DOCSLIB.ORG

East Bay Municipal Utility District, Watershed Master Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

East Bay Watershed Master Plan FINAL PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 2017 EAST BAY WATERSHED MASTER PLAN UPDATE East Bay Municipal Utility District Board of Directors Frank Mellon President William B. Patterson Vice President John A. Coleman Andy Katz Doug Linney Lesa R. McIntosh Marguerite Young District Personnel Alexander R. Coate General Manager Richard G. Sykes Director of Water and Natural Resources Douglas I. Wallace Environmental Affairs Officer, Master Plan Update Project Manager Scott D. Hill Manager of Watershed and Recreation Jose D. Setka Manager of Fisheries and Wildlife Rick Leong Principal Management Analyst Rachel R. Jones Office of General Counsel East Bay Watershed Master Plan Prepared by: East Bay Municipal Utility District 375 - 11th Street Oakland, CA 94607 510-287-1370 Contact: Douglas I. Wallace February 29, 1996 Revised March 15, 1999 Updated Month, 2016 This document should be cited as: East Bay Municipal Utility District. 1996. East Bay Watershed Master Plan. February 29, 1996. Revised March 15, 1999. Updated [July] 2016. With technical assistance from Jones & Stokes Associates; Brady and Associates; Dillingham Associates; REM & Associates; Merritt Smith Consulting; Reza Ghezelbash, GIS Consultant; and Montgomery Watson. (JSA 94-320.) Oakland, CA. Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction 1 Purpose of the East Bay Watershed Master Plan . .1 Plan Terminology . .3 Board of Directors’ Policy Direction. 4 History of East Bay Watershed Land Use Planning. 5 Scope of the East Bay Watershed Master Plan . .5 Public Involvement. 5 Organization and Use of the Plan. 6 Section 2 District Lands and Resources 9 Introduction . .9 Overview of District Lands . .9 General Description of Watershed Lands. 11 District-Owned Nonreservoir Watershed Lands . 13 Description of Watershed Resources. 14 Description of Watershed Planning Zones . 29 Section 3 General Management Direction 45 Introduction . 45 Natural Resources Management Programs . 46 Water Quality 46 Biodiversity 50 Forestry 53 Livestock Grazing 55 Fire and Fuels 57 Community Use Management Programs. 64 Developed Recreation and Trails 64 Environmental Education 70 Cultural Resources 72 Visual Resources 73 Property Management Programs . 75 Land Ownership 75 Entitlements 77 Section 4 Watershed Management Area Direction 79 Introduction . 79 San Pablo Reservoir Watershed . 81 Briones Watershed. 84 Upper San Leandro Reservoir Watershed. 86 Chabot Reservoir Watershed. 88 Lafayette Reservoir Watershed. 90 Pinole Watershed. 92 i v Table of Contents Section 5 Management Direction for Interjurisdictional Coordination 95 Introduction . 95 Major Management Issues. 98 Summary of Land Use Conditions on Adjacent Lands. 98 General Management Direction . 105 Area-Specific Management Direction. 106 Section 6 Citations 109 viii LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADA Americans with Disabilities Act AUMs animal unit-months BHAPA Briones Hills Agricultural Preservation Area BMP best management practice Board East Bay Municipal Utility District Board of Directors CAC Community Advisory Committee Caltrans California Department of Transportation CCCFPD Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Cal Fire California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act DBPs disinfection byproducts District East Bay Municipal Utility District EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District EBWMP East Bay Watershed Master Plan EIR environmental impact report FMU fire management unit GIS geographic information system HCP Habitat Conservation Plan IPM integrated pest management ITP Incidental Take Permit PAHs polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls TAC Trails Adjunct Committee THMs trihalomethanes USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service voCs volatile organic compounds iiivii viii Section 1 Introduction Purpose of the East Bay Watershed Master Plan The East Bay Municipal Utility District (District) owns and Because these lands have been largely protected from manages approximately 29,000 acres of land and water development and human disturbance, they support surface in the East Bay area (Figure 1-1). These lands important and high-quality habitats and resources for a surround five reservoirs (Briones, San Pablo, Upper San wide variety of plant and animal species. Leandro, Chabot, and Lafayette) and one basin area that does not contain a reservoir (Pinole Valley). The District’s The District has determined that managing lands and reservoirs store high-quality drinking water and emergency reservoirs to protect water quality and important, high-quality water supplies for approximately 1.4 million water users in biological resources can best be achieved by