DOCSLIB.ORG

Anthony Chabot Regional Park Land Use-Development Plan (Then Titled the "Master Plan", Fig

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Anthony Chabot Regional Park Land Use-Development Plan (Then Titled the ANTHONY CHABOT REGIONAL PARK LAND USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT State Clearinghouse No. SCH# 82072713 Adopted: February 21, 1984 Resolution No: 1984-02-44 Prepared by: East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 94605 (510) 635-0135 TABLE OF CONTENTS P~E FOREWORD------------------------------------------------- iii I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose and role of EBRPD---------------------------- 1 B. Master Plan Guidelines/Purpose of Document----------- 2 C. Location and Description----------------------------- 3 D. Ownership and Administration------------------------- 8 E. Park Names------------------------------------------- 9 II. BACKGROUND A. Parkland Planning and Acquisition History------------ 13 B. Regional and Local Agency Plans---------------------- 18 C. Adjacent Land Use------------------------------------ 18 D. 30-Minute Planning Zone------------------------------ 18 E. Public Use and Demand-------------------------------- 22 III. LA1~ USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Parkland Classification and Regional Park Activities- 33 B. Regional Park Purposes------------------------------- 34 C. Development Program---------------------------------- 34 D. Funding and Schedules-------------------------------- 65 E. Plan Administration and Implementation--------------- 65 F. Revisions to the Plan-------------------------------- 66 IV. NATURAL RESOURCES MANAG~IENT PLAN A. General---------------------------------------------- 67 B. Vegetation------------------------------------------- 67 C. Wildlife--------------------------------------------- 77 D. Water------------------------------------------------ 80 E. Soil------------------------------------------------- 81 F. Air-------------------------------------------------- 83 V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT A. Summary---------------------------------------------- 85 B. BiD/Physical Environments---------------------------- 86 C. Socio-Economic Environment--------------------------- 108 D. Impact Overview-------------------------------------- 121 E. Report Preparation----------------------------------- 124 VI. APPENDICES A. References------------------------------------------- 125 B. Draft LUDP!EIR Distribution List--------------------- 129 C. Public Comments Pre-Draft LUDP/EIR------------------- 140 D. Public Comments and Responses for the Final LUDP/EIR- 141 E. Recommendations of the EBRPD Educational Use Advisory Committee-------------------------------------------- 173 i P~E FIGURES 1. Location Map----------------------------------------- 4 2. Major Features Naming-------------------------------- 6 3. Existing Development and Circulation----------------- 10 4. 1966 LUDP-------------------------------------------- 14 5. Balanced Parkland------------------------------------ 17 6. 30-Minute Planning Zone------------------------------ 19 7. Land Use-Development Plan---------------------------- 36 8. Willow Park Recreation Unit (R.U.)------------------- 39 9. Lake Chabot R.U.------------------------------------- 39 9A. Marina Meadow/Lake Chabot Marina--------------------- 41 10. Grass Valley Picnic R.U.----------------------------- 43 11. Chabot Equestrian Center R.U.------------------------ 43 12. Bort Meadow R.U.------------------------------------- 45 13. Motorcycle Hill R.U.--------------------------------- 45 14. Marciel Gate R.U.------------------------------------ 47 14A. Firing Line of 500m/600 yd. Range-------------------- 49 15. Marksmanship Range R.U.------------------------------ 51 16. Hilltop Camping R.U.--------------------------------- 53 17. South County Service Unit---------------------------- 53 18. Regional Trails Plan--------------------------------- 63 19. Proposed Fuel Break and Vegetation Management Plan--- 73 20. Traffic---------------------------------------------- 111 TABLE 1. Planning Zone Population----------------------------- 20 2. Noise Levels at Use Areas Near the Chabot Marksmanship Range--------------------------------- 103 3. Estimated Traffic Volumes---------------------------- 114 4. 1982 Annual Revenues and Estimated Expenses for ACRP- 119 5. Projected Annual Revenue and Estimated Expenses for ACRP------------------------------------------- 120 ii FOREWORD The essence of this report is contained in Chapter III.C of the "Development Program" of the "Land Use-Development Plan" (also referred to as the Plan or LUDP). which outlines the future development of Anthony Chabot Regional Park. The Plan is graphically illustrated in Figure 7. The other major portions of this report are Chapter IV. "Natural Resources Management Plan" • which proposes management policies concerning vegetation, wildlife, water and other park resources; and Chapter V. "Environmental Impact Report". which discusses the environmental impacts which could result from the Plan and suggests mitigation for possible significant impacts. Other project alternatives are also discussed. Other sections of the report primarily serve as background material for the major chapters. iii 1. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE AND ROLE OF THE EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT The East Bay Regional Park District (referred to as "EBRPD" or the "District"), is a State mandated Special District for the area of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Its headquarters are located in Oakland. California. .,..--------'---------------'--------.-----------r EBRPD MASTER PLAN Purpose and Role of EBRPD I PURPOSE The East Bay Regional Park District shall acquire. develop and I operate regional parklands in perpetuity for public use and shall conserve these lands for the purpose of making the I outdoor environment available for the enjoyment and education of the general public. I ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY The East Bay Regional Park District will thus become a major participant in improving the quality of life for Alameda and Contra Costa County residents. I ROLE POLICY AND OBJECTIVES The Board of Directors, in order to provide direction for I fulfilling the District's proper role in the community, I establishes the objectives listed below as those necessary to I accomplish the District's purpose. \ -----------------"-~ 1 ~:;irO:;t:~tsiV:~d .r:t:t~te~~edt::~~£:~::~~~~:~~:~:~ I 1,1 I agencies and the private sector with a clear statement which . I will be used to guide the District in implementing this Master I I Plan: j , I l 1. To provide a diversified land and water system of regional ! parks, recreation areas, wilderness, preserves, trails and \ shorelines and parkland-related services which will provide District residents with opportunities for creative use of I outdoor leisure time. 2. To acquire. preserve and interpret significant examples of the natural environment, including biologic. geologic. scenic. and outdoor historic resources which exist within the boundaries of the district. 3. To cooperate with other public agencies in the acquisition, preservation and management of non-park open space lands. 4. To emphasize balance of both environmental concerns and regional recreation opportunities within the system of parklands operated by the District. 5. To effectively conserve energy by dispersed location of parklands close to the people throughout the District by reasoned management of energy resources available to the District; and by cooperating with other public and private entities in j oint efforts to conserve diminishing energy resources. (Page 7) _. ,_.,..",~_,_"._. ... ...__.------3I B. MASTER PL~~ GUIDELINES/PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT 1. The Land Use-Development Plan (referred to as the "Plan" or "LUDP"). is a part of the planning process required by the East Bay Regional Park District Master Plan. the maj or policy document of the District (adopted 1973. revised 1980). The purpose of the LUDP is to direct future park development by: outlining expected levels of use and development, delineating general park character. planning access points and circulation systems. and dividing the Park into zoning units for recreation and for the natural areas which will preserve the significant natural resources of the park. Quotes of Master Plan policies are reprinted in boxes throughout the report for clarification. 2 ,....---------------------------'---"-'---, EBRPD MASTER PLAN Land Use-Development Plan The District will. following adoption of the resource analysis, prepare a land use-development plan prior to any significant development or substantial public use of the site. The plan will identify natural environment areas. environmental protective zones or any other designation within the parkland classification system which will control planning and management of the parkland and any recreation or staging area within the proposed parkland site. A schematic development concept or resource preservation plan will be prepared in map form along with supporting narrative. Specific sites will be planned with full recognition of both environmental and recreational needs based upon the resource analysis. Full consideration will be given to site resources to preserve significant resource values as well as public recreation need and demand as identified in policies relating to those areas of concern. Recreation need and demand policies shall be based upon: data collected as part of the need and demand survey program. Expressed public desire for development or provision for activities. Evaluation of the recreational needs of current and future residents and overall regional system needs which can be met at a specific parkland. (Page 28) ,----------__J The Land Use-Development Plan is based on the conclusions of the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Centennial Industrial Site Habitat Management Plan for Pine Hill Flannelbush
