Cultural Resources Inventory Report For

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Cultural Resources Inventory Report For CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY REPORT FOR PORTIONS OF THE RICHMOND PROPERTIES RICHMOND, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA March 2013 PREPARED FOR: Tetra Tech, Inc. 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 500 Oakland, CA 94612 PREPARED BY: Barb Siskin, M.A., RPA Erica Schultz, M.H.P Kruger Frank, B.A. Garcia and Associates 1 Saunders Avenue San Anselmo, CA 94960 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY This report presents the results of the cultural resources investigation, which included the identification of archaeological resources and cultural landscape features, for portions of the University of California’s Richmond properties in Richmond, Contra Costa County, California. Within the 133-acre area comprised of these properties, the University of California proposes to consolidate the biosciences programs of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and to develop additional facilities for use by both the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley, and other institutional or industry counterparts for research and development focused on energy, environment, and health. The Phase 1 development plan would construct the first three buildings within a smaller 16-acre area on these properties. Due to the involvement of the United States Department of Energy, the proposed Phase 1 development is a federal undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800. Therefore, only the smaller 16-acre area is subject to Section 106 regulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on any historic property (i.e., district, site, building, structure, or object) that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. This cultural resources investigation was conducted to identify archaeological resources and cultural landscape features that may meet the definition of a historic property under the National Historic Preservation Act, per 36 CFR 800.4. Built environment resources, such as buildings and structures, are addressed in a separate historic properties survey report. The United States Department of Energy is the lead federal agency under Section 106. This investigation also complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations 15064.5). The 133-acre is subject to programmatic-level analysis under CEQA, while the smaller 16-acre area (where specific project construction will occur) will be subject to project-level analysis under CEQA. The University of California is the lead agency under CEQA. This investigation included background research for the 133-acre area, which is considered the Study Area. The Area of Potential Effects is the smaller 16-acre area, which is considered the Phase 1 development plan area. Since the Area of Potential Effects is subject to Section 106 regulations, this area required a field survey as well as background research. Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800.4, this report documents the methods used to identify all historic properties within the Area of Potential Effects. Findings for this report are based on the following: A cultural resources records search and historic map review for the Study Area at the Northwest Information Center of the California Historic Resource Inventory System at California State University, Sonoma; the initiation of Section 106 consultation with Native American groups and individuals identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (36 CFR Part 800.2(a)); an inventory survey of the Area of Potential Effects; and, documentation of newly identified cultural resources (i.e., archaeological resources and cultural landscape features) within the Area of Potential Effects on California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 forms. I The results of the records search indicate that there is one previously recorded prehistoric shellmound, CA-CC0-157, within the Study Area. The field survey resulted in the identification of two newly identified historic period cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effects, GANDA-622-01 (Eucalyptus Stands 1 and 2), which consists of historic period landscape features, and GANDA-ISO-622-01, an isolated historic period bottle. These resources were formally recorded on Department of Parks and Recreation 523 forms, but not evaluated for their potential for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources. This inventory report includes the methods and results of background research consisting of a records search and a literature review; geoarchaeological, prehistoric, ethnographic, and historical background information; a field survey; a geoarchaeological sensitivity analysis; and consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission and potentially interested Native American groups and individuals; as well as recommendations for any subsequent archaeological work to meet the requirements of Section 106 and 36 Code of Federal Regulations 800.4. This investigation addresses only archaeological resources and cultural landscape features within the Area of Potential Effects. The identification and evaluation of the built environment resources have been addressed in a separate report. While this investigation did not result in the identification of any newly or previously documented prehistoric archaeological resources within the Area of Potential Effects, the geoarchaeological analysis, environmental setting, and close proximity of several prehistoric shellmounds to the Area of Potential Effects and Study Area indicate that the Area of Potential Effects has a high sensitivity for the presence of buried and surface prehistoric resources. In addition, there is evidence of historic use of the site based on results of the background research and field survey; therefore, there is the potential for the presence of historic period archaeological resources as well. This cultural resources investigation adheres to the California Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports Recommended Contents and Format (1990); the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 CFR 44716); and the United States Army Corps of Engineers’ Guidelines for Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (2012). II TABLE OF CONTENTS MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................I FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................... IV 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1 DEFINITION OF THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS - PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT AREA .................................. 