future regulatory permit applications (see below).
Special-status Species Plants. The site conditions provide low potential for fragrant fritillary due to ongoing mowing and it’s unlikely that Suisun marsh aster is present due to its rarity. However, LSA’s November 2014 visit occurred outside the blooming period of these species, and if mowing was eliminated and the site left undisturbed for a few years, there is low potential that they could occur. To confirm the absence of special-status plants prior to development, LSA recommends a focused botanical survey for fragrant fritillary and Suisun marsh aster in accordance with CDFW (CDFG 2009) protocols.
Anadromous Fish. There is low potential for migratory individuals of five special-status anadromous fish species (green sturgeon, longfin smelt, central California coast steelhead, Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, and Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon) to venture into the open waters of San Pablo Bay adjacent to the shoreline stabilization area. Further analysis pursuant to Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) will likely be necessary during the CWA Section 404 permitting process since the Corps would need to demonstrate that the proposed activities would not result in adverse effects on federally listed species prior to issuing the permit. Given the relatively small amount of Bay affected and low potential for anadromous fish to regularly use the affected waters, it’s possible that the proposed work could be appended to the joint Corps/National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Not Likely to Adversely Affect Program (NLAA Program) of 2013.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 7 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
California Red-legged Frog. The seasonal wetland on the Upland Parcel is unlikely to support breeding California red-legged frogs due to the lack of perennial water, but contains physical habitat characteristics (i.e., dense wetland and willow plant cover) suitable for red-legged frog resting and foraging. There are no known red-legged frog occurrences within 1 mile of the wetland and , which is also isolated from known occurrences to the south and southeast by development. Despite these factors, LSA expects regulatory agencies to require more detailed information to support the assertion that California red-legged frogs are absent from the site, and recommends preparation of a formal site assessment in accordance with USFWS guidelines (USFWS 2005).
Alternatively, the District may assume presence and incorporate avoidance and minimization measures (including preconstruction surveys) into the project description, but assuming presence would also trigger federal ESA Section 7 (federal projects) or 10 (non-federal projects) consultation with the USFWS and possible compensatory mitigation for impacts to upland habitat within 300 feet of the wetland. If the project were to result in temporary or permanent impacts to the seasonal wetland, the necessary permitting under Section 404 of the federal CWA would constitute a “federal nexus” that would trigger ESA Section 7 consultation with the USFWS. Under this scenario, it’s likely that the project could be appended to the USFWS programmatic biological opinion (BO) for projects that affect California red-legged frog in the Bay Area (USFWS 2014) (CRLF Programmatic BO) since impacts would likely be less than 1.0 acre.
Burrowing Owl. As described above, the Upland Parcel currently lacks ground squirrel burrows or other features suitable for use by burrowing owls. The shoreline stabilization area contains a few active ground squirrel burrows but LSA did not observe any evidence of burrowing owl use (i.e., prey remains, droppings, feathers) during the June 2014 site visit and regular recreational use of the shoreline likely precludes long-term use by burrowing owls. However, if the Upland Parcel was left undisturbed for a few years, there is slight potential that ground squirrels could colonize the site and that burrowing owls could occupy resulting burrows. To confirm the absence of burrowing owls prior to development, LSA recommends that a burrowing owl take avoidance survey in accordance with CDFW guidelines (CDFG 2012) be conducted prior to construction.
Sensitive Natural Communities Sensitive natural communities observed on the Upland Parcel include beardless wild rye turfs, arroyo willow thickets, and seasonal wetland. It is unlikely that the project will result in significant impacts to any of these communities due to its linear configuration and relatively small amount of area affected, but further analysis will be required (e.g., temporary and permanent impacts to beardless wild rye turfs, removal or trimming of arroyo willows to accommodate the pedestrian bridge) during preparation of the CEQA document and regulatory permit applications.
Nesting Birds Nests of all native bird species are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Section 3503 of the California Fish and Game Code, which prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird. The trees and shrubs on the site provide nesting habitat for resident bird species such as white-tailed kite (a California Fully Protected Species), western scrub-jay, northern mockingbird, and house finch, among others. If conducted during the nesting season (typically defined by CDFW as February 1 to September 1), project activities could impact nesting birds by removing vegetation containing active nests and/or causing nest abandonment and subsequent reproductive failure due to prolonged loud construction noise. Potential impacts to
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 8 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
nesting birds are typically addressed under CEQA with preconstruction nest surveys incorporated into the project description or as a mitigation measure in a project’s CEQA document (e.g., Initial Study or Environmental Impact Report).
Regulatory Permits The proposed shoreline stabilization activities will require the following permits, at a minimum:
• Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit – Corps ○ Possible ESA Section 7 “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” concurrence or biological opinion (BO) – NMFS • CWA Section 401 water quality certification – RWQCB • San Francisco Bay Administrative Permit – BCDC
Applications for CWA Section 404 and 401 permits would also need to include proposed trail construction activities on the Upland Parcel if such activities resulted in temporary and/or permanent impacts to the seasonal wetland. Based on the preliminary trail alignment identified by BKF, it appears that the alignment is located inland from BCDC’s 100-foot shoreline band.
Given the low likelihood of California red-legged presence in the seasonal wetland, LSA anticipates that the project would either (1) qualify for coverage under the 2014 CRLF Programmatic BO (if the wetland is impacted) or (2) be able to demonstrate that impacts to uplands within 300 feet of the seasonal wetland would have no effect on the species due to its absence. If the latter option is chosen, LSA recommends preparation of a formal California red-legged frog site assessment (USFWS 2005) for the administrative record and future permit applications.