    Centennial Industrial Site Habitat Management Plan for Pine Hill Flannelbush Centennial Industrial Site Habitat Management Plan for the Pine Hill Flannelbush (Fremontodendron decumbens) Prepared for: Rise Grass Valley, Inc. PO Box 271 Grass Valley, CA 95945 Prepared by: Greg Matuzak, Principal Biologist Greg Matuzak Environmental Consulting LLC 471 Sutton Way, Suite #210 Grass Valley, CA 95945 Email: [email protected] November 2019 Centennial Industrial Site Habitat Management Plan for Pine Hill Flannelbush TABLE OF CONTENTS INFORMATION SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ iv Habitat Management Plan Summary ................................................................................ v 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Pine Hill Flannelbush USFW Recovery Plan ............................................................ 1-1 1.2 Centennial Industrial Site in Nevada County ....................................................... 1-2 1.3 Project Understanding ........................................................................................... 1-3 1.4 Purpose of the Habitat Management Plan .......................................................... 1-4 2 SPECIES DESCRIPTION, IDENTIFICATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND ECOLOGY .................... 2-1 2.1 Description and Identification ............................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case 12/17
    Case 19-10547 Doc 66 Filed 05/15/19 Entered 05/15/19 12:26:25 Page 1 of 2 Information to identify the case: Debtor Falcon V, L.L.C. EIN 81−4041725 Name United States Bankruptcy Court Middle District of Louisiana Date case filed for chapter 11 5/10/19 Case number: 19−10547 Official Form 309F (For Corporations or Partnerships) Notice of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case 12/17 For the debtor listed above, a case has been filed under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. An order for relief has been entered. This notice has important information about the case for creditors, debtors, and trustees, including information about the meeting of creditors and deadlines. Read both pages carefully. The filing of the case imposed an automatic stay against most collection activities. This means that creditors generally may not take action to collect debts from the debtor or the debtor's property. For example, while the stay is in effect, creditors cannot sue, assert a deficiency, repossess property, or otherwise try to collect from the debtor. Creditors cannot demand repayment from the debtor by mail, phone, or otherwise. Creditors who violate the stay can be required to pay actual and punitive damages and attorney's fees. Confirmation of a chapter 11 plan may result in a discharge of debt. A creditor who wants to have a particular debt excepted from discharge may be required to file a complaint in the bankruptcy clerk's office within the deadline specified in this notice. (See line 11 below for more information.) To protect your rights, consult an attorney.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Open-File Report 03-485
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Proceedings of the Hayward Fault Workshop, Eastern San Francisco Bay Area, California, September 19-20, 2003 Edited By David A. Ponce1, Roland Bürgmann2, Russell W. Graymer1, James J. Lienkaemper1, Diane E. Moore1, and David P. Schwartz1 Open-File Report 03-485 Rodgers Cr Fault Petaluma Novato San Pablo Bay Pinole Pt Pittsburg San Rafael Concord Richmond Pleasant Hill El Cerrito Mill Valley Walnut Creek Berkeley Hayward Fault Danville OAKLAND SAN FRANCISCO San Francisco Bay Daly City San Leandro Dublin Livermore Hayward San Mateo FREMONT Calaveras Fault Half Moon Bay Menlo Park Sunnyvale SAN JOSE 2003 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 2U.C. Berkeley, Dept. of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 389 McCone Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Proceedings of the Hayward Fault Workshop, Eastern San Francisco Bay Area, California, September 19-20, 2003 Edited By David A. Ponce1, Roland Bürgmann2, Russell W. Graymer1, James J. Lienkaemper1, Diane E. Moore1, and David P. Schwartz1 Open-File Report 03-485 2003 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025 2U.C. Berkeley, Dept. of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 389 McCone Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Hazards Incorporates the State-Mandated “Safety” and “Noise” Elements of the General Plan
