DOCSLIB.ORG

Dredging at Lagoon Intake Structure Initial Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dredging at Lagoon Intake Structure Initial Study DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY City of Foster City September 16, 2016 1 2 SEPTEMBER 2016 FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 5 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ....................................................... 27 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ............................................................................................ 29 I. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................... 30 II. Agriculture and Forest Resources ...................................................................... 52 III. Air Quality .......................................................................................................... 54 IV. Biological Resources .......................................................................................... 74 V. Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 111 VI. Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................................ 116 VII. Hazards ........................................................................................................... 136 VIII. Geology and Soils ............................................................................................ 146 IX. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................. 156 X. Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................... 161 XI. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................ 167 XII. Noise ............................................................................................................... 168 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................... 191 XIV. Public Services ................................................................................................. 192 XV. Recreation ........................................................................................................ 193 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ..................................................................................... 196 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................ 198 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................. 200 i FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE SEPTEMBER 2016 INITIAL STUDY REPORT PREPARERS ......................................................................................................... 204 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 206 ii SEPTEMBER 2016 FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY List of Tables Table 1 Summary of Proposed Construction Equipment ......................................... 64 Table 2 Summary of Average Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions During Dredging and Disposal Options 1and 4 ..................................................... 65 Table 3 Summary of Average Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions During Dredging and Disposal Options 2 and 5 .................................................... 68 Table 4 Summary of Average Daily Criteria Pollutant Emissions During Dredging and Disposal Option 3 ............................................................... 70 Table 5 Scientific Names of All Common Animal Species Mentioned in the Text .......................................................................................................... 81 Table 6 Summary of GHG Emissions during Project Construction ........................ 159 Table 7 Definition of Acoustical Terms ................................................................ 169 Table 8 Noise levels from construction equipment used during dredging............ 177 Table 9 Noise levels from construction equipment used in Disposal Options 2, 3, and 5 ................................................................................. 178 Table 10 Noise levels from construction equipment used in Disposal Option 1 ............................................................................................................. 180 Table 11 Noise levels from construction equipment used in Disposal Option 4 ............................................................................................................. 182 Table 12 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................... 184 Table 13 Vibration Criteria to Prevent Disturbance – RMS (Vdb) ............................. 185 Table 14 Vibration Criteria to Prevent Damage to Structures ................................. 186 Table 15 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................... 188 List of Figures Figure 1 Project Vicinity ............................................................................................ 7 Figure 2 Project Site .................................................................................................. 8 Figure 3 Disposal Options 1 and 4 .......................................................................... 10 Figure 4 Disposal Locations .................................................................................... 11 Figure 5 Cullinan Ranch Disposal Site Loction ......................................................... 15 iii FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE SEPTEMBER 2016 INITIAL STUDY Figure 6 Montezuma Disposal Site Location ............................................................ 16 Figure 7 Alcatraz Disposal Site Location .................................................................. 18 Figure 8 Typical Dredging Equipment...................................................................... 22 Figure 9 Photo Locations ......................................................................................... 31 Figure 10 Site Photos, Western and Easter Views ....................................................... 33 Figure 11 Site Photo, Western Intake Structure .......................................................... 34 Figure 12 Site Photos, Views of Sea Cloud Phase II site ............................................. 35 Figure 13 Site Photos, Sea Cloud Phase II site from Sea Cloud Park ........................... 36 Figure 14 Scenic Views from Sea Cloud Phase II Site .................................................. 38 Figure 15 Vegetative Communities at the Project Site ............................................... 77 Figure 16 2004 Foster City Dredge Disposal Mitigation Site ...................................... 