2 DEFINITION OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................... 2 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................................................................................... 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................ 7 2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT................................................................................................................. 9 FEDERAL REGULATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 9 STATE REGULATIONS.................................................................................................................................10 3.0 BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................13 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT...........................................................................................................................13 PREHISTORIC CONTEXT .............................................................................................................................13 ETHNOGRAPHIC CONTEXT .........................................................................................................................21 HISTORIC CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................................22 4.0 PREFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTATION METHODS AND RESULTS .........................25 RECORDS SEARCH METHODS.....................................................................................................................25 RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS ......................................................................................................................25 HISTORIC MAP REVIEW .............................................................................................................................28 GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................28 NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION ..........................................................................................................28 5.0 FIELD METHODS AND RESULTS...................................................................................................29
Recommended publications
  • Fall 2011  510 520 3876
    BPWA Walks Walks take place rain or shine and last 2-3 hours unless otherwise noted. They are free and Berkeley’s open to all. Walks are divided into four types: Theme Friendly Power Self Guided Questions about the walks? Contact Keith Skinner: [email protected] Vol. 14 No. 3 BerkeleyPaths Path Wanderers Association Fall 2011 510 520 3876. October 9, Sunday - 2nd An- BPWA Annual Meeting Oct. 20 nual Long Walk - 9 a.m. Leaders: Keith Skinner, Colleen Neff, To Feature Greenbelt Alliance — Sandy Friedland Sandy Friedland Can the Bay Area continue to gain way people live.” A graduate of Stanford Meeting Place: El Cerrito BART station, University, Matt worked for an envi- main entrance near Central population without sacrificing precious Transit: BART - Richmond line farmland, losing open space and harm- ronmental group in Sacramento before All day walk that includes portions of Al- ing the environment? The members of he joined Greenbelt. His responsibilities bany Hill, Pt. Isabel, Bay Trail, Albany Bulb, Greenbelt Alliance are doing everything include meeting with city council members East Shore Park, Aquatic Park, Sisterna they can to answer those questions with District, and Santa Fe Right-of-Way, ending a resounding “Yes.” Berkeley Path at North Berkeley BART. See further details Wanderers Asso- in the article on page 2. Be sure to bring a ciation is proud to water bottle and bag lunch. No dogs, please. feature Greenbelt October 22, Saturday - Bay Alliance at our Trail Exploration on New Landfill Annual Meeting Thursday, October Loop - 9:30 a.m. 20, at the Hillside Club (2286 Cedar Leaders: Sandra & Bruce Beyaert.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4.4 Cultural Resources
    Section 4.4 Cultural Resources 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES 4.4.1 Introduction This section presents information on known and potentially existing cultural resources at the RBC site and analyzes the potential for development under the proposed 2014 LRDP to affect those resources. Information and analysis in this section is based on previous archaeological surveys (see Section 4.4.5) and those conducted for the current project: Cultural Resources Inventory Report for the Richmond Bay Campus, Alameda County (GANDA 2013) and Historic Properties Survey Report for Richmond Bay Campus (Tetra Tech 2013). Cultural resources can be prehistoric, Native American, or historic. Prehistoric resources are artifacts from human activities that predate written records; these are generally identified in isolated finds or sites. Prehistoric resources are typically archaeological and can include village sites, temporary camps, lithic scatters, roasting pits/hearths, milling features, petroglyphs, rock features, and burial plots. Historic resources are properties, structures, or built items from human activities that coincide with the epoch of written records. Historic resources can include archaeological remains and architectural structures. Historic archaeological sites include townsites, homesteads, agricultural or ranching features, mining-related features, refuse concentrations, and features or artifacts associated with early military and industrial land uses. Historic architectural resources can include houses, cabins, barns, lighthouses, other constructed buildings, and bridges. Generally, architectural resources that are over 50 years old are considered for evaluation for their historic significance. Public and agency NOP comments related to cultural resources are summarized below: For construction activities proposed in a state right-of-way, Caltrans requires that project environmental documentation include results of a current Northwest Information Center archaeological records search.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Joint Venture