Recommendations • The study area includes jurisdictional waters and wetlands subject to Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction. LSA recommends a formal jurisdictional delineation of waters of the United States using Corps methodology (Environmental Laboratory 1987) be conducted to verify the extent of Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction on both parcels. • Although it is still very early in the planning process, LSA recommends that the following measures be incorporated into any future project description to avoid impacts to special-status plants, burrowing owl, and nesting birds (including white-tailed kite). ○ Special-status Plant Surveys. Prior to the initiation of construction, a qualified botanist will conduct a focused survey for fragrant fritillary and Suisun marsh aster within the construction footprint during the appropriate blooming periods. A minimum of two surveys will be conducted: in March for fragrant fritillary and in late summer/early fall (August–September) for Suisun Marsh aster. The surveys will be conducted in accordance with the CDFW’s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (CDFG 2009). ○ Burrowing Owl Take Avoidance Survey. No more than 14 days prior to any ground disturbing activities, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction/take avoidance survey for burrowing owls using methods described in Appendix D of the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (Staff Report) (CDFG 2012). If no owls are detected
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 9 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
during the initial take avoidance survey, a final survey shall be conducted within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance to confirm that owls are still absent.
If take avoidance surveys conducted during the non-breeding season (September 1 to January 31) identify any burrowing owls within the construction footprint, owls may be excluded from burrows using one-way doors, provided that a Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan is developed and approved by CDFW prior to implementation. Any burrow exclusion efforts will be monitored prior to, during, and after exclusion of burrowing owls from burrows to ensure that take is avoided. If burrow exclusion will occur immediately after the end of the breeding season, daily monitoring shall be conducted for one week prior to the exclusion to confirm that any young of the year have fledged.
If owls are found within the construction footprint during the breeding season, occupied burrows will be avoided by establishing buffers around the burrows in which no work shall be allowed until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest attempt has failed or that young have fledged and can forage independently of the adults. A minimum buffer of 250 feet will be maintained during the breeding season around active burrows. Owls present on site after February 1 will be assumed to be nesting on or adjacent to the site unless focused monitoring by a qualified biologist familiar with burrowing owl reproductive behavior indicates that the observed individual is unpaired or that egg-laying has not yet begun. A Burrowing Owl Exclusion Plan will be developed and approved by CDFW prior to implementation. ○ Preconstruction Nesting Bird Survey. If any construction activities (e.g., grubbing, grading, tree removal) are scheduled during the bird nesting season (typically defined by CDFW as February 1 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for nesting birds no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. If the survey indicates the presence of nesting birds, the biologist shall delineate a buffer zone where no construction will occur until the biologist has determined that all young have successfully fledged. The size of the buffer(s) shall be determined by the project biologist and be based on the nesting species and its sensitivity to disturbance. Typical buffer zones are 50 feet for passerines and up to 250 feet for raptors. Nests shall be monitored regularly to determine if construction activities are affecting the nesting activities and when young birds have fledged. • To minimize permitting inefficiencies, LSA recommends contacting the regulatory agencies (Corps, RWQCB, USFWS, CDFW, and BCDC) as soon as possible to obtain feedback on any project concerns that would need to be addressed during project design and permitting. The most efficient way to obtain agency feedback would be to request inclusion in one of the Interagency Meetings hosted by the San Francisco District of the Corps in early to mid-2015. Feedback from the USFWS regarding their concerns (or lack thereof) over California red-legged frogs would be especially valuable.
REFERENCES Baxter, R. 2009. Longfin smelt quick reference. Unpublished Microsoft PowerPoint presentation. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Bay-Delta Region. May.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. November 24. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/Protocols_for_Surveying_and_Evaluating_Imp acts.pdf (accessed December 3, 2013).
———. 2010. List of vegetation alliances and associations. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Sacramento. September.
———. 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. March 7. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/docs/BUOWStaffReport.pdf (accessed December 3, 2013).
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2014. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), commercial version dated December 9, 2014. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2013. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-02). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org (accessed November 26, 2013).
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Fellers, G.M. 2005. California red-legged frog. In M. Lannoo, ed. Amphibian Declines: The Conservation Status of United States Species. University of California Press, Berkeley.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Revised guidance on site assessments and field surveys for the California Red-legged Frog. August.
———. 2014. Programmatic biological opinion for issuance of permits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, including authorizations under 22 Nationwide Permits, for projects that may affect the threatened California red- legged frog in nine San Francisco Bay Area counties, California. Letter to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Ms. Jane M. Hicks). June 18.
Attachments: Table A – Special-status Species Table B – Plant List Figure 1 – Vegetation Map
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) 11 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Table A: Special-status Species Evaluated for the Lone Tree Point Segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail, Rodeo, California
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion PLANTS Amsinckia lunaris 1B Coastal bluff scrub, Not expected to occur due to Bent-flowered fiddleneck cismontane woodland, lack of suitable grassland valley and foothill habitat. Valley and foothill grassland; openings. grassland habitat type refers Elevation: 3–500 meters to bunchgrass prairie (m). habitat. Nearest occurrence Blooms: March–June. is at Sobrante Ridge Regional Preserve, approximately 5 air-miles to the south. Arctostaphylos pallida FT, SE, 1B Shale or thin chert Not expected to occur due to Pallid manzanita substrates in deciduous and lack of suitable habitat. coniferous forests and Nearest remaining natural woodlands, chaparral, or occurrences are in Sobrante coastal scrub. Known from Ridge Regional Preserve, fewer than 10 occurrences approximately 4.5 air-miles in the Diablo Range. to the northeast. Elevation: 185–465 m. Blooms: December–March. Calystegia purpurata subsp. 1B North Coast coniferous Not expected to occur due to saxicola forest, coastal dunes, and lack of habitat. Pink creamsacks coastal scrub. Elevation: 10–105 m. Blooms: May–September .