promoting Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Protecting water biological diversity (biodiversity). Biodiversity is defined quality is primary in importance to the District. Additionally, here as “the variety and variability among living organisms the District is committed to preserving and protecting the and the ecological complexes in which they occur” (Office natural resources that exist on its lands and its reservoirs. of Technology Assessment 1987). Focus of the East Bay Watershed Master Plan Natural Resource Management Programs Water Quality Biodiversity Forestry Livestock Grazing Fire & Fuels Community Use Management Programs Developed Environmental Cultural Visual Recreation Education Resources Resources & Trails Assets Management Programs Land Entitlements Ownership Section 1 Introduction 1 4 4 Pinole Martinez 680 Hercules 80 242 El Sobrante Richmond San Pablo Res. Briones Res. Contra Costa County Walnut Creek 24 Alameda County Lafayette Lafayette Res. Orinda Caldecott 680 Tunnel Berkeley 24 Moraga 13 Danville Oakland Contra Costa County Upper San Leandro Alameda County Res. 880 Alameda 580 0 10,000 20,000 feet Chabot Legend Res. District-owned property Watershed basin bounderies San Leandro Castro Valley Figure 1-1 | East Bay Municipal Utility District property boundary Section 1 Introduction 2 The purpose of the East Bay Watershed Master Plan The EBWMP provides clear guidance regarding the (EBWMP) is to provide long-term management direction management direction on East Bay watershed lands. It is for District-owned lands and reservoirs that will ensure the important to note that the EBWMP is not intended to protection of the District’s water resources and preserve require the implementation of any specific management environmental resources on District-owned lands. The actions and that approval of the plan by the Board of plan also identifies public uses considered compatible or Directors (Board) does not imply or create a future potentially compatible with the primary water quality and commitment to fund any programs or program elements. biodiversity goals. Implementation of such actions will be determined by the Board through the routine budgeting process. If funding is approved for a specific program or program element, the EBWMP will provide the direction on how that program or program element will be implemented. Plan Terminology For purposes of this plan, the term “watershed” is typically References to “non-District watershed lands” are to those used to describe District-owned lands that are the subject of lands that are tributary to District reservoirs and lands but the EBWMP. These areas include the: that are not owned by the District. When this document addresses the entire land area that is tributary to a District • San Pablo Reservoir watershed, reservoir, including both District-owned and non-District- owned lands, the terms “hydrologic watershed” and “basin” • Briones Reservoir watershed, are used. • Pinole watershed,* • Lafayette Reservoir watershed, • Upper San Leandro Reservoir watershed, and • Chabot Reservoir watershed. *District-owned nonreservoir watershed (see page 13 for further description) Section 1 Introduction 3 Board of Directors’ Policy Direction The mission statement of the District represents general management guidance regarding all lands and reservoirs owned by the District. The guiding principles, developed from the mission statement, have provided direction for the master planning process. Mission Statement In 1992, the Board adopted the following District mission statement for management of lands and resources: To manage the natural resouces Implicit in the District’s mission statement is the with which the District is entrusted, commitment to exercise responsible financial management, to provide high-quality water and ensure fair rates and charges, provide responsive customer service, and promote environmental responsibility. wastewater services for the people of the The EBWMP reflects the District’s mission by using it as East Bay, and to preserve and protect the the basis for a plan that protects reservoir water quality for environment for future generations. future generations through prudent management of District watershed natural resources. Guiding Principles In 1993, the District’s Board provided seven guiding principles for the EBWMP. These principles guided an integrated planning process that resulted in the adoption of the first EBWMP in 1996. In adopting the update to this plan in 2016, the Board reaffirmed the guiding principles as follows: 1. Protect water quality through sensitive natural resource and recreation management. 2. Ensure protection of the natural, cultural, and historical resources of the watershed on a long- term basis. 3. Respect natural resources; sustain and restore populations of native
Recommended publications
  • 2. Existing Conditions