    7 HAZARDS ENVIRONMENTAL A. OVERVIEW Environmental Hazards incorporates the state-mandated “Safety” and “Noise” elements of the General Plan. The Chapter addresses natural and man-made hazards in the City, including earthquakes, landslides, floods, sea level rise, wildfire, air and water pollution, hazardous materials, and aviation accidents. It includes a summary of emergency preparedness in San Leandro, with policies that provide the foundation for disaster planning in the City. The Element also addresses noise issues, with the dual objective of mitigating existing noise problems and avoiding future disturbances and conflicts. The overall purpose of this Element is to minimize the potential for damage and injury resulting from environmental hazards. The State Government Code requires that the Element identify and evaluate the hazards that are present and establish appropriate goals, policies, and action programs to reduce those hazards to acceptable levels. Environmental hazards define basic constraints to land use that must be reflected in how and where development takes place. Public education is critical to the successful implementation of this Element. Although San Leandrans are generally aware that the City is located in “earthquake country,” there is still much that can be done to improve readiness and response when disaster strikes. The Environmental Hazards Element takes a pro-active approach to emergency preparedness, emphasizing mitigation and reduced exposure to hazards as well as response and recovery. This Element is closely coordinated with the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), a federally mandated plan to reduce exposure to hazards and ensure eligibility for federal disaster preparedness and relief funds. 7-1 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD S The Element also sets forth a pro-active strategy for addressing noise issues in the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessor Book Boundaries National Parks : 1178 O § 1242 E ¦¨ GRAN S N 0322 D D AVE
    LEY S L P A Y E V INYO COUNTY R A S P R I E INYO COUNTY T20NR10E Jupiter Pioneer Copper Y Point of Point Queen N Mine Rocks L D Rob Roy Acme Omega Canyon A T20NR01E 0512 Mine H (historical) T20NR08E R Smith Mine Beck Kingston # Standard T20NR02E T20NR06E Sperry Rogers Mine Range Blackwater # T20NR11E 0485 # L T20NR03E T20NR05E T20NR07E Hills Western Spring Mine Excelsior A S # Mine Monarch I T19NR09EN Mine T20NR09E Number Two Red Hill # L # Talc Mine O # Mine T20NR04E Pleasanton Mine # # Horse N Mine # T25SR40E Searles L # F # Thief # Snow N L M#ine # I # T T19NR06EN Springs # Long S T19NR07EN T19NR08EN White I I Valley # #Moorehouse # U T Valley E #Mine Acme L E Mine Alexander Tecopa# Q E A Mine # G E Hills Pass S A Trona A# BootAh N Kingston # # Mine T25SR41E Trona Y S # Alexander A E T L C R T19NR12E V M V o L #Mine Cub Lee s # N t M Well N T25SR43E T25SR44E R T25SR46E A L O Argus T25SR45E T25SR47E L I T Argus Tank a S A # Sandora k # T19NR13E U Canyon I T19NR08EE T25SR42E A Mine G e H G Wingate S Sperry N Borosolvay # Pass I N N O # K K Virginia Lake N I L N # China # Sand View # Old Ibex T19NR10E 0486 Canyon Ann Mine Owlshead AT19NR03E Ibex A D U M O N T Mine O T19NR04E T Wash Pass T19NR06E H I L L S Lake M E # Mountains T Kingston D T L Ponga E T19NR09E Peak T19NR11E Mesquite E China # T19NR02E N L G # S # T19NR07E T19NR08E Crystal # # Mine P Valley N S South N T19NR05E Mesquite L I U O Lake Trona New York Mine Hills Owl Lake # # Mountains # TA 0520 E Rabbit Mesquite R O T Colorado N # SISKIYOU Searles E U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
    Housing Element Rezone Implementation Program County of Nevada Environmental Impact Report 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section evaluates potential hydrology and water quality impacts that could result from the Nevada County Housing Element Rezone. Mitigation measures for potential impacts are identified where applicable. Information in this section comes from County of Nevada GIS mapping analysis as well as existing federal, state, and local regulations. 4.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING CLIMATE Located on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range, Nevada County (County) enjoys a temperate climate with seasonal variations consisting of hot dry summers and cold wet winters. Average temperatures range from a low of 34 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in January to a high of 91°F in July. Precipitation falls primarily from November to April in the form of both rain and snow with snow falling most winters. The majority of precipitation falls in December, January, and February. WATERSHEDS The proposed project areas lie within the Upper Bear and Upper Yuba subbasins. Both subbasins exist within the American River subregion, which consists of roughly 5,375 square miles and includes portions of six counties. More specifically, the project sites are located within three watersheds (Sites 1-9, 14, and 17 are in the Wolf Creek Watershed, Sites 10-13 are in the Deer Creek Watershed, and Sites 15, 16, and 18 are in the Middle Bear Watershed). The Upper Bear subbasin, which incorporates the Grass Valley area sites and the Lake of the Pines area sites, originates about 20 miles west of the crest of the Sierra Nevada in northern Placer County within the boundaries of the Tahoe National Forest.