Campanula californica 1B Bogs and fens, closed-cone Not expected to occur due to Swamp harebell coniferous forest, coastal lack of habitat. prairie, meadows, marshes and swamps; freshwater. Elevation: 1-405 m. Blooms: June–October. Carex lyngbyei 2B Freshwater or brackish Not expected to occur. Lyngby sedge wetlands in coastal prairie, Suitable habitat may have marshes and swamps. been present prior to the Elevation: 0–10 m. development and fill of Blooms: April–August. Lone Tree Point, but current conditions not suitable. The closest CNDDB occurrence (#10, possibly extirpated) is an 1866 record from an unspecified “swamp” location in San Francisco, approximately 10 air-miles to the west.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Centromadia parryi ssp. 1B Grazed and ungrazed Not expected to occur due to congdonii annual grassland. Alkaline lack of suitable habitat. No Congdon’s tarplant or saline soils sometimes tarplant-like plants were described as heavy white observed in November clay (saline clay soil). 2014. No surveys are Elevation: 1–230 m. recommended. Blooms: May–October. Centromadia parryi subsp. 1B Vernally mesic areas in Low-quality habitat present parryi valley and foothill adjacent to on-site seasonal Pappose tarplant grasslands, meadows and wetland. None observed in seeps, coastal salt marsh; November 2014 when plant often on alkaline sites in would have been chaparral and coastal identifiable, however. As prairie. Elevation: 2-420 m. such, species presumed Blooms: May–November. absent and no further surveys are recommended. Chloropyron maritimum 1B Marshes and swamps Not expected to occur due to subsp. palustre (coastal salt). lack of tidal salt marsh. [Cordylanthus maritimus Elevation: 0–10 m. subsp. palustris] Blooms: June–October . Point Reyes salty bird's-beak Chloropyron molle FE, SR, 1B Coastal salt marshes and Not expected to occur due to [Cordylanthus mollis subsp. brackish marshes from lack of tidal salt marsh. mollis] northern San Francisco Soft bird's-beak Bay to Suisun Bay in Napa, Solano, and Contra Costa Counties Elevation: 0–3 m. Blooms July–September. Cicuta maculata var. 2B Freshwater or brackish Low-quality habitat present bolanderi wetlands in coastal prairie, in on-site seasonal wetland. Bolander’s water hemlock marshes and swamps. No plants in the carrot Elevation: 0–200 m. family observed in Blooms: July–September. November 2014, however. Species is presumed absent and no further surveys are recommended. Extriplex (Atriplex) 1B Chenopod scrub, meadows Not expected to occur due to joaquinana and seeps, playas, valley lack of habitat. San Joaquin spearscale and foothill grassland/alkaline. Elevation: 1–835 m. Blooms: April–October.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Fritillaria liliacea 1B Coastal scrub, valley and Low-quality habitat present Fragrant fritillary foothill grassland, and in mesic grasslands. Closest coastal prairie. Often on CNDDB occurrence (#43) is serpentine soils. Other an 1875 record from Mare various soils reported, Island, approximately 3 air- though usually clay. miles to the north. Regular Elevation: 3-410 m. mowing may preclude Blooms: February–April. occurrence. Surveys recommended during blooming period to confirm absence. Helianthella castanea 1B Rocky soils in Not expected to occur due to Diablo helianthella chaparral/oak woodland lack of suitable habitat and interface. elevation (too low). Nearest Elevation: 60–300 m. CNDDB occurrence (#59) is Blooms March– June. 1.81 air-miles to the northeast. Holocarpha macradenia FT, SE, 1B Clay and sandy soils in Not expected to occur. Santa Cruz tarplant coastal prairie, coastal Closest CNDDB occurrence scrub, and valley and (#16) is from an extirpated foothill grassland. population approximately Elevation: 10–220 m. 3.29 air-miles to the Blooms June–October. southwest which was the last remaining natural population in the Bay Area.
Isocoma arguta 1B Alkaline sites in valley and Not expected to occur due to Carquinez goldenbush foothill grassland and other lack of bunchgrass grassland sub-saline sites. with alkaline soils. Nearest Elevation: 1–20 m. CNDDB occurrence (#14) Blooms: August– from undisclosed location December. approximately 0.05 air- miles to the northeast. Lathyrus jepsonii var. jepsonii 1B Freshwater and brackish Not expected to occur due to Delta tule pea marsh. lack of suitable tidal channel Elevation: 0–5 m. substrate. Blooms: May–June. Lilaeopsis masonii SR, 1B Tidal zone of brackish and Not expected to occur due to Mason’s lilaeopsis freshwater marshes and lack of suitable tidal channel swamps, riparian scrub. substrate. Elevation: 0–10 m. Blooms: April–November. Senecio aphanactis 2B Alkaline flats and rocky Not expected to occur due to Chaparral ragwort areas in cismontane lack of cismontane woodland and coastal woodland and coastal scrub. scrub; Elevation: 15-800 Nearest CNDDB occurrence m. (#15) from an 1874 Blooms: January–April. collection from a rocky escarpment on Mare Island, approximately 2.58 air- miles to the north.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Suaeda californica FE, 1B Margins of coastal salt Not expected to occur due to California seablite marsh. lack of tidal salt marsh. Elevation: 0–15 m. Blooms: July–October. Symphyotrichum lentum 1B Brackish and freshwater Marginal habitat present at (=Aster lentus) marshes and swamps. southeast end of on-site Suisun marsh aster Elevation: 0–3 m. seasonal wetland. Blooms: June–October. Symphyotrichum species observed during November 2014 reconnaissance survey, but unable to identify to species level due to lack of flowers. Species is very rare and was believed extinct until rediscovered in the 1990s (CNPS 2008). The closest CNDDB occurrence (#17) is a presumed extant population growing in Southampton Marsh, southwest of Benicia. ANIMALS Fish Green sturgeon (southern FT Estuaries, lower reaches of May occasionally visit open DPS2) large rivers, and salt or waters of San Pablo Bay Acipenser medirostris brackish water off river adjacent to shoreline mouths. Ascends far up stabilization area. Trinity and Klamath rivers. Delta smelt FT, SE Open brackish and fresh Not expected to occur. San Hypomesus transpacificus water of large channels. Pablo Bay waters adjacent to site outside known range. Longfin smelt FC, ST, CSC Bays, estuaries, and May occur in open water Spirinchus thaleichthys nearshore coastal waters habitat adjacent to shoreline from San Francisco Bay stabilization area, although north to Lake Earl, near the adults and juveniles Oregon Border. Spawn in emigrating from upstream low-salinity or freshwater spawning habitat more reaches of coastal rivers likely to favor deeper and tributary streams. channel habitat (Baxter 2009). Steelhead (central California FT, CSC Coastal streams from Migratory individuals may coast DPS) Russian River south to occasionally visit open Oncorhynchus mykiss Aptos Creek (Santa Cruz waters of San Pablo Bay Co.), including streams adjacent to shoreline tributary to San Francisco stabilization area between and San Pablo Bays. August and March.