80 Figure 17 Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. Potentially Subject to USACE Jurisdiction ................................................................................................ 87 Figure 18 Proposed Maintenance Dredging Project Site plan ..................................... 94 Figure 19 Impacts to Waters of the U.S. ................................................................... 104 Appendices Appendix 1: Air Quality iv SEPTEMBER 2016 FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE INITIAL STUDY PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Project Title: Dredging at the Lagoon Intake Structure (CIP 301-629) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Foster City Community Development Department 610 Foster City Boulevard Foster City, CA 94404 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Kohar Kojayan Planning Manager [email protected] 650-286-3237 4. Project Location: The project site is located within Angelo Slough (also referred to as the West Intake Channel), west of Sea Cloud Park in Foster City, San Mateo County, and west of Angelo Slough adjacent to Sea Cloud Park (APNs 097-080-050 and 097-080-030). Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: City of Foster City Community Development Department/Public Works Department 610 Foster City Boulevard Foster City, CA 94404 5. General Plan Designation: The land portion of the dredging and staging sites as well as two of the potential disposal sites (Sea Cloud Phase II sedimentation basin and Sea Cloud Park upland disposal) are designated Parks and Recreation or Open Space. The staging area is designated Parks and the paved bike and pedestrian path, which connects Sea Cloud Park to the Levee Pedway and Wheel House Lane, is designated Open Space. The area 5 FOSTER CITY DREDGING AT LAGOON INTAKE STRUCTURE SEPTEMBER 2016 INITIAL STUDY along the levee immediately adjacent to Angelo Slough, including the Levee Pedway, is designated Open Space. The in-water portion is designated Water. 6. Zoning: The land portion of the dredging and staging sites as well as two of the potential disposal sites (Sea Cloud Phase II sedimentation basin and Sea Cloud Park upland disposal) are zoned Open Space and Conservation (OSC). The levee and water areas, including the Levee Pedway, are zoned Open Space and Conservation with Aquatic (OSC/W). 7. Description of Project: The following project description details the location of the project site, surrounding land uses, project components, and background about the regulatory requirements to complete the project as proposed. Project Site The Dredging at the Lagoon Intake Structure project (proposed project) would involve construction activity at the following
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • About WETA Present Future a Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service
    About WETA Maintenance Facility will consolidate Central and South Bay fleet operations, include a fueling facility with emergency fuel The San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation storage capacity, and provide an alternative EOC location, Authority (WETA) is a regional public transit agency tasked with thereby significantly expanding WETA’s emergency response operating and expanding ferry service on the San Francisco and recovery capabilities. Bay, and is responsible for coordinating the water transit response to regional emergencies. Future Present WETA is planning for a system that seamlessly connects cities in the greater Bay Area with San Francisco, using Today, WETA operates daily passenger ferry service to the fast, environmentally responsible vessels, with wait times cities of Alameda, Oakland, San Francisco, Vallejo, and South of 15 minutes or less during peak commute hours. WETA’s San Francisco, carr4$)"(*- /#)тѵр million passengers 2035 vision would expand service throughout the Bay Area, annually under the San Francisco Bay Ferry brand. Over the operating 12 services at 16 terminals with a fleet of 44 vessels. last five years, SF Bay Ferry ridership has grown чф percent. In the near term, WETA will launch a Richmond/San Francisco route (201ш) and new service to Treasure Island. Other By the Numbers terminal sites such as Seaplane Lagoon in Alameda, Berkeley, Mission Bay, Redwood City, the South Bay, and the Carquinez *- /#)ǔǹǒ --$ ./-).+*-/0+ Strait are on the not-too-distant horizon. ($''$*)-$ -. /*ǗǕǑ$& .-*.. 0. 4 --4 /# 4 #4ǹ 1 -44 -ǹ A Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service --4-$ -.#$+ 1 )! --$ . Vallejo #.$)- . /*!' / /2 )ǓǑǒǘ CARQUINEZ STRAIT Ǚǖʞ.$) ǓǑǒǓǹ )ǓǑǓǑǹ Hercules WETA Expansion Targets Richmond Funded Traveling by ferry has become increasingly more popular in • Richmond Berkeley the Bay Area, as the economy continues to improve and the • Treasure Island Partially Funded Pier 41 Treasure Island population grows.
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: an Overview
    Marine Geology 345 (2013) 3–17 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo Sediment transport in the San Francisco Bay Coastal System: An overview Patrick L. Barnard a,⁎, David H. Schoellhamer b,c, Bruce E. Jaffe a, Lester J. McKee d a U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA, USA b U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center, Sacramento, CA, USA c University of California, Davis, USA d San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, CA, USA article info abstract Article history: The papers in this special issue feature state-of-the-art approaches to understanding the physical processes Received 29 March 2012 related to sediment transport and geomorphology of complex coastal–estuarine systems. Here we focus on Received in revised form 9 April 2013 the San Francisco Bay Coastal System, extending from the lower San Joaquin–Sacramento Delta, through the Accepted 13 April 2013 Bay, and along the adjacent outer Pacific Coast. San Francisco Bay is an urbanized estuary that is impacted by Available online 20 April 2013 numerous anthropogenic activities common to many large estuaries, including a mining legacy, channel dredging, aggregate mining, reservoirs, freshwater diversion, watershed modifications, urban run-off, ship traffic, exotic Keywords: sediment transport species introductions, land reclamation, and wetland restoration. The Golden Gate strait is the sole inlet 9 3 estuaries connecting the Bay to the Pacific Ocean, and serves as the conduit for a tidal flow of ~8 × 10 m /day, in addition circulation to the transport of mud, sand, biogenic material, nutrients, and pollutants.