    [Show full text]
  • (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.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Species Occurrences
    S U G A R L O A F M OUNTAIN T RAIL Biological Resources Report Prepared for: Bear-Yuba Land Trust (BYLT) ATTN: Bill Haire 12183 South Auburn Road Grass Valley, CA 95949 Ph: (530) 272-5994 and City of Nevada City ATTN: Amy Wolfson 317 Broad Street Nevada City, CA 95959 Ph: (530) 265-2496 Prepared by: Chainey-Davis Biological Consulting ATTN: Carolyn Chainey-Davis 182 Grove Street Nevada City, CA 95959 Ph: (530) 205-6218 August 2018 Sugarloaf Mountain Trail — Biological Inventory C h a i n e y - Davis Biological Consulting SUMMARY This Biological Resources Report (BRR) includes an inventory and analysis of potential impacts to biological resources resulting from the construction and operation of the Sugarloaf Mountain Trail, a proposed 1.5-mile public recreational trail in Nevada City, California, on a 30-acre open space preserve owned by the City of Nevada City (APN 036-020-026). The trail would be constructed, managed, and maintained by the Bear-Yuba Land Trust, a private non-profit organization. The project would expand an existing small, primitive trail and construct a new segment of trail on Sugarloaf Mountain, just north of Nevada City. The trail begins near the intersection of State Route 49 and North Bloomfield Road and terminates on Sugarloaf Mountain. The proposed trail includes a quarter-mile segment on an easement through private land. The project drawings are provided in Appendix A. Trail tread width will vary from 36 to 48 inches, depending on location and physical constraints, and constructed using a mini excavator, chainsaws, and a variety of hand tools.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Classification, 2003. 577 Pp. Pdf Icon[PDF – 7.1
    Instruction Manual Part 8 Vital Records, Geographic Classification, 2003 Vital Statistics Data Preparation U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics Hyattsville, Maryland October, 2002 VITAL RECORDS GEOGRAPHIC CLASSIFICATION, 2003 This manual contains geographic codes used by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in processing information from birth, death, and fetal death records. Included are (1) incorporated places identified by the U.S. Bureau of the Census in the 2000 Census of Population and Housing; (2) census designated places, formerly called unincorporated places, identified by the U.S. Bureau of the Census; (3) certain towns and townships; and (4) military installations identified by the Department of Defense and the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The geographic place of occurrence of the vital event is coded to the state and county or county equivalent level; the geographic place of residence is coded to at least the county level. Incorporated places of residence of 10,000 or more population and certain towns or townships defined as urban under special rules also have separate identifying codes. Specific geographic areas are represented by five-digit codes. The first two digits (1-54) identify the state, District of Columbia, or U.S. Possession. The last three digits refer to the county (701-999) or specified urban place (001-699). Information in this manual is presented in two sections for each state. Section I is to be used for classifying occurrence and residence when the reporting of the geographic location is complete.