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Steelhead (Central Valley DPS) FT Anadromous: adults begin Migratory individuals may spawning migration to occasionally visit open freshwater tributary waters of San Pablo Bay streams of Sacramento and adjacent to shoreline San Joaquin Rivers stabilization area between between August and August and October. October. Chinook salmon (Sacramento FE Anadromous: adults begin Migratory individuals may River winter-run ESU3) spawning migration to occasionally visit open Oncorhynchus tshawytscha tributary streams of waters of San Pablo Bay Sacramento River between adjacent to shoreline November and June. stabilization area between November and June. Chinook salmon (Central Valley FT Anadromous: adults begin Migratory individuals may spring-run ESU) spawning migration to occasionally visit open tributary streams of waters of San Pablo Bay Sacramento River in spring adjacent to shoreline and early summer. stabilization area between spring and early fall. Amphibians and Reptiles California red-legged frog FT, CSC Ponds, streams, drainages Unlikely to occur. Seasonal Rana draytonii and associated uplands; wetland suitable for resting requires areas of deep, still, and foraging but not for and/or slow-moving water breeding due to limited for breeding hydroperiod. Wetland also isolated from occupied habitat in vicinity (i.e., Refugio Creek, Rodeo Creek) by intervening development. Western pond turtle CSC Ponds, streams, drainages, Not expected to occur due to Actinemys marmorata and associated uplands. lack of perennial streams and/or ponds and site’s isolation from occupied habitat in vicinity (i.e., Rodeo Creek). Alameda whipsnake FT, ST Chaparral and sage scrub Not expected to occur due to Masticophis lateralis with rock outcrops and an lack of chaparral and scrub. euryxanthus abundance of prey species such as western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis). Birds White-tailed kite CFP Open grasslands, meadows, May occur. Blue gum and Elanus leucurus or marshes. Require dense- willow trees suitable for topped trees or shrubs for nesting and open terrain nesting and perching. suitable for foraging.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Northern harrier CSC Nests in wet meadows and May occasionally forage Circus cyaneus marshes, forages over open over on-site grassland but grasslands and agricultural not expected to nest due to fields. lack of dense ground vegetation and nearby disturbance. California black rail ST, CFP Salt marshes bordering Not expected to occur due to Laterallus jamaicensis larger bays, also found in lack of tidal salt or brackish coturniculus brackish and freshwater marsh. marshes. Ridgway’s (=California FE, SE,, CFP Tidal salt marshes with Not expected to occur due to clapper) rail sloughs and substantial lack of tidal salt or brackish Rallus obsoletus obsoletus cordgrass (Spartina sp.) marsh. cover. Burrowing owl CSC Open habitats (e.g., Migratory individuals may Athene cunicularia grasslands, agricultural occasionally occur on site areas) with mammal for very brief periods but burrows or other features limited California ground (e.g., culverts, pipes, debris squirrel burrows or burrow piles) suitable for nesting surrogates (i.e., culverts, and roosting. pipes) likely precludes long- term use. However, this species could occur in the future if ground squirrels colonized the study area. Salt marsh common CSC Salt, brackish, and Unlikely to occur. Seasonal yellowthroat freshwater marshes; and wetland vegetation and Geothylpis trichas sinuosa riparian woodlands. Nests willows suitable for nesting, on or near ground in low but small size of patch and vegetation. abundance of generalist predators due to adjacent development substantially reduces likelihood of occurrence. San Pablo song sparrow CSC Tidal and muted salt Not expected to occur due to Melospiza melodia samuelis marshes on the fringes of lack of tidal salt or brackish San Pablo Bay, Tomales marsh. Bay, and Richardson Bay. Nests primarily in pickleweed and gumplant. Mammals Suisun shrew CSC Salt marshes of northern Not expected to occur due to Sorex ornatus sinuosus San Pablo and Suisun lack of tidal salt marsh. Bays. Require dense low- lying cover and driftwood or other litter about the high tide line for nesting and foraging. San Pablo vole CSC Tidal marshes around the Not expected to occur. Site Microtus californicus mouth of San Pablo Creek outside known range of this sanpabloensis and adjacent upland subspecies. grasslands.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Species Status1 Habitat/Blooming Period Discussion Pallid bat CSC Roosts in caves, tunnels, Not expected to occur due to Antrozous pallidus buildings, under bridges, lack of roosting habitat. and in tree hollows; forages over variety of habitats. Salt-marsh harvest mouse FE, SE, CFP Tidal salt marshes of San Not expected to occur due to Reithrodontomys raviventris Francisco Bay and its lack of tidal salt marsh. tributaries. Requires tall, dense pickleweed (Salicornia sp.) for cover. 1Status Codes: FE = federally endangered; FT = federally threatened; SE = State endangered; ST = State threatened; 1B = California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1B (plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere); 2B = CRPR 2B (plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere); CSC = California Species of Special Concern; CFP = California Fully Protected Species 2 DPS = distinct population segment 3 ESU = evolutionarily significant unit
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Table B: Plant Species Observed on the Lone Tree Segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail Study Area, November 14, 2014.
Scientific Name English Name Native?
GYMNOSPERMS Juniperus sp. Common juniper no Juniperus chinensis Chinese juniper no
EUDICOTS APIACEAE CARROT Conium maculatum Poison hemlock no
APOCYNACEAE DOGBANE FAMILY Vinca major Periwinkle no
ARALIACEAE GINSENG FAMILY Hedera canariensis Canary ivy no
ASTERACEAE SUNFLOWER FAMILY Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush yes Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle no Dittrichia graveolens Stinkwort no Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox-tongue no Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce no Xanthium spinosum Spiny cocklebur yes
BIGNONIACEAE Campsis radicans Trumpet creeper no
BRASSICACEAE MUSTARD FAMILY Brassica nigra Black mustard no Hirschfeldia incana Shortpod mustard no Raphanus sativus Wild radish no
CACTACEAE CACTUS FAMILY Opuntia ficus-indica Mission cactus no
CELASTRACEAE STAFF-TREE FAMILY Maytenus boaria Mayten tree no
CHENOPODIACEAE GOOSEFOOT FAMILY Atriplex serenana var. serenana Bracted saltbush yes
CONVOLVULACEAE MORNING GLORY Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed no Cressa truxillensis Spreading alkaliweed yes
EUPHORBIACEAE SPURGE FAMILY Ricinus communis Castor bean no
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Scientific Name English Name Native?