    2. Existing Conditions

    2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter provides a description of existing conditions within the City of Lafayette relevant to the Bikeways Master Plan. Information is based on site visits, existing planning documents, maps, and conversations with Lafayette residents and City of Lafayette, Contra Costa County and other agency staff. 2.1. SETTING The City of Lafayette is situated in a semi-rural valley in Contra Costa County, approximately twenty miles east of San Francisco, on the east side of the Oakland/Berkeley hills. Lafayette has a population of approximately 24,000, and encompasses about 15 square miles of land area, for a population density of about 1,500 persons per square mile. Settlement started in the late 1800s but incorporation did not occur until 1968. Lafayette developed its first general plan in 1974, and this general plan was last updated in 2002. The City is bordered on the north by Briones Regional Lafayette-Moraga Trail along St. Mary’s Park, on the east by Walnut Creek, on the south by Moraga and Road near Florence Drive the west by Orinda. Mixed in along its borders are small pockets of unincorporated Contra Costa County. Lafayette has varied terrain, with steep hills located to the north and south. Highway 24 runs through the City, San Francisco is a 25-minute BART ride away, and Oakland’s Rockridge district is just two BART stops away. LAFAYETTE LAND USES Lafayette’s existing development consists mostly of low- to medium-density single family residential, commercial, parkland and open space. Land uses reflect a somewhat older growth pattern: Commercial areas are located on both sides of Mt.
  • Notice of Special Meeting

    Notice of Special Meeting

    BOARD OF DIRECTORS EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 375 - 11th Street, Oakland, CA 94607 Office of the Secretary: (510) 287-0440 Notice of Special Meeting FY22 and FY23 Budget Workshop #2 Tuesday, March 23, 2021 9:00 a.m. **Virtual** At the call of President Doug A. Linney, the Board of Directors has scheduled a Budget Workshop for 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. Due to COVID-19 and in accordance with the most recent Alameda County Health Order, and with the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 which suspends portions of the Brown Act, this meeting will be conducted by webinar or teleconference only. In compliance with said orders, a physical location will not be provided for this meeting. These measures will only apply during the period in which state or local public health officials have imposed or recommended social distancing. The Board will meet in workshop session to review the proposed Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22) and Fiscal Year 2023 biennial budget, rates, operating and capital priorities, and staffing; the proposed FY22 System Capacity Charge and FY22 Wastewater Capacity Fee; and will receive follow-up information from the January 26, 2021 Budget Workshop #1. Dated: March 18, 2021 _______________________________ Rischa S. Cole Secretary of the District W:\Board of Directors - Meeting Related Docs\Notices\Notices 2021\032321_FY22_FY23 Budget Workshop 2.docx This page is intentionally left blank. BOARD OF DIRECTORS EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 375 - 11th Street, Oakland, CA 94607 Office of the Secretary: (510) 287-0440 AGENDA Special Meeting FY22 and FY23 Budget Workshop #2 Tuesday, March 23, 2021 9:00 a.m.
  • Pinolecreeksedimentfinal

    Pinolecreeksedimentfinal

    Pinole Creek Watershed Sediment Source Assessment January 2005 Prepared by the San Francisco Estuary Institute for USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and Contra Costa Resource Conservation District San Francisco Estuary Institute The Regional Watershed Program was founded in 1998 to assist local and regional environmental management and the public to understand, characterize and manage environmental resources in the watersheds of the Bay Area. Our intent is to help develop a regional picture of watershed condition and downstream effects through a solid foundation of literature review and peer- review, and the application of a range of science methodologies, empirical data collection and interpretation in watersheds around the Bay Area. Over this time period, the Regional Watershed Program has worked with Bay Area local government bodies, universities, government research organizations, Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs) and local community and environmental groups in the Counties of Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and San Francisco. We have also fulfilled technical advisory roles for groups doing similar work outside the Bay Area. This report should be referenced as: Pearce, S., McKee, L., and Shonkoff, S., 2005. Pinole Creek Watershed Sediment Source Assessment. A technical report of the Regional Watershed Program, San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI), Oakland, California. SFEI Contribution no. 316, 102 pp. ii San Francisco Estuary Institute ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors gratefully
  • 6284 SAN PABLO DAM Single-Family Residential EL SOBRANTE | CALIFORNIA 7 Lots | 2.57 Acres OFFERING MEMORANDUM