    The San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Management Board Bay Area Audubon Council Bay Area Open Space Council Bay Conservation and Development Commission The Bay Institute The San Francisco Bay Joint Venture Bay Planning Coalition California State Coastal Conservancy Celebrating years of partnerships protecting wetlands and wildlife California Department of Fish and Game California Resources Agency 15 Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District Ducks Unlimited National Audubon Society National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Natural Resources Conservation Service Pacific Gas and Electric Company PRBO Conservation Science SF Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Estuary Partnership Save the Bay Sierra Club U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey Wildlife Conservation Board 735B Center Boulevard, Fairfax, CA 94930 415-259-0334 www.sfbayjv.org www.yourwetlands.org The San Francisco Bay Area is breathtaking! As Chair of the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture, I would like to personally thank our partners It’s no wonder so many of us live here – 7.15 million of us, according to the 2010 census. Each one of us has our for their ongoing support of our critical mission and goals in honor of our 15 year anniversary. own mental image of “the Bay Area.” For some it may be the place where the Pacific Ocean flows beneath the This retrospective is a testament to the significant achievements we’ve made together. I look Golden Gate Bridge, for others it might be somewhere along the East Bay Regional Parks shoreline, or from one forward to the next 15 years of even bigger wins for wetland habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrologic Investigation of Concrete Flood Control Channel at UC Berkeley’S Richmond Field Station
    Hydrologic Investigation of Concrete Flood Control Channel at UC Berkeley’s Richmond Field Station by Patrick Nichols Abstract The Richmond Field Station Natural Restoration Project is a five year multimillion dollar effort. The first stages involve the remediation of polluted marsh lands, then the restoration of the upland prairie habitat, finishing with the adjacent channel. The concrete flood control channel is slated to become a free flowing creek and riparian corridor by the restoration planners at the university. The dynamics of this system must be understood to properly design a restoration, or creation plan since historically no creek existed there. This study assesses multiple aspects of the concrete channel to determine its health and qualifications for restoration. We calculated flow measurements at various intervals along the channel using velocity observations and the known cross sectional areas. We observed the depths creating a predictive relationship between depth and flow. Water quality characteristics: dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and conductivity were measured on a weekly basis for three months during the winter/spring of 2004. This information is used to help answer the question of what is the health of this system with regards to these variables, and what are its hydrological characteristics. Results show a consistent base flow of about 1 cubic foot per second with a peak flow around 152cfs. A linear relationship exists between depth and flow. The slope of the channel water surface is about 0.36%. The water quality parameters were indicative of a healthy system. The results of this project provide a base of knowledge for future investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • December 15, 2020
    RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, December 15, 2020 The Richmond City Council Evening Open Session was called to order at 5:02 p.m. by Mayor Thomas K. Butt via teleconference. Due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Contra Costa County and Governor Gavin Newsom issued multiple orders requiring sheltering in place, social distancing, and reduction of person-to-person contact. Accordingly, Governor Gavin Newsom issued executive orders that allowed cities to hold public meetings via teleconferencing (Executive Order N-29-20). DUE TO THE SHELTER IN PLACE ORDERS, attendance at the City of Richmond City Council meeting was limited to Councilmembers, essential City of Richmond staff, and members of the news media. Public comment was confined to items appearing on the agenda and was limited to the methods provided below. Consistent with Executive Order N-29-20, this meeting utilized teleconferencing only. The following provides information on how the public participated in the meeting. The public was able to view the meeting from home on KCRT Comcast Channel 28 or AT&T Uverse Channel 99 and livestream online at http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/3178/KCRT- Live. Written public comments were received via email to [email protected]. Comments received by 1:00 p.m. on December 15, 2020, were summarized at the meeting, put into the record, and considered before Council action. Comments received via email after 1:00 p.m. and up until the public comment period on the relevant agenda item closed, were put into the record. Public comments were also received via teleconference during the meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Richmond Marina Bay Trail
    ↓ 2.1 mi to Point Richmond ▾ 580 Y ▾ A Must see, must do … Harbor Gate W ▶ Walk the timeline through the Rosie the Riveter Memorial to the water’s edge. RICHA centuryMO ago MarinaN BayD was Ma land ARIthat dissolvedNA into tidal marshBAY at the edge TRAIL SOUTH Shopping Center K H T R ▶ Visit all 8 historical interpretive markers and of the great estuary we call San Francisco Bay. One could find shell mounds left U R learn about the World War II Home Front. E A O G by the Huchiun tribe of native Ohlone and watch sailing vessels ply the bay with S A P T ▶ Fish at high tide with the locals (and remember Y T passengers and cargo. The arrival of Standard Oil and the Santa Fe Railroad at A your fishing license). A H A L L A V E . W B Y the beginning of the 20th century sparked a transformation of this landscape that continues ▶ Visit the S. S. Red Oak Victory ship in Shipyard #3 .26 mi M A R I N A W A Y Harbor Master A R L and see a ship’s restoration first hand. Call U today. The Marina Bay segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail offers us new opportunities B V O 510-237-2933 or visit www.ssredoakvictory.org. Future site of D to explore the history, wildlife, and scenery of Richmond’s dynamic southeastern shore. B 5 R Rosie the Riveter/ ESPLANADE DR. ▶ Be a bird watcher; bring binoculars. A .3 mi A WWII Home Front .37 mi H National Historical Park Visitor Center Marina Bay Park N Map Legend Sheridan Point I R ▶ MARINA BAY PARK was once at the heart Bay Trail suitable for walking, biking, 4 8 of Kaiser Richmond Shipyard #2.