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA FISH and GAME ' CONSERVATION of WILDLIFE THROUGH EDUCATION'
    REPRINT FROM CALIFORNIA FISH and GAME ' CONSERVATION OF WILDLIFE THROUGH EDUCATION' . VOLUME 50 APRIL 1964 NUMBER 2 ANNUAL ABUNDANCE OF YOUNG STRIPED BASS, ROCCUS SAXATILIS, IN THE SACRAMENTO- SAN JOAQUIN DELTA, CALIFORNIA' HAROLD K. CHADWICK Inland Fisheries Branch California Department of Fish and Game INTRODUCTION A reliable index of striped bass spawning success would serve two important management purposes. First, it would enable us to determine if recruitment is directly related to spawning success. If it is, we could predict important changes in the fishery three years in advance. Second, it would give insight into environmental factors responsible for good and poor year-classes. Besides increasing our understanding of the bass population, this knowledge might be used to improve recruit- ment by modifying water development plans in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta under the State Water Resources Development System. Fyke net samples provided the earliest information on young bass distribution (Hatton, 1940). They were not promising for estimating abundance, and subsequent sampling of eggs and larvae with plankton nets also had important limitations (Calhoun and Woodhull, 1948; Cal- houn, Woodhull, and Johnson, 1950). An exploratory survey with tow nets in the early summer of 1947 (Calhoun and Woodhull, 1948) found bass about an inch long dis- tributed throughout the lower Sacramento-San Joaquin River system except in the Sacramento River above Isleton. This suggested the best index of spawning success would be the abundance of bass about an inch long, measured by tow netting. In 1948 and 1949 extensive tow net surveys were made to measure the relative abundance of young bass in the Delta between Rio Vista and Pittsburg (Erkkila et al., 1950).
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Context Statement City of Benicia February 2011 Benicia, CA
    Historic Context Statement City of Benicia February 2011 Benicia, CA Prepared for City of Benicia Department of Public Works & Community Development Prepared by page & turnbull, inc. 1000 Sansome Street, Ste. 200, San Francisco CA 94111 415.362.5154 / www.page-turnbull.com Benicia Historic Context Statement FOREWORD “Benicia is a very pretty place; the situation is well chosen, the land gradually sloping back from the water, with ample space for the spread of the town. The anchorage is excellent, vessels of the largest size being able to tie so near shore as to land goods without lightering. The back country, including the Napa and Sonoma Valleys, is one of the finest agriculture districts in California. Notwithstanding these advantages, Benicia must always remain inferior in commercial advantages, both to San Francisco and Sacramento City.”1 So wrote Bayard Taylor in 1850, less than three years after Benicia’s founding, and another three years before the city would—at least briefly—serve as the capital of California. In the century that followed, Taylor’s assessment was echoed by many authors—that although Benicia had all the ingredients for a great metropolis, it was destined to remain in the shadow of others. Yet these assessments only tell a half truth. While Benicia never became the great commercial center envisioned by its founders, its role in Northern California history is nevertheless one that far outstrips the scale of its geography or the number of its citizens. Benicia gave rise to the first large industrial works in California, hosted the largest train ferries ever constructed, and housed the West Coast’s primary ordnance facility for over 100 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • Public Sediment / Unlock Alameda Creek
    PUBLIC SEDIMENT / UNLOCK ALAMEDA CREEK WWW.RESILIENTBAYAREA.ORG ◄ BAYLANDS = LIVING INFRA STR CTY\, E' j(II( ........ • 400 +-' -L C Based on preliminary 0 analysis by SFfl. A more , detailed analysis is beinq E TIDAL MARSH conducted as part of -l/) the Healthy Watersheds l/) ro Resilient Aaylands E project (hwrb.sfei.org) +-' C QJ E "'O MUDFLAT QJ V1 SAC-SJ DELTA 0 1 Sediment supply was estimated by 'Sediment demand was estimated multiplying the current average using a mudflat soil bulK density of annual c;ediment load valuec; from 1.5 q c;ediment/rm c;oil (Brew and McKee et al. (in prep) by the number Williams :?010), a tidal marsh soil of years between 201 r and2100. bulK density ot 0.4 g sed1m ent / cm 3 c;oil (Callaway et al. :?010), and baywide mudflat and marsh area circa 2009 (BAARI vl). BAYLANDS TODAY BAYLANDS 2100 WITH 3' SLR LOW SEDIMENT SUPPLY BAYLANDS 2100 WITH 7' SLR