FABACEAE LEGUME FAMILY Medicago polymorpha Bur-clover no Robinia pseudoacacia Black locust no
FAGACEAE OAK FAMILY Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak yes
JUGLANDACEAE WALNUT Juglans regia English walnut no
LAMIACEAE MINT FAMILY Marrubium vulgare Horehound no Salvia leucantha Mexican sage no
MALVACEAE MALLOW FAMILY Malva parviflora Cheeses no
MYRTACEAE MYRTLE FAMILY Callistemon citrinus Crimson bottelbrsuh no
OLEACEAE OLIVE FAMILY Olea europaea Cultivated olive no
POLYGONACAE BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Rumex crispus Curly dock no
RHAMNACEAE BUCKTHORN FAMILY Frangula californica California coffeberry yes Rhamnus alaternus Italian buckthorn no
ROSACEAE ROSE FAMILY Pyracantha angustifolia Firethorn no Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry yes
SALICACEAE WILLOW FAMILY Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow yes
SOLANACEAE NIGHTSHADE FAMILY Solanum furcatum Forked nightshade no
MONOCOTS AGAVACEAE Agave Americana Century plant no
ARECACEAE PALM FAMILY Washingtonia robusta Washington fan palm no
POACEAE GRASS FAMILY
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Scientific Name English Name Native? Avena fatua Common wild oat no Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome no Bromus hordeaceus Soft cheatgrass no Bromus madritensis Foxtail cess no
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Bio Tech Memo_2014-12-11.docx) Shoreline Stabilization Area
LEGEND Land Cover Types FIGURE 1 District Property Boundary Semi-natural Herbaceous Stands Arroyo Willow Thickets Shoreline Parcel Creeping Ryegrass Turfs Trees and Shrubs Upland Parcel Fields of Fat-hen (Seasonal Wetland) Developed San Francisco Bay Trail - Lone Tree Point 0 75 150 Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California FEET Vegetation Map SOURCE: USGS Orthoimagery (04/2011). I:\BKF1403\GIS\Maps\BioReport\Figure 1_Vegetation Map.mxd (12/11/2014)
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. B E R K E L E Y F R E S N O R I V E R S I D E 157 PARK PLACE 510.236.6810 TEL C A R L S B A D I R V I N E R O C K L I N PT. RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA 94801 510.236.3480 FAX FORT COLLINS PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 11, 2014
TO: April Malvino and Robert Stevens, BKF Engineers
FROM: E. Timothy Jones, M.A., RPA, LSA Senior Cultural Resources Manager
SUBJECT: Cultural Resources Constraints Review for the SF Bay Trail—Lone Tree Point segment, Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California (LSA Project #BKF1403)
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA), conducted background research and a field review for cultural resources for the proposed Lone Tree Point segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail in Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California (Figures 1-2). These tasks were completed to identify potential cultural resources constraints that may impede development of this trail segment by the East Bay Regional Park District (District). The study area for this constraints review is depicted on Figure 2 and consists of District- owned parcels to the east (357-371-001-3) and west (357-020-023-2) of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). For the purposes of this memorandum, these parcels are referred to as the Upland and Shoreline Parcels, respectively, in accordance with the map included in the District’s Request for Proposals. The tasks conducted for this review are described below, and the results and recommendations of the analysis are presented at the end of this memorandum.
RECORDS SEARCH Record searches of the study area were conducted on November 24, 2014, at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park. The NWIC, an affiliate of the State of California Office of Historic Preservation, is the official State repository of cultural resource records and reports for Contra Costa County.
As part of the records search, LSA also reviewed the following State inventories for cultural resources in and adjacent to the study area:
• California Inventory of Historic Resources (California Department of Parks and Recreation 1976); • Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California (California Office of Historic Preservation 1988); • California Points of Historical Interest (California Office of Historic Preservation 1992); • California Historical Landmarks (California Office of Historic Preservation 1996); and • Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File (California Office of Historic Preservation April 5, 2012). The directory includes the listings of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), National Historic Landmarks, and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Results Recorded Cultural Resources. Three cultural resources have been recorded within 500 feet of the study area, consisting of prehistoric archaeological site CA-CCO-258, the Southern Pacific Railroad (P-07-000813), and steel pipes (P-07-004530). These resources are described below, and their locations, as plotted on the cultural resource base map on file at the NWIC, are indicated on Figure 3.
Archaeologist Nels Nelson recorded CA-CCO-258 in 1907 as a shellmound that was “Situated on Lone Tree Point, north of the railroad track at Rodeo.” At that time, the Western Oil Refinery occupied the reported location of CA-CCO-258, and Nelson’s record of the site noted that the deposit had been removed and its existence was “hearsay.”
Subsequent archaeological surveys of the recorded location and vicinity of CA-CCO-258 have been completed by Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. (FWARG), and Tremaine & Associates. Archaeologists with FWARG identified shell associated with CA-CCO-258 in disturbed soils east of the current study area during a linear survey for a proposed fiber optics cable in 1998 (Nelson 1998). Archaeologists with Tremaine & Associates identified surface shell 353 feet west of channelized Rodeo Creek during a survey for a proposed fiber optics cable. Due to the presence of shell and the general sensitivity of the area for archaeological deposits, Tremaine (2000) monitored four utility “pothole” excavations and excavated 14 cores between Rodeo Creek and the Pacific Avenue overpass to identify subsurface archaeological deposits. One pothole excavation contained one piece of mussel and five clam shell fragments; one core excavation contained seven fragments of oyster and one Monterey chert flake. No other prehistoric cultural materials were identified.