    [Show full text]
  • Adopted Projects Budget Five-Year Expenditure Plan Section E - Active Projects……………………...…………………………………329 East Bay Regional Park District Map …………………
    ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Counties Costa Contra and Alameda within System Park Regional a Operating ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••California Oakland, in Headquartered •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Plan Expenditure Five-Year ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Budget Projects Adopted 2012 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.ebparks.org •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Regional Park District Park Regional •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• East Bay Bay East ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
    [Show full text]
  • Budget Justifications Are Prepared for the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittees
    The United States BUDGET Department of the Interior JUSTIFICATIONS and Performance Information Fiscal Year 2016 NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND RESTORATION PROGRAM NOTICE: These budget justifications are prepared for the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittees. Approval for release of the justifications prior to their printing in the public record of the Subcommittee hearings may be obtained through the Office of Budget of the Department of the Interior. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Justifications TABLE OF CONTENTS Appropriation: Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration Summary of Request Page General Statement……..……….......................................................... 1 Executive Summary…………………………………………………. 2 Program Performance Summary ......................................................... 6 Goal Performance Table….................................................................. 8 Summary of Requirements Table....................................................... 10 Fixed Costs and Related Changes....................................................... 11 Appropriations Language.................................................................... 12 Program Activities Damage Assessments Activity............................................................ 15 Assessments and Restorations Site Map.......................................….. 20 Restoration Support Activity............................................................... 22 Inland Oil Spill Preparedness
    [Show full text]
  • 3.0 Affected Environment
    Chapter 3 3.0 Affected Environment 3.1 Traffic and Transportation Systems This section presents an overview of the traffic and transportation systems in the vicinity of the Hercules ITC in Hercules, California, as well as along the broader I-80 corridor between the Carquinez and San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridges. The existing transportation modes include roadways, railways, and pedestrian/bicycle trails. The transportation portion of the proposed project includes development of a bus-to-train connection for an anticipated usage of up to 837 riders per day (Fehr & Peers 2009), extending John Muir Parkway, and providing a 220-space surface parking lot (on Block N) in the near- term. In the long-term, a transit area garage with approximately 450 spaces would be constructed. The proposed project would improve access to public mass transit and would be a benefit to the residents and workers in the vicinity of the Hercules ITC and the region. In fact, the majority of transit riders using the Hercules ITC are projected to come from the new residential units located within one-half mile of the transit center and the immediate surrounding cities and communities of Hercules, Pinole, and Rodeo-Crockett. Residents and commuters from the unincorporated communities of Contra Costa and Solano counties along I- 80 east of Hercules are also likely to utilize the Hercules ITC. The traffic related to the proposed project would result in minor net benefit to the area-wide transportation systems that serve the seven-million people who live in the Bay Area. Detailed traffic discussion, therefore, focuses on the cities of Hercules, Pinole, and Rodeo-Crockett (the area of western Contra Costa County).