LOW SEDIMENT SUPPLY WE MUST LOOK UPSTREAM TRIBUTARIES FEED THE BAY SONOMA CREEK NAPA RIVER PETALUMA CREEK WALNUT CREEK ALAMEDA CREEK COYOTE CREEK GUADALUPE CREEK ALAMEDA CREEK SEDIMENTSHED ALAMEDA CREEK ALAMEDA CREEK WATERSHED - 660 SQMI OAKLAND ALAMEDA CREEK WATERSHED SAN FRANCISCO SAN JOSE THE CREEK BUILT AN ALLUVIAL FAN AND FED THE BAY ALAMEDA CREEK SOUTH BAY NILES CONE ALLUVIAL FAN HIGH SEDIMENT FEEDS MARSHES TIDAL WETLANDS IT HAS BEEN LOCKED IN PLACE OVER TIME LIVERMORE PLEASANTON SUNOL UNION CITY NILES SAN MATEO BRIDGE EDEN LANDING FREMONT NEWARK LOW SEDIMENT CARGILL SALT PONDS DUMBARTON BRIDGE SEDIMENT FLOWS ARE HIGHLY MODIFIED SEDIMENT IS STUCK IN CHANNEL IMPOUNDED BY DAMS UPSTREAM REDUCED SUPPLY TO THE BAY AND VULNERABILITIES ARE EXACERBATED BY CLIMATE CHANGE EROSION SUBSIDENCE SEA LEVEL RISE THE FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL SAN MATEO BRIDGE UNION CITY NILES RUBBER DAMS BART WEIR EDEN LANDING PONDS HEAD OF TIDE FREMONT 880 NEWARK TIDAL EXTENT FLUVIAL EXTENT DUMBARTON BRIDGE.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fishing Industry and Martinez-Benicia Ferry
    The Fishing Industry and Martinez-Benicia Ferry Courtesy of the Contra Costa Historical Society Some of the first Italian immigrants to arrive in Martinez settled in the Grangers' Wharf area and established a fishing village complete with grocery stores, bakeries, barber shop, boarding house, and restaurants. The City of Martinez leased the land to the fishermen for $1.00 a year. Although Alhambra Creek, the creek used by the fishermen, was dredged for accessibility, the boats often needed a high tide to get in and out. The fishing nets, made of linen, required much upkeep. During the fishing season, the linen nets were dipped weekly in a tanning solution, put on racks to dry, and repaired. The Italian fishermen called these tanning vats “karates.” The karates, built by the fishermen's union, are still visible and Courtesy of the Martinez Historical Society can be seen near Alhambra Creek. Fishermen repairing nets. The Grangers' Wharf area. A ferry can be seen in the distance. Courtesy of the Conta Costa Historical Society The Martinez-Benicia Ferry was the first established In 1850, Contra Costa County was established and and longest operating ferry service in the San Francisco required ferry operations to be licensed. During the same Bay area. year, application was made and a license granted to Oliver In 1847, ferry service was established between Coffin to operate a ferry between Martinez and Benicia. Benicia and Martinez by Dr. Robert Semple, the In November of 1854, the Contra Costa County founder of Benicia. The first boats were small sail and Court of Sessions directed that the ferry operating oar-powered scows, and operated on an occasional basis between Martinez and Benicia make half-hourly trips across Carquinez Strait.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Land Use and Planning
    Redwood City New General Plan 4.9 Land Use and Planning 4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING This section describes existing land uses in and around the plan area, as well as applicable land use policies and regulations. Information in this section was derived from a technical land use background report, Redwood City General Plan Land Use Report, prepared in June 2008 by Hogle-Ireland, Inc., as well as CirclePoint’s reconnaissance of the plan area. 4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The plan area covered by the New General Plan consists of the corporate City limits as well as lands within the City’s sphere of influence. The plan area comprises approximately 38 square miles within a diverse physical setting, with flat lands near the Bayfront area; hills in the western portion of the City; and the San Francisco Bay, stream corridors, and tidal marshes in the north and east. Current Land Use Patterns The current land use patterns reflect the diverse physical features within the plan area, with most office, commercial and residential uses south and west of U.S. 101 while most open space and industrial uses are north of U.S. 101 or in the southwestern foothill areas. The City consists of residential neighborhoods with varying densities and characters; a conventional downtown with retail, restaurant, office, and civic uses; active industrial areas, including research and development and heavy industrial uses associated with the Port of Redwood City; open space areas; and civic areas, including County offices, parks, schools, and community centers. These uses have been clustered within five distinct areas of the City reflecting their specific geographies and function, described below.