    6284 SAN PABLO DAM Single-Family Residential EL SOBRANTE | CALIFORNIA 7 Lots | 2.57 Acres OFFERING MEMORANDUM

    Final Map Ready 6284 SAN PABLO DAM Single-Family Residential EL SOBRANTE | CALIFORNIA 7 Lots | 2.57 Acres OFFERING MEMORANDUM Accelerating success. DISCLAIMER STATEMENT This Offering Memorandum (“Memorandum”) was prepared by Colliers International (“Colliers”) as part of Collier’s efforts to market for sale the real property commonly known as 6284 San Pablo Dam Road, El Sobrante (the “Property”). Colliers is the exclusive agent and broker for the owner of the Property (the “Owner”). Colliers is providing this Memorandum and the material contained in it to prospective buyer (each a “Buyer”) solely to assist Buyer in determining whether Buyer is interested in potentially purchasing all or part of the Property. Colliers is also providing this Memorandum and the material in it to Buyer with the understanding that Buyer will independently investigate those matters that it deems necessary and appropriate to evaluate the Property and that Buyer will rely only on its own investigation, and not on Colliers, the Owner, or this Memorandum, in determining whether or not to purchase the Property. This Memorandum is a solicitation of interest only and is not an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, an interest in the Property. Owner expressly reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to reject any or all expressions of interest or offers to purchase the Property and expressly reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to terminate discussions with any potential Buyer at any time with or without notice. Owner shall have no legal commitment or obligation to any party reviewing the Memorandum or making an offer to purchase the Property unless and until a written real estate purchase and sale agreement is executed by Owner and Buyer.
  • TR-060, the East Bay Hills Fire Oakland-Berkeley, California, October 1991* United States Fire Administration Technical Report Series

    TR-060, the East Bay Hills Fire Oakland-Berkeley, California, October 1991* United States Fire Administration Technical Report Series

    TR-060, The East Bay Hills Fire Oakland-Berkeley, California, October 1991* United States Fire Administration Technical Report Series The East Bay Hills Fire Oakland-Berkeley, California Federal Emergency Management Agency United States Fire Administration National Fire Data Center United States Fire Administration Fire Investigations Program The United States Fire Administration develops reports on selected major fires throughout the country. The fires usually involve multiple deaths or a large loss of property. But the primary criterion for deciding to do a report is whether it will result in significant "lessons learned." In some cases these lessons bring to light new knowledge about fire -the effect of building construction or contents, human behavior in fire, etc In other cases, the lessons are not new but are serious enough to highhght once again, with yet another fire tragedy report. The reports are Sent to fire magazines and are distributed at national and regional fire meetings. The International Association of Fire Chiefs assists USFA in disseminating the findings throughout the fire service.. On a continuing basis the reports are available on request from USFA; announcements of their availability are published widely in fire journals and newsletters This body of work provides detailed information on the nature of the fire problem for policymakers who must decide on allocations of resources between fire and other pressing problems, and within the fire service to improve codes and code enforcement, training, public tire education, building technology, and other related areas The Fire Administration, which has no regulatory authority, sends an cxperienced fire investigator into a community after a major incident only after having conferred with the local tire authorities to insure that USFA's assistance and presence would be supportive and would in no way interfere with any review of the incident they are themselves conducting.
  • Contra Costa County

    Contra Costa County

    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Marsh Creek Watershed Marsh Creek flows approximately 30 miles from the eastern slopes of Mt. Diablo to Suisun Bay in the northern San Francisco Estuary. Its watershed consists of about 100 square miles. The headwaters of Marsh Creek consist of numerous small, intermittent and perennial tributaries within the Black Hills. The creek drains to the northwest before abruptly turning east near Marsh Creek Springs. From Marsh Creek Springs, Marsh Creek flows in an easterly direction entering Marsh Creek Reservoir, constructed in the 1960s. The creek is largely channelized in the lower watershed, and includes a drop structure near the city of Brentwood that appears to be a complete passage barrier. Marsh Creek enters the Big Break area of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta northeast of the city of Oakley. Marsh Creek No salmonids were observed by DFG during an April 1942 visual survey of Marsh Creek at two locations: 0.25 miles upstream from the mouth in a tidal reach, and in close proximity to a bridge four miles east of Byron (Curtis 1942).
  • Board Meeting Packet

    Board Meeting Packet

    June 1, 2021 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Board Meeting Packet SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AT THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2021 at 1:00 pm Pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order No. N-29-20 and the Alameda County Health Officer’s Shelter in Place Orders, the East Bay Regional Park District Headquarters will not be open to the public and the Board of Directors and staff will be participating in the Board meetings via phone/video conferencing. Members of the public can listen and view the meeting in the following way: Via the Park District’s live video stream which can be found at https://youtu.be/md2gdzkkvVg Public comments may be submitted one of three ways: 1. Via email to Yolande Barial Knight, Clerk of the Board, at [email protected]. Email must contain in the subject line public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item #. It is preferred that these written comments be submitted by Monday, May 31, 2021 at 3:00 pm. 2. Via voicemail at (510) 544-2016. The caller must start the message by stating public comments – not on the agenda or public comments – agenda item # followed by their name and place of residence, followed by their comments. It is preferred that these voicemail comments be submitted by Monday, May 31, 2021 at 3:00 pm. 3. Live via zoom. If you would like to make a live public comment during the meeting this option is available through the virtual meeting platform: *Note: this virtual meeting platform link will let you into the https://zoom.us/j/94773173402 virtual meeting for the purpose of providing a public comment.
  • Wildcat Creek Restoration Action Plan Version 1.3 April 26, 2010 Prepared by the URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

