DOCSLIB.ORG

Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL: LONE TREE POINT‐RODEO RODEO, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA January 2018 This page intentionally left blank PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL: LONE TREE POINT‐RODEO RODEO, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, California 94605 Attention: Jim Townsend, ACME Consulting Prepared by: LSA 157 Park Place Point Richmond, California 94801 510.236.6810 Project No. BKF 1702 January 2018 This page intentionally left blank P UBLIC R EVIEW D RAFT S AN F RANCISCO B AY T RAIL: L ONE T REE P OINT‐R ODEO I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION R ODEO, C ONTRA C OSTA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA J ANUARY 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... i FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................. v 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.1 Contact Person(s) .............................................................................................................. 1‐1 1.2 Project Location ................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.3 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.4 Project Description ............................................................................................................ 1‐7 1.4.1 Project Characteristics ........................................................................................................ 1‐7 1.4.2 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 1‐11 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 2‐1 2.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources ..................................................................................... 2‐5 2.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 2‐8 2.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 2‐15 2.5 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 2‐36 2.6 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................ 2‐41 2.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................. 2‐46 2.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................. 2‐49 2.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................... 2‐55 2.10 Land Use and Planning .................................................................................................... 2‐63 2.11 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................... 2‐66 2.12 Noise................................................................................................................................ 2‐67 2.13 Population and Housing .................................................................................................. 2‐75 2.14 Public Services ................................................................................................................. 2‐77 2.15 Recreation ....................................................................................................................... 2‐79 2.16 Transportation/Traffic ..................................................................................................... 2‐81 2.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................ 2‐89 2.18 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................................... 2‐91 2.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................ 2‐95 3.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .................................. 3‐1 4.0 LIST OF PREPARERS/PERSONS CONTACTED ...................................................... 4‐1 5.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 5‐1 APPENDICES A: Air Quality Modeling Results B: Intersection Turning Movement Volumes C: Highway Capacity Manual Worksheets P:\BKF1702 Lone Tree Point Rodeo\CEQA\Lone Tree_PublicReviewDraft_ISMND.docx (01/10/18) iii P UBLIC R EVIEW D RAFT S AN F RANCISCO B AY T RAIL: L ONE T REE P OINT‐R ODEO I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION R ODEO, C ONTRA C OSTA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA J ANUARY 2018 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1: Regional Location ................................................................................................................. 1‐3 Figure 2: Project Site ........................................................................................................................... 1‐5 Figure 3: Proposed Project .................................................................................................................. 1‐9 Figure 4: Vegetation Types ............................................................................................................... 2‐17 Figure 5: Creeping Rye Grass Turf ..................................................................................................... 2‐31 TABLES Table 2.A: Project Construction Emissions in Pounds Per Day ......................................................... 2‐11 Table 2.B: Special‐status Species Evaluated for the Lone Tree Point Project ................................... 2‐21 Table 2.C: Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure Stationary Noise Sources1 .................................... 2‐68 Table 2.D: Noise Emission Reference Levels and Usage Factors ...................................................... 2‐70 Table 2.E: Construction Trip Generation .......................................................................................... 2‐84 Table 2.F: Intersection Level of Service Summary ............................................................................ 