    [Show full text]
  • 903 Manor Boulevard Residential Project
    903 Manor Boulevard Residential Project Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared by City of San Leandro Community Development Department 835 East 14th Street San Leandro, California 94577 Contact: Andrew Mogensen, AICP, Planning Manager prepared with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 449 15th Street, Suite 303 Oakland, California 94612 March 2020 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY AND INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 903 MANOR BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT AT 903 MANOR BOULEVARD, SAN LEANDRO, CALIFORNIA 94579 Notice is Hereby Given that the City of San Leandro is considering a recommendation that the project herein identified will have no significant environmental impacts in compliance with Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines. A copy of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, Initial Study, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are on file in the San Leandro Community Development Department, 835 East 14th Street, San Leandro, California 95477. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, hard copies will be mailed upon request rather than accessible to the public at a physical location. If you need a hardcopy please send a self-addressed 10”x12” envelope with pre-paid postage to City of San Leandro, Planning Division, Attn: Andrew Mogensen, Planning Manager, 835 E. 14th Street, San Leandro, CA 94577. It is also available on the City’s Website at City of San Leandro, Community Development Department, Planning Services, Plans & CEQA Documents: https://www.sanleandro.org/depts/cd/plan/polplanstudiesceqa/default.asp. REVIEW PERIOD: The 20-day review period is from May 15, 2020 to June 4, 2020. Comments on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration should be provided in writing to the San Leandro Community Development Department, 835 East 14th Street, San Leandro, California 94577 by June 4, 2020 at 4:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS Open-File Report 96-252, Geologic Explanation Pamphlet
    Preliminary geologic map emphasizing bedrock formations in Alameda County, California: A digital database by R.W. Graymer, D.L. Jones, and E.E. Brabb U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-252 Geologic Explanation Introduction This map database represents the integration of previously published and unpublished maps by several workers (see Sources of Data) and thousands of man-hours of new geologic mapping and field checking by the authors. The data are released in a preliminary digital form to provide an opportunity for regional planners, local, state, and federal agencies, teachers, consultants, and others interested in geologic data to have the new data long before a traditional paper map is published. The authors currently plan to produce a second version of the geologic map of Alameda County that would include subdivided Quaternary units and enhanced stratigraphic description and nomenclature, both as a digital product and as a traditional paper map. The timing of release of these products, and indeed whether they will be produced at all, depends on a variety of factors, including funding, outside author control. Stratigraphy Lithologic associations in Alameda County are divided into nine assemblages; I, II, and V - XI (Assemblages III and IV occur only in Contra Costa County). As defined in Graymer, Jones, and Brabb (1994), assemblages are large, fault - bounded blocks that contain a unique stratigraphic sequence. The stratigraphic sequence differs from that of neighboring assemblages by containing different rock units (e.g. the freshwater limestone (Tlp) in Assemblage VIII is missing from the other Assemblages), or by different stratigraphic relationship among similar rock units (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Visual Resources
    LSA ASSOCIATES, INC EBRPD WILDFIRE HAZARD REDUCTION AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN EIR JULY 2009 IV. SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES I. VISUAL RESOURCES I. VISUAL RESOURCES This section addresses the visual resources for the parks located within the East Bay Regional Park District’s (EBRPD’s) Wildfire Hazard Reduction and Resource Management Plan (Plan) Study Area. Included in this section is a description of existing visual conditions within the Study Area, as well as an evaluation of the potential effects on visual resources from implementation of the Plan. The visual analysis is based on field observations of the Study Area, aerial and ground-level photographs of the Study Area, use of the Google Maps Street View program, and publicly-available planning documents. Within this section, the term “viewshed” is used in reference to the surface area visible from a viewpoint or a series of viewpoints: that portion of the landscape that would be visible from a particular location and which could be visually impacted by changes to vegetation or landforms in those areas. For the purpose of determining potential effects of a project on visual resources within an area, particular viewpoints may be selected because they present a view that is representative of the landscape or reflect a typical viewshed for that area. These viewpoints are then used to describe the visual changes or contrasts that could result from implementation of the proposed project. 1. Setting This section describes the regional context of the Study Area, views within and across the Study Area, applicable EBRPD policies relating to open space and resource management within the Study Area, and concerns related to roadway visibility and safety within the Study Area.
    [Show full text]