In 2010, the Federal Transit Administration recorded P-07-004530 for the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center project. The resource is south of the study area and consists of “a cluster of at least seven steel pipes extending from a cut bank above the [Union Pacific] railroad.” The historical association of the pipes is unknown, but this feature likely dates to the early 20th century development of the area. An evaluation of the feature indicated that it does not appear eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to a lack of a significant historical association (Kaijankoski et al. 2012).
P-07-000813, the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR), was constructed adjacent to the study area between 1876 and 1878. Kaijankoski et al. (2012) evaluated this segment of the SPRR and are of the opinion it is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to numerous alterations that have compromised the resource’s integrity of materials, design, workmanship, feeling, and association.
Previous Studies. Seven previous survey and monitoring studies have been completed within portions of the current study area. Holman (1987) conducted an archaeological field survey of the study area east of the UPRR. The remaining six studies were completed for linear projects at or along the UPRR, including fiber optic cable installations (Furlong and Tremaine 2001; Nelson and Carpenter 2000; SWCA Environmental Consultants 2006), pipeline construction (McIvers 1992; Stoddard 1977), and a transportation project (Kaijankoski et al. 2012). None of these reports identified cultural resources within the current study area.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
FIELD REVIEW LSA Registered Professional Archaeologist E. Timothy Jones conducted a field review for the study area on December 4, 2014. The field review did not constitute a formal cultural resources survey of the study area but assessed the potential for the study area to contain archaeological deposits.
Results No surface archaeological deposits were identified during the field review. Marine shell fragments were observed on the surface of the study area west of the UPRR. This shell, however, does not appear to be associated with an archaeological deposit and was likely deposited from tidal action, birds, and/or fill episodes. No midden, fire-affected rock, charcoal, culturally flaked stone, or bone— materials typically associated with a shellmound—were observed. A review of the shoreline cutbank indicates fill deposition or extensive mixing of soils at this location, with assorted concrete, glass, metal, and plastic observed in the profile.
The NWIC indicates that prehistoric archaeological site CA-CCO-258 is adjacent to the current study area (Figure 3). Nelson’s 1907 site record indicates that this resource is at Lone Tree Point, north of the UPRR. This description would indicate that there is a potential to identify archaeological deposits associated with CA-CCO-258 in the study area. The absence of surface deposits does not necessarily indicate reduced sensitivity for archaeological resources, and prehistoric archaeological deposits have been identified south of the study area near Hercules, beneath approximately six feet of artificial fill (Kaijankoski et al. 2012).
The remains of a historic wharf were identified on a parcel adjacent to the study area at Lone Tree Point (APN 357-020-010-9). The wharf remains include pilings and sections of the superstructure. Based on a review of historical aerial photographs and maps, the wharf was constructed sometime between 1916 and 1939. Roughly 50 percent of the wharf has been removed.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary LSA’s background research identified three cultural resources recorded within or adjacent to the study area. Two of these resources, the SPRR and a cluster of historic-period steel pipes, do not appear eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (Kaijankoski et al. 2012), and no further documentation or study of these resources appears warranted. The status of the third resource, prehistoric archaeological site CA-CCO-258, is unclear. Previous presence-absence excavations adjacent to the study area (Tremaine 2000) identified only sparse subsurface cultural materials. Previous archaeological monitoring and survey efforts along the UPRR did not identify evidence of CA-CCO-258 within the study area, although surface shell was noted in disturbed soil east of the current study area (Nelson 1998). In short, the precise location of CA-CCO-258 and its current condition are not known at this time. Based on Nelson’s description of this site as “north of the railroad track” at Lone Tree Point, there is some potential that remnants of this site are within the study area.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) 3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Recommendations Shoreline Parcel. Due to the sensitivity of this parcel for prehistoric archaeological deposits, LSA recommends that additional work be conducted at this location. This work should consist of (1) an intensive archaeological survey, and (2) an archaeological excavation at locations where project ground disturbance is anticipated. An archaeological survey is recommended as this area has not been previously surveyed for archaeological deposits and, based on Nelson’s 1907 site record description, it may have been the location of CA-CCO-258. The archaeological excavation would be conducted to confirm the presence or absence of subsurface in situ archaeological deposits with auger and shovel test excavations. A report should be prepared to document the results of the survey and excavation. The report should assess the potential that project implementation may disturb archaeological deposits that meet the definition of a historical resource under Public Resources Code Section (PRC) 21084.1 or as unique archaeological resources under PRC Section 21083.2. Recommendations for additional work would be detailed in the report, as necessary, including mitigation of adverse effects to significant archaeological deposits identified by the survey and excavation.
Upland Parcel. Holman (1987) previously surveyed this parcel. Archaeological monitoring of project ground disturbance at this location is recommended in the event that archaeological deposits not identified by Holman, e.g., deposits buried beneath fill or obscured by vegetation, are unearthed during project construction. A report documenting the results of the monitoring should be prepared after the archaeological monitoring has been completed.
Adjacent Parcels (APN 357-020-010-9). The historic wharf at APN 357-020-010-9 has not been previously recorded, and neither its historical association nor significance is known. Due to the removal of portions of this resource, the wharf is unlikely to retain sufficient integrity to convey its historical significance, if any. If the project has the potential to affect the wharf, however, it is recommended that a qualified historian document and evaluate the resource to determine its status as a “historical resource” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a).
REFERENCES CITED California Office of Historic Preservation 1976 California Inventory of Historic Resources. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Sites Survey for California. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
1992 California Points of Historical Interest. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
1996 California Historical Landmarks. Sacramento: California Department of Parks and Recreation.
2012 Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File, April 5. Sacramento: California Office of Historic Preservation.
City of Hercules, and Federal Transit Administration 2011 Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Furlong, Denise, and Kim J. Tremaine 2001 Archaeological Monitoring for WS01 Long Haul Fiber Optic Segment, between Sacramento and Emeryville, California. Dixon, California: Tremaine & Associates, LLC.