2‐86 Table 2.G: Roadway ADT Summary .................................................................................................. 2‐87 Table 3.A: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program ................................................................. 3‐1 iv P:\BKF1702 Lone Tree Point Rodeo\CEQA\Lone Tree_PublicReviewDraft_ISMND.docx (01/10/18) P UBLIC R EVIEW D RAFT S AN F RANCISCO B AY T RAIL: L ONE T REE P OINT‐R ODEO I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION R ODEO, C ONTRA C OSTA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA J ANUARY 2018 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ADT Average Daily Traffic ARB California Air Resources Board AT&T American Telephone and Telegraph BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District Basin Plan Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin Bay Trail San Francisco Bay Trail BCDC San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission BMP Best Management Practice CAP Contra Costa County Climate Action Plan CBC California Building Code CCR California Code of Regulations CCTA Contra Costa Transportation Authority CDFW California Department of Fish & Wildlife CESA California Endangered Species Act CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CGP Construction General Permit CH4 Methane CMP Congestion Management Program CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNEL community noise equivalent level CNPS California Native Plant Society CO Carbon Monoxide CO2e CO2 equivalents CoIMP Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans (CoIWMP) CWA Clean Water Act CWP County Watershed Program dB decibel dBA A‐weighted sound level District East Bay Regional Park District DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utilities District EFZ Earthquake Fault Zone EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FCD Contra Costa County Flood Control District FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FHWA Federal Highways Administration P:\BKF1702 Lone Tree Point Rodeo\CEQA\Lone Tree_PublicReviewDraft_ISMND.docx (01/10/18) v P UBLIC R EVIEW D RAFT S AN F RANCISCO B AY T RAIL: L ONE T REE P OINT‐R ODEO I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION R ODEO, C ONTRA C OSTA C OUNTY, C ALIFORNIA J ANUARY 2018 FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information System GWP Global Warming Potential HCM Highway
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US Format C V2.1
    APPENDIX G-7 Listed, Proposed Species, and Critical Habitat Potentially Occurring or Known to Occur in the Project Region Listed, Proposed Species, and Critical Habitat Potentially Occurring or Known to Occur in the Project Region. Scientific Name/ Common Federal/State/ General Habitat Description Habitat Rationale Name CNPS/other Present/ Status Absent Invertebrates Adela oplerella --/--/G2G3, S2S3 Opler's longhorn moth is recorded from 18 sites A Suitable habitat for this species is not Opler’s longhorn moth extending along the west side of the San present within the project site. Francisco Bay from 5 miles southeast of Nicasio in Marin County south to the Gilroy area of Santa Clara County and from the Oakland area on the inner Coast Ranges. Habitat for Opler's longhorn moth consists of serpentine grassland (Federal Register 50CFR17). Andrena blennospermatis --/--/G2, S2 Known occurrences in Contra Costa, Lake, A Yellow carpet is absent from the Blennosperma vernal pool Sonoma, Solano, Yolo, Tehamea, Sacramento, project site. Upland habitat adjacent andrenid bee San Joaquin, El Dorado, and Placer Counties. to vernal pools in the area is Habitat consists of upland areas near vernal pools composed of substrate, such as containing yellow carpet (Blennosperma sp.). gravel, compacted soil, or heavily Forages exclusively on flowering yellow carpet. disturbed soil, which does not This species excavates nests in soil in adjacent provide suitable nesting habitat for upland areas (Thorp 2008). this species. Branchinecta conservatio FE/--/-- Conservancy fairy shrimp inhabit rather large, cool- A Suitable habitat for this species does conservancy fairy shrimp water vernal pools with moderately turbid water. It not occur on site.
    [Show full text]
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018
    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
    [Show full text]
  • Contra Costa County
    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Marsh Creek Watershed Marsh Creek flows approximately 30 miles from the eastern slopes of Mt. Diablo to Suisun Bay in the northern San Francisco Estuary. Its watershed consists of about 100 square miles. The headwaters of Marsh Creek consist of numerous small, intermittent and perennial tributaries within the Black Hills. The creek drains to the northwest before abruptly turning east near Marsh Creek Springs. From Marsh Creek Springs, Marsh Creek flows in an easterly direction entering Marsh Creek Reservoir, constructed in the 1960s. The creek is largely channelized in the lower watershed, and includes a drop structure near the city of Brentwood that appears to be a complete passage barrier. Marsh Creek enters the Big Break area of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta northeast of the city of Oakley. Marsh Creek No salmonids were observed by DFG during an April 1942 visual survey of Marsh Creek at two locations: 0.25 miles upstream from the mouth in a tidal reach, and in close proximity to a bridge four miles east of Byron (Curtis 1942).
