DOCSLIB.ORG

Mitigated Negative Declaration Putah Creek Energy Farm Use Permit Parcel 030-200-016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mitigated Negative Declaration Putah Creek Energy