    Wildcat Creek Restoration Action Plan Version 1.3 April 26, 2010 Prepared by the URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

    wildcat creek restoration action plan version 1.3 April 26, 2010 prepared by THE URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL Adopted by the City of San Pablo on August 3, 2010 wildcat creek restoration action plan table of contents 1. INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 plan obJectives 5 1.2 scope 6 Urban Urban 1.5 Methods 8 1.5 Metadata c 10 reeks 2. WATERSHED OVERVIEW 12 c 2.1 introdUction o 12 U 2.2 watershed land Use ncil 13 2.3 iMpacts of Urbanized watersheds 17 april 2.4 hydrology 19 2.5 sediMent transport 22 2010 2.6 water qUality 24 2.7 habitat 26 2.8 flood ManageMent on lower wildcat creek 29 2.9 coMMUnity 32 3. PROJECT AREA ANALYSIS 37 3.1 overview 37 3.2 flooding 37 3.4 in-streaM conditions 51 3.5 sUMMer fish habitat 53 3.6 bioassessMent 57 4. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 58 4.1 obJectives, findings and strategies 58 4.2 recoMMended actions according to strategy 61 4.3 streaM restoration recoMMendations by reach 69 4.4 recoMMended actions for phase one reaches 73 t 4.5 phase one flood daMage redUction reach 73 able of 4.6 recoMMended actions for watershed coUncil 74 c ontents version 1.3 april 26, 2010 2 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban creeks coUncil april 2010 table of contents 3 figUre 1-1: wildcat watershed overview to Point Pinole Regional Shoreline wildcat watershed existing trail wildcat creek highway railroad city of san pablo planned trail other creek arterial road bart Parkway SAN PABLO Richmond BAY Avenue San Pablo Point UP RR San Pablo WEST COUNTY BNSF RR CITY OF LANDFILL NORTH SAN PABLO RICHMOND San Pablo
  • Classy City: Residential Realms of the Bay Region

    Classy City: Residential Realms of the Bay Region

    Classy City: Residential Realms of the Bay Region Richard Walker Department of Geography University of California Berkeley 94720 USA On-line version Revised 2002 Previous published version: Landscape and city life: four ecologies of residence in the San Francisco Bay Area. Ecumene . 2(1), 1995, pp. 33-64. (Includes photos & maps) ANYONE MAY DOWNLOAD AND USE THIS PAPER WITH THE USUAL COURTESY OF CITATION. COPYRIGHT 2004. The residential areas occupy the largest swath of the built-up portion of cities, and therefore catch the eye of the beholder above all else. Houses, houses, everywhere. Big houses, little houses, apartment houses; sterile new tract houses, picturesque Victorian houses, snug little stucco homes; gargantuan manor houses, houses tucked into leafy hillsides, and clusters of town houses. Such residential zones establish the basic tone of urban life in the metropolis. By looking at residential landscapes around the city, one can begin to capture the character of the place and its people. We can mark out five residential landscapes in the Bay Area. The oldest is the 19th century Victorian townhouse realm. The most extensive is the vast domain of single-family homes in the suburbia of the 20th century. The grandest is the carefully hidden ostentation of the rich in their estates and manor houses. The most telling for the cultural tone of the region is a middle class suburbia of a peculiar sort: the ecotopian middle landscape. The most vital, yet neglected, realms are the hotel and apartment districts, where life spills out on the streets. More than just an assemblage of buildings and styles, the character of these urban realms reflects the occupants and their class origins, the economics and organization of home- building, and larger social purposes and planning.
  • (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward p. 3 Introduction p. 5 Methods p. 7 Determining Historical Distribution and Current Status; Information Presented in the Report; Table Headings and Terms Defined; Mapping Methods Contra Costa County p. 13 Marsh Creek Watershed; Mt. Diablo Creek Watershed; Walnut Creek Watershed; Rodeo Creek Watershed; Refugio Creek Watershed; Pinole Creek Watershed; Garrity Creek Watershed; San Pablo Creek Watershed; Wildcat Creek Watershed; Cerrito Creek Watershed Contra Costa County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 39 Alameda County p. 45 Codornices Creek Watershed; Strawberry Creek Watershed; Temescal Creek Watershed; Glen Echo Creek Watershed; Sausal Creek Watershed; Peralta Creek Watershed; Lion Creek Watershed; Arroyo Viejo Watershed; San Leandro Creek Watershed; San Lorenzo Creek Watershed; Alameda Creek Watershed; Laguna Creek (Arroyo de la Laguna) Watershed Alameda County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 91 Santa Clara County p. 97 Coyote Creek Watershed; Guadalupe River Watershed; San Tomas Aquino Creek/Saratoga Creek Watershed; Calabazas Creek Watershed; Stevens Creek Watershed; Permanente Creek Watershed; Adobe Creek Watershed; Matadero Creek/Barron Creek Watershed Santa Clara County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p.
  • The F Street Trailhead Is a Hidden Gateway & How the Franklin Hills