    [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]
  • 2004 Rapid Bioassessment Project Report Contra
    CONTRA COSTA MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (CCMAP) 2004 RAPID BIOASSESSMENT PROJECT REPORT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Contra Costa Clean Water Program 600 Main St. Martinez, CA 94553 Prepared by: Scott Cressey Cressey & Associates 147 Ashbury Avenue El Cerrito, CA 94530 & Chris Sommers EOA, Inc. 1410 Jackson Street Oakland, CA 94612 August 18, 2005 1 Preface The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (Program) initiated a water quality monitoring and assessment plan (Contra Costa Monitoring and Assessment Plan) within Alhambra Creek, the Program's pilot watershed in 2001. The Program contracted Scott Cressey of Cressey & Associates in 2002, 2003 and 2004 to assist in preparing the work plan for, and ultimately the implementation of, a study to conduct rapid bioassessments on Las Trampas Creek, Refugio Creek, Rodeo Creek, Edwards Creek and Lower Marsh Creek. The California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP) protocols for Non-point Source Design were followed during all years. This project was overseen and managed by Chris Sommers (EOA Inc.), Monitoring Program Project Manager for the Program. Mr. Sommers worked closely with Cressey & Associates to apply his expertise bioassessment to study design and data analysis, and was also responsible for the critical review and edits to the draft reports. iii D:\2004 Bio Report Final.doc Executive Summary In April 2001, the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (Program) initiated a water quality monitoring and assessment plan within Alhambra Creek, the Program's pilot watershed. The Contra Costa Monitoring and Assessment Plan (CCMAP) is a long-term strategy designed to assess the conditions of watersheds, water bodies, and water quality within Contra Costa County (County).
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Project Status Report (QPSR)
    CONTRA COSTA transportation 0 authority Measure J Half‐Percent Countywide Sales Tax Revenue Expenditure Program 12, Transportation for Livable Communities, and Program 13, Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Trail Facilities Quarterly Project Status Report (QPSR) January 2021 Quarterly Project Status Report (QPSR) for Measure J CC‐TLC and PBTF Funds January 2021 Status of Measure J TLC and PBTF Projects This report is provided quarterly to the Planning Committee (PC) and Authority Board regarding the updated status of ongoing and completed projects funded by at least one of two Measure J programs: Program 12, TLC, and Program 13, PBTF; in some cases, projects are funded by both countywide programs. The reporting period for this Quarterly Project Status Report (QPSR) is October through December 2020, Quarter 2 (Q2) Fiscal Year (FY) 2020‐21. Projects in this report are organized into three status categories: Projects with funds appropriated by the Authority; Projects with funds programmed by the Authority (not yet appropriated); and Projects completed by each sponsor agency. For projects with funds appropriated by the Authority, the QPSR provides detailed information on the status of each phase including Preliminary Studies/Planning, Environmental Review, Design, Right‐of‐Way/Utilities, and Construction; estimated completion year, amount billed to date, and amount completed. The QPSR also provides financial information on the status of all funding resolutions approved by the Authority Board including the appropriated amount per phase, the total amount billed‐to‐date (for invoices received by the Authority through October 31, 2020 requesting reimbursement), and funding from non‐Measure J sources. The following major milestones were reached during Quarter 2: Rodeo Downtown Infrastructure Project (#120045, Contra Costa County) construction was completed and closeout initiated.