Holman, Miley P. 1987 Letter Report to Robert Isaacs, California Land Research, Lone Tree Point Archaeological Reconnaissance. San Francisco: Holman & Associates.
Kaijankoski, Philip, et al. 2012 Addendum: Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Hercules Intermodal Transit Center. Davis, California: Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
McIvers, Kenneth J. 1992 An Archaeological Survey of the Richmond to Concord Pipeline Project. Sacramento: Archaeological Study Center, California State University, Sacramento.
Nelson, Nels C. 1907 Archaeological Site Survey Record, CA-CCO-258. Record on file, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.
Nelson, Wendy J. 1998 California Department of Parks and Recreation DPR 523 record for CA-CCO-258. Record on file, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California.
Nelson, Wendy J., and Maureen Carpenter 2000 Cultural Resources Survey for the Level (3) Communications Long Haul Fiber Optics Project, Segment WS01: Sacramento to Oakland. Davis, California: Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.
Stoddard, Steven E. 1977 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Proposed Pipeline Routes between the Pinole and Rodeo Wastewater Treatment Plants, Contra Costa County, California. Rohnert Park, California: The Anthropology Laboratory, Sonoma State University.
SWCA Environmental Consultants 2006 Cultural Resources Final Report of Monitoring and Findings for the Qwest Network Construction Project, State of California. Sacramento: SWCA Environmental Consultants.
Tremaine, Kim J. 2000 Results of Utility Locating & Site Boundary Delineation for CA-CCO-258, Rodeo, California. Dixon, California: Tremaine & Associates.
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) 5 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
ATTACHMENT
PROJECT FIGURES
FIGURE 1: REGIONAL LOCATION FIGURE 2: PROJECT SITE FIGURE 3: RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
12/31/14 (K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\ENG\DWG-IN\LSA\Lone Tree Pt Cultural Memo_2014-12-11.doc) 6 S o n o m a TS29 ¦¨§80 C o u n t y S o l a n o Carquinez C o u n t y Straight
37 Vallejo TS37 TS Project Site TS29 ¨680 ¦§ A St Crockett ¦¨§780 Rodeo Benicia 1st St A St 4 Hercules TS Martinez San Rafael San San C o n t r a Concord Pablo C o s t a 580 C o s t a Pleasant ¦¨§ C o u n t y Hill Richmond Walnut Balvedere ¦¨§80 TS24 Creek Berkeley 680 ¤£101 Berkeley ¦¨§
San Pablo Ave
Dempsey Project Site John St Way San Pablo Ave 2nd St 1st St
Rodeo Ave San Pablo 2nd St Tullibee 3r Ct Bay Sharon Ave d St 3rd St 4th St
e Parker Ave Parker v A a C m Vaqueros a o 7th St l if n o Victoria Ave e o r l Park n t S s e ia e v 6th St r o r S T t C D e 80 rn ¦¨§ Salt o Spray Ter Willow Ave th Langlie w a Way H lvd t B Dockside in o Baypoin Bay p t w Way e i us V in Dr g r L lin N A D u l a o f Ketch Ct l b r P e a a e d Copper g r l e o Bayfront D d y Beech Gln C r o a r Blvd B e W D
v d r A t a le B il o r D w t l i t g a d W n r S b h n t t i o o f t S a o r n F r Seacliff Ct W F S P d r S o t S
N n
n t t
a
S Newbury St
o
S l Riverview t
l
Pinole St o Ter
p
A amo Titan 4 yc re Railroad Ave TS S Way Ave FIGURE 1
San Francisco Bay Trail - Lone Tree Point 0 1000 2000 Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California FEET Regional Location SOURCE: ESRI StreetMap North America (2012). I:\BKF1403\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 1_Regional Location.mxd (11/12/2014) Project Site
FIGURE 2
San Francisco Bay Trail - Lone Tree Point 0 1000 2000 Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California FEET Project Site SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quad - Mare Island, Calif. (1980) and Benicia, Calif. (1980). I:\BKF1403\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 2_Project Site.mxd (11/11/2014) CA-CCO-258 Project Site
P-07-000813
P-07-004530
FIGURE 3
San Francisco Bay Trail - Lone Tree Point 0 1000 2000 Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California FEET Record Search Results SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quad - Mare Island, Calif. (1980) and Benicia, Calif. (1980). I:\BKF1403\GIS\Maps\Cultural\RecordSearchResults\Figure 3_Record Search Results.mxd (12/3/2014)
APPENDIX E Shoreline Protection
APPENDIX F Project Description
SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL AT LONE TREE POINT DRAFT PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The East Bay Regional Park District (District) proposes to construct a section of the San Francisco Bay Trail extending approximately 0.5 mile from the northwest terminus of the existing Victoria by the Bay segment to the San Pablo Bay Staging Area at Lone Tree Point in Rodeo, Contra Costa County, California.
Project Background The San Francisco Bay Trail is a non-motorized alternative transportation and recreational corridor proposed to encircle San Francisco and San Pablo Bays with a continuous 500-mile network of bicycling and hiking trails. The corridor will connect the shoreline of all nine bay area counties, link 47 cities and eventually cross all the major toll bridges in the region. Approximately 340 miles of the alignment have been completed.
A key segment of the Bay Trail exists along the San Pablo Bay Shoreline. This multi-use trail will eventually connect the cities of Richmond, San Pablo, Pinole, Hercules, and Rodeo and extend 10 miles from Point Pinole Regional Shoreline in Richmond to Lone Tree Point in the Town of Rodeo. Implementation of the proposed project would connect the existing Bay Trail segment adjacent to the Victoria by the Bay housing development in Hercules to the San Pablo Bay Regional Shoreline staging area at Lone Tree Point, in Rodeo. In 2014, the District commissioned a feasibility and preliminary engineering/environmental study to develop potential alignments for the proposed trail segment and to identify resource issues that might constrain the trail alignment.