    The F Street Trailhead Is a Hidden Gateway & How the Franklin Hills

    View of the Franklin Hills and the canyon above F Street from above the track at Alhambra High School (Photo by Seth Adams, 5-2020) The F Street Trailhead is a Hidden Gateway & How the Franklin Hills Were Saved F Street Trailhead, Carquinez Strait Regional Shoreline By Seth Adams, Co-Chairman, Thousand Friends of Martinez Hike Start: top of F Street Distance: 0.8 miles roundtrip, or longer Time: 45 minutes roundtrip, or longer Moderate hike What are the Franklin Hills? How were they saved? Why go there? They are the scenic backdrop for Martinez and its western border from Highway 4 to the Carquinez Strait. They’re a constant—everyone in Martinez loves them, whether you grew up or moved here—and they’ve resisted change. At the simplest we love them because they’re our backyard, they mean Martinez, and most of us see them every day. In May 2020 Martinez residents are sheltering in place from the coronavirus pandemic, luckily with nearby access to wonderful open spaces. Martinez is surrounded by four regional parks. The recently renamed Radke-Martinez Regional Shoreline to the north and Briones Regional Park to the south are the most well-known. Waterbird Regional Preserve is east across Highway 680. Carquinez Strait Regional Shoreline includes the Franklin Hills west of downtown. Most people who go there use the Nejedly staging area along Carquinez Scenic Drive, or the entrances further west where the George Miller Trail begins. Less well known is the F Street Trailhead at the south edge of Alhambra High School. This article is in two major parts.
  • 1 MINUTES Wildcat-San Pablo Creeks Watershed Council

    1 MINUTES Wildcat-San Pablo Creeks Watershed Council

    MINUTES Wildcat-San Pablo Creeks Watershed Council December 9, 2020 10am – 12pm Attendance: Julia Kernitz, Kent Wegener, Chris Lim, Colleen Noland, Amanda Booth, Peter Mangarella, Jeanine Strickland, Rich Walkling, Melissa Farinha, Patrick Phelan, Adele Ho, Tim Jensen, John Steere, Sarah Puckett, Andrew Chambers, Helen Fitanides, Melinda Harris, Sherry Stanley 1. Introductions –Tim Jensen began the meeting at 10:09 am. 2. City of San Pablo— Amanda Booth reported that the Wildcat and Vale trail project is still missing some plants that were delayed, as well as some bricklaying that’s also delayed. They expect to be done early next year. They are in the process of filming a video highlighting the City’s partnership with the Council that really made this project happen. The Council will host a tour of the project in the spring. The Rumrill Complete Streets project is going to bid later this month, and will go to construction in the summer. This will be a year-plus long construction project on a very busy street; avoid if possible! The El Portal project is basically complete; bike lanes are open, bioswales are working well, and the sign is up. The traffic circles are the only thing left to be installed. They plan to submit an application to Prop 68 in March for the park project at 2600 Moraga, including adjacent creek. Formerly a school, it will be renovated into a park and likely include a trail. 3. CUSP— Josh Bradt was not present. 4. Urban Tilth— Nathan Bickart reported through Helen Fitanides: Urban Tilth's Watershed Stewardship Crew is chugging along at our three main sites: Wildcat Creek in North Richmond, Alvarado Park / Wildcat Canyon, and Cerrito Creek on the Richmond/Albany/El Cerrito border; we're also growing lots of native plants in our little greenhouse.