    [Show full text]
  • Update to the Safety Element of the General Plan
    CITY OF HERCULES SAFETY ELEMENT Administrative Draft November 2020 Draft 2020 | HERCULES SAFETY ELEMENT VI-1 VI-2 Table of Contents 1.INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW ............................................................................ 9 PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC OUTREACH .......................................................................................................... 9 COMMUNITY PROFILE ............................................................................................................................................11 SENATE BILL 535 – DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES .......................................................................................................... 12 SENATE BILL 1000 – ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE................................................................................................................... 12 GENERAL PLAN POLICIES ........................................................................................................................................15 RELATIONSHIP TO GENERAL PLAN ..........................................................................................................................15 LAND USE ELEMENT (ADOPTED 1998) ................................................................................................................................ 15 OPEN SPACE & CONSERVATION ELEMENT (ADOPTED 1998) ............................................................................................... 16 HOUSING ELEMENT (ADOPTED 2015) ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Salmonscape: Priorities for Conserving California’S Salmon and Steelhead Diversity
    SalmonScape: Priorities for Conserving California’s Salmon and Steelhead Diversity The Nature Conservancy of California August 2011 Version 1.1 SalmonScape – August 2011 SalmonScape: Priorities for Conserving California’s Salmon and Steelhead Diversity August 2011 Version 1.1 Jeanette Howard Kirk Klausmeyer Sally Liu The Nature Conservancy of California 201 Mission Street, 4th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Cover photographs: Ian Shive (salmon), Bridget Besaw (Shasta Big Springs and juvenile coho salmon), CJ Hudlow (scientists at river mouth) Recommended Citation: Howard, J., K. Klausmeyer, and S. Liu. 2011. SalmonScape: Priorities for Conserving California’s Salmon and Steelhead Diversity. Version 1.1. Unpublished report. The Nature Conservancy, San Francisco, CA. 34 pages + Tables and Appendix. The Nature Conservancy 2 SalmonScape – August 2011 Table of Contents List of Tables 4 List of Figures 5 Acknowledgements 6 1.0 Introduction 7 Box 1. California’s Anadromous Salmon and Trout Diversity 8 2.0 Developing a SalmonScape: a Portfolio of Priority Landscapes 9 2.1 Framework 9 2.2 Study Area 12 2.3 Methods 12 2.4 Results 15 2.5 How the SalmonScape Compares to Agency Priorities 20 3.0 Uses of Data and Analyses 20 3.1 Priority Places and the Salmon Lifecycle 20 3.2 Stresses 20 3.3 Identifying Bottlenecks 25 4.0 Platform Sites 28 5.0 Conclusions and Future Directions 32 6.0 Literature Cited 33 The Nature Conservancy 3 SalmonScape – August 2011 List of Tables Tables and Appendix Page Table 1: Watersheds that make up top 2, 5, 10 and 20 percent of the study area identified as the 35 priority places to protect the strongest populations and best remaining habitat, restore habitat and populations to create and maintain viable populations.
    [Show full text]
  • National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211
    National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA, Commerce § 226.211 and the following DOI, USGS, 1:500,000 (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Critical habitat scale hydrologic unit maps: State of is designated to include all river Oregon, 1974 and State of California, reaches accessible to listed coho salm- 1978 which are incorporated by ref- on between Cape Blanco, Oregon, and erence. This incorporation by reference Punta Gorda, California. Critical habi- was approved by the Director of the tat consists of the water, substrate, Federal Register in accordance with 5 and adjacent riparian zone of estuarine U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies and riverine reaches (including off- of the USGS publication and maps may channel habitats) in hydrologic units be obtained from the USGS, Map Sales, and counties identified in Table 6 of Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225. Copies may this part. Accessible reaches are those be inspected at NMFS, Protected Re- within the historical range of the ESU sources Division, 525 NE Oregon that can still be occupied by any life Street—Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232– stage of coho salmon. Inaccessible 2737, or NMFS, Office of Protected Re- sources, 1315 East-West Highway, Sil- reaches are those above specific dams ver Spring, MD 20910, or at the Na- identified in Table 6 of this part or tional Archives and Records Adminis- above longstanding, naturally impass- tration (NARA). For information on able barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in the availability of this material at existence for at least several hundred NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// years).