Project Location The project area is located along the San Pablo Bay shoreline from the City of Hercules to the town of Rodeo in western Contra Costa County, and includes a portion of the District-owned parcel west of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) (APN 357-020-023-2; Shoreline Parcel) and the entire District- owned parcel east of the UPRR (APN 357-371-001-3; Upland Parcel). The proposed trail alignment is located within the Upland Parcel and would extend approximately 0.5 mile from the existing Bay Trail segment adjacent to the Victoria by the Bay housing development in Hercules to the San Pablo Bay Regional Shoreline staging area at Lone Tree Point. The proposed project also includes shoreline stabilization work (i.e., riprap installation) along an approximately 280-foot segment of the San Pablo Bay shoreline in the northern portion of the Shoreline Parcel (hereafter referred to as “shoreline stabilization area”).
Existing Conditions Land Uses in the Project Vicinity. The project area is located at the northwestern edge of the town of Rodeo, adjacent to San Pablo Bay. Land uses immediately adjacent to the project area include park land, residential and industrial uses. The Rodeo Marina (boat and recreational vehicle storage yard), Rodeo Sewage Treatment Plant and the Conoco Phillips San Francisco Refinery are located to the
12/21/2015(K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\DOCS\03-Correspondence\B-Letters\Feasiblity-Report\Appendix-F-Project- 1 Description\LoneTreePoint_Draft Project Desc.doc) north along the shoreline. San Pablo Bay borders the Shoreline Parcel to the west. Residential development associated with the unincorporated town of Rodeo is located to the east. The southern terminus of the proposed trail alignment abuts the Victoria by the Bay residential subdivision in the City of Hercules, which includes single-family homes, a commercial center, and an elementary school.
The proposed trail traverses lands owned in fee by the District. Much of the proposed trail alignment would be located parallel to the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks just east of the railroad right-of-way. This area supports four vegetation types: beardless wild rye turfs, semi-natural herbaceous stands, fields of fat hen (seasonal wetland), and arroyo willow thickets. Tree and shrub species identified on the site include black acacia (Acacia melanoxylon), Tasmanian blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), English walnut (Juglans regia), shiny privet (Ligustrum japonicum), Horticultural rose (Rosa sp.), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), Washington fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). With the exception of coast live oak, willow, and toyon, all of these species are non-native ornamentals that were either planted on site or have colonized the site from adjacent landscaped areas.
Project Characteristics The proposed project is the northernmost segment of the San Pablo Bay Trail portion of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The proposed trail alignment would begin at the San Pablo Bay Staging Area at Lone Tree Point, an existing recreational facility along the San Pablo Bay Shoreline. The trail alignment would cross over the railroad tracks via the existing grade-separated crossing at Pacific Avenue and extend south. The trail alignment would parallel the UPRR right-of-way for approximately 1,800 feet to connect to the northwest terminus of the existing Victoria by the Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. Specifically, the project would consist of a new multi-use pathway connection and proposed shoreline stabilization along the water’s edge. The project is described in more detail below.
Trail Alignment. The overall width of the proposed trail would be 14 feet consisting of a 10-foot paved trail with a 2-foot shoulder on each side. The maximum cross slope on the trail would be 2 percent to meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. The maximum grade of the trail alignment would be 4.8 percent. The paved portion would be constructed with 6 inches of Portland cement concrete (PCC) over 6 inches of Class II aggregate base.
At the northern boundary of the project, the proposed trail alignment would extend south from the existing Lone Tree Point staging area approximately 500 feet. At Station 5+00, the proposed trail would cross an intermittent stream and associated seasonal wetland that ponds during normal to heavy rainfall. A bicycle and pedestrian bridge crossing would be constructed at this location. The bridge would consist of a prefabricated structure, including potential for piers in the wetland area. The bridge would have a concrete deck, safety fencing, and rails. Beyond the bridge, the trail alignment would continue south, roughly parallel to the UPRR tracks to connect to the northwest terminus of the existing Victoria by the Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail.
Existing utilities would remain in place. Where needed, culverts or other means would be provided to convey stormwater into existing storm drain systems and channels with minimal alteration to the existing drainage system.
12/21/2015(K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\DOCS\03-Correspondence\B-Letters\Feasiblity-Report\Appendix-F-Project- 2 Description\LoneTreePoint_Draft Project Desc.doc)
Shoreline Stabilization. As part of the proposed project, the District proposes to repair erosion along the San Pablo Bay shoreline within the Shoreline Parcel west of the UPRR tracks. In this area, existing debris (e.g., tree stumps, wood materials, tires, and reinforcing bars protruding from concrete surfaces) would be removed and disposed of off-site at an approved disposal facility. All other concrete and rock material would remain. Exposed concrete material would be broken down into 2- foot pieces and used, along with imported material, to construct a 2:1 slope of riprap along the shoreline. Slope areas would be covered with a minimum 4-inch-thick Class 3 base rock to 85 percent relative compaction over finished grade. Filter fabric would be installed with a minimum of 2-feet overlap.
Construction. Project construction would be conducted entirely on land owned by the District. Construction access would primarily occur via public roads, including Pacific Avenue. These access points would continue to be used for trail maintenance activities after completion of construction activities.
Staging areas would be finalized in coordination with the construction contractor. A potential staging area to be considered is the existing parking lot at the Lone Tree Point Staging Area. After completion of construction activities, staging areas would be returned to their previous condition or improved.
Much of the excavation and pipe removal/installation work would be performed by a large excavator. Other construction equipment would consist of flat-bed and dump trucks, loaders, bulldozers, and light-duty passenger/support vehicles to convey workers and necessary tools and equipment. Compactors and generators would also likely be needed to support construction activities.
The project would require about 3 months to complete construction.
Required Approvals • City of Hercules Grading Permit • Contra Costa County Grading Permit • San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (Administrative Permit) • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Federal Clean Water Act [CWA] Section 404 Permit) • Regional Water Quality Control Board (CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification) • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (possible Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation or “Not Likely to Adversely Affect” concurrence)
12/21/2015(K:\2014\145121_EBRPD-LoneTreePoint\DOCS\03-Correspondence\B-Letters\Feasiblity-Report\Appendix-F-Project- 3 Description\LoneTreePoint_Draft Project Desc.doc)