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Inventory - Nomination Form
    Form No. 10-300 REV. (9/77) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY - NOMINATION FORM SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOW TO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES -- COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS (NAME HISTORIC Hercules Village AND/OR COMMON same LOCATION STREET &JSIUMBER 1<ings Avenue, Railroad /Vvenue, Santa Fe Hercules Avam*c% Tallev Way, Say and Pinole Streets —NOT FOR PUBLICATION CITY. TOWN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT Hercules VICINITY OF #7 STATE CODE COUNTY CODE California Centra Costa 013 CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY OWNERSHIP STATUS PRESENT USE _XDISTRICT —PUBLIC ^.OCCUPIED _AGRICULTURE —MUSEUM _BUILDING(S) _PRIVATE ^.UNOCCUPIED —COMMERCIAL —PARK —STRUCTURE _XBOTH —WORK IN PROGRESS —EDUCATIONAL .^PRIVATE RESIDENCE —SITE PUBLIC ACQUISITION ACCESSIBLE —ENTERTAINMENT —RELIGIOUS —OBJECT —IN PROCESS ,X_YES: RESTRICTED —XCQVERNMENT —SCIENTIFIC —XBEING CONSIDERED —X.YES: UNRESTRICTED —XlNDUSTRIAL —TRANSPORTATION —NO —MILITARY —OTHER: OWNER OF PROPERTY NAME multiple ownership STREET & NUMBER (See Continuation Sheet) CITY, TOWN STATE _ VICINITY OF i LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION COURTHOUSE, REGISTRY OF DEEDS.ETC. Courthouse of Contra Costa County STREET& NUMBER 843 Cour CITY. TOWN STATE California REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TiTLE DATE —FEDERAL —STATE —COUNTY —LOCAL DEPOSITORY FOR SURVEY RECORDS CITY. TOWN STATE DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE CHECK ONE X-EXCELLENT ^DETERIORATED XUNALTERED XORIGINALSITE —GOOD _RUINS —ALTERED —MOVED DATE- X-FAIR _UNEX POSED DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE The Hercules, California plant village being nominated is comprised of thirty-six buildings remaining from the original plant village in the geographical area included in this nomination. This represents the majority of the total buildings in this area that was the company town operated by the explosive manufacturing companies in Hercules in the 1890 l s-1940's.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marshes Are Either Exposed to the Open Bay Or Are Protected from Wave and Tidal Energy by Offshore Mudflats
    Assessment Chapter Contra Costa County Adapting to Rising Tides Project Natural Shorelines Natural shorelines include a range of shoreline types and conditions. Fully tidal marshes are either exposed to the open Bay or are protected from wave and tidal energy by offshore mudflats. At the other end of spectrum are muted tidal marshes and ponds, that are protected from the Bay by berms and levees and have water levels controlled by tide gates and other structures. These systems provide an array of ecosystem service benefits, the loss of which will ultimately diminish the value of the Bay Area as a desirable place to live. Natural shorelines help reduce incoming wave heights, protecting shoreline structures from wind, waves, and tidal energy. Natural shorelines provide buffers to neighboring communities of all kinds, including disadvantaged and vulnerable communities, from sea level rise and storm surge. Their loss can place shoreline communities at greater risk of flooding by increasing the likelihood that structural shoreline protection is overtopped or fails, and can increase the cost of maintaining, repairing and upgrading these already expensive structural protection assets. In addition, many natural shorelines, including tidal and muted tidal marshes and ponds, have been restored and represent a significant financial investment. Many of these areas provide habitat to a number of state-listed or federally threatened and endangered species as well as migrating and wintering birds that rely on them for breeding, foraging, and high tide refuge. Additionally, they offer opportunities to view wildlife, provide access to the shoreline, and offer scenic and aesthetic benefits. Tidal Marshes Historically, tidal marshes keep pace with sea level rise by accumulating mineral sediment and by moving upward and landward in the tidal frame.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Draft Project List And
    Examples of projects anticipated to be eligible for Restoration Authority grants. Last updated June 9, 2017 TOTAL LEAD (AND CURRENT PHASE PROJECT SCHEDULE CURRENT PROJECT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRIPTION PARTNER) SCHEDULE TOTAL COST LOCATION (Phase; dates or (Phase; dates PHASE COST ORGS years) or years) Peninsula and South Bay Phase 2 of the Yosemite Slough Restoration & Development Project will green and open a 21‐acre section of waterfront parkland in San Francisco's Candlestick Point California State Recreation Area that has remained closed to the Department of public since the park's inception in 1977, add 21 acres of Parks and restored waterfront parklands and recreational space in a Candlestick Recreation disadvantaged community, improve air and water quality, Peninsula and Point ‐ Yosemite San (State Parks), Planning and Construction: reduce and clean stormwater runoff, provide wildlife $1,300,000 $6,400,000 South Bay Slough Wetland Francisco California State Design: 2016‐2018 2018‐2019 habitat, and improve the ability of the park's natural Restoration Parks systems to buffer the impacts of climate change. The Foundation; San project will also provide valuable public access amenities Francisco Bay including a new 1,100 sq. ft. zero net energy Education Trail Center, 1.1 miles of new waterfront biking and pedestrian trails (including a section of the San Francisco Bay Trail), and ADA‐accessible park viewing and picnic/BBQ areas. Peninsula and South Bay Environmental education programs for students of all ages Golden Gate at the Crissy Field Center related to restoration projects. National Parks Crissy Field San The Center offers place‐based exploration that focuses on Conservancy, Educational ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Francisco the interaction between humans and nature and makes National Park Programs use of the natural and cultural resources of the restored Service, Presidio Crissy Field wetland and the Tennessee Hollow watershed.
    [Show full text]