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resource Evaluation Santa Clara County, California
    LOS GATOS CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT / SOUTH TERMINAL PHASE III PROJECT Biological Resource Evaluation Santa Clara County, California Prepared for Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 1250 San Carlos Avenue P.O. Box 3006 San Carlos, California 94070-1306 Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc. 2379 Gateway Oaks Drive Suite 200 Sacramento, California 95833 November 2013 LOS GATOS CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT / SOUTH TERMINAL PHASE III PROJECT Biological Resource Evaluation Santa Clara County, California Prepared for Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 1250 San Carlos Avenue P.O. Box 3006 San Carlos, California 94070-1306 Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc. 2379 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 200 Sacramento, California 95833 Contact: Todd Wong November 2013 This page left blank intentionally. Summary The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) which operates the San Francisco Bay Area’s Caltrain passenger rail service proposes to replace the two-track railroad bridge that crosses Los Gatos Creek, in the City of San Jose, Santa Clara County, California. The Proposed Action is needed to address the structural deficiencies and safety issues of the Caltrain Los Gatos Creek railroad bridge to be consistent with the standards of safety and reliability required for public transit, to ensure that the bridge will continue to safely carry commuter rail service well into the future, and to improve operations at nearby San Jose Diridon Station and along the Caltrain rail line. This Biological Resources Evaluation (BRE) has been prepared to provide a summary of existing biological conditions, the potential presence of special status species and resources, an initial evaluation of impacts of the project on biological resources, and feasible avoidance and minimization measures to reduced potential impacts to a level typically considered less than significant under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
    [Show full text]
  • Floods of December 1955-January 1956 in the Far Western States
    Floods of December 1955-January 1956 in the Far Western States GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1650 This Water-Supply Paper was prepared as separate chapters A and B UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director CONTENTS [Letters designate the separately published chapters] (A) Part 1. Description. (B) Part 2. Streamflow data. Floods of December 1955-January 1956 in the Far Western States Part 1. Description By WALTER HOFMANN and S. E. RANTZ GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1650-A Prepared in cooperation with the States of California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington, and with other agencies UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFF.ICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. PREFACE This report on the floods of December 1955-January 1956 in the Far Western States was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division. C. G. Paulsen, chief hydraulic engineer, suc­ ceeded by Luna B. Leopold, under the general direction of J. V. B. Wells, chief, Surface Water Branch. A preliminary report of peak discharges was released as Geological Survey Circular 380 in August 1956. Basic records of stage and discharge in the area, covered by Water- Supply Paper 1650-B, were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey as part of a continuous program in cooperation with the States of California, Idaho, Oregon, Nevada, and Washington; county and city agencies within these states; and agencies of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Facilities and Infrastructure
    6 Community Facilities and Infrastructure 4 4 TENNENTTENNENT AVE AVE SYCAM SYCOARMO E ARVEE AVE MapMap 6.1 6.1 VE R AVE EF R Community Facilities LO A UGEF Community Facilities ABLO IO UG P B V IO NPA A SAN LL VA SA EY LL R EY D R HERCULESHERCULES D COUNTYk APPIAN WY R e efu COUNTYk e gio r APPIAN WY R San Pablo Bay Ce Cefre y e ueg Owned and operated by City of Richmond San Pablo Bay it r kio C r C I-80 re r y e Owned and operated by City of Richmond iat k r I-80 P r G a I N G P O I N L O E Y L Libraries V W E A K PINOLE Y Libraries L V W P L A K E PINOLE D LY P N L RED D O Y M NH RD Community Centers Parchester IOC RM H R P Community Centers Community Center in C D Parchester I o R le RE P Community Center iCn D M re oe U le E k L COUNTY C M r B ee U COUNTY k ALH L AMB Owned and operated by partner agencies B R R R ILLTOP D A V heem Cr H ALH A eek Murphy AMB LL R RAEY Owned and operated by partner agencies R HILLTOP D Elementary V R heem Cr Highland A D eek Murphy LL Contra Costa Elementary School EY GIANT RD APPIAN WY Elementary Valley View R Community HighlandSchool D Schools Contra CostaCollege Elementary School Elementary School GIANT RD APPIAN WY Valley View Community School ElementaryMay Valley CommunitySchool Center Schools Creek College San Pablo De Anza High andMay Valley Community Center RUMRILL BLVD Sheldon Colleges ablo Creek Delta Continuation School San P Elementary COUNTY COUNTY AM RD De Anza High and BR O D School Colleges RUMRILLO BLVD RD 20 DR PABL Sheldon OKSID EL PORTAL SAN Delta Continuation School ANCH RD E DR
    [Show full text]