    [Show full text]
  • The Voyage Home U.S. Windsurfing Nationals Bay Bridge Closure
    AYAY ROSSINGSROSSINGS “The VoiceBB of the Waterfront” CC August 2007 Vol.8, No.8 The Voyage Home Long-Haul Freighter Journey Bay Bridge Closure Behind the Labor Day Project U.S. Windsurfi ng Nationals Competition at Crissy Field Complete Ferry Schedules for all SF Lines Upscale. Downtown. Voted Best Restaurant 4 Years Running For $300,000 less. Lunch & Dinner Daily Banquets Corporate Events www.scomas.com (415)771-4383 Fisherman’s Wharf on Pier 47 Foot of Jones on Jefferson Street Zinfandel, Syrah and more. Rich, ripe, fruit-forward Zins, Syrahs–and more– Eight Orchids in downtown that get top scores from critics and Wine Spectator. Oakland’s Chinatown is Visit us to taste your way through the best of California. redefining urban style and city convenience. At a price you won’t find anywhere in San Francisco. Discover unparalleled luxury in these exceptional condominium homes. Affordably priced from the high $300,000s. The Sales Center and furnished model at 425 7th Street are open Monday 1 to 6 and Tuesday-Sunday 11 to 6. WINERY & TASTING ROOM 2900 Main Street, Alameda, CA 94501 Complimentary Wine Tasting Accessible by San Francisco Bay ferry, we’re just feet from the Alameda Terminal! Open Daily 11–6 510-835-8808 8orchidsmovie.com 510-865-7007 Exclusively represented by The Reiser Group www.RosenblumCellars.com 2 August 2007 BAYCROSSINGS www.baycrossings.com columns feature 15 SAILING ADVENTURES 12 THE VOYAGE HOME 12 Making Your Sailboat Bay Bridge Sand Takes Look Good Long Trip from Canada guides by Scott Alumbaugh by Tom Paiva 07 WATERFRONT
    [Show full text]
  • SCENIC LOOP TRAIL a Remarkable Convergence of the Bay Trail + Ridge Trail + Delta Trail
    CARQUINEZ STRAIT SCENIC LOOP TRAIL A remarkable convergence of the Bay Trail + Ridge Trail + Delta Trail LEGEND dedicated proposed Hanns Blue Rock Carquinez Strait Springs Park Scenic Loop Trail River Park Park San Francisco Bay Trail Tennessee St Lak e Bay Area Ridge Trail He BayLink Ferry rm C a o n Rd lu The Great California Delta Trail m Curtola/I-80 b u Transit Center s Parks and Public Lands B en ici a S P ose Dr t k R w Trailhead/Access y N 0 1 2 miles Glen Cove W E Waterfront Benicia State 0 1 2 kilometers Park Recreation Area S t California S Maritime d n t M 2 S Academy i l ita Glen Cove r E k Al Zampa y W r Marina e a Bridge st P M ilit ar y Ea C st Crockett C a rq ro u Benicia- c i k n W 1st St e e Martinez tt z E 5th St Bridge B Benicia lv S G d ce e n o Marina ic rg Rodeo e D C M r M u c il Martinez m E le Crockett Hills w r Martinez Marina mi e T Regional Park ngs n r Regional ail S k R Shoreline y d w a Marina Vista y Nejedly Staging Area Hercules Carquinez Strait Regional Amtrak Station Shoreline Ave Alhambra Fernandez F r a Ranch n Pinole k JMLT lin Ca nyon Rd John Muir National Sky Ranch Historic Site Pi JMLT nole V Pinole alle y Rd Watershed Mount Wanda EBMUD JMNHS Pinole Valley Park access by permit Sobrante A lh d amb Ridge ra R V Al Regional alley ha y R mbra Valle Preserve d Reliez Valley Rd mapped by Ben Pease www.peasepress.com Updated 2/14/18 version 6 Project Partners: The Carquinez Strait Scenic Loop Trail project represents a collaborative effort between the Solano Trail Advocacy Group (STAG), Bay Area Ridge Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail, Great California Delta Trail, Bay Area Water Trail, and the City of Benecia, with technical support provided by the National Park Service’s Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) program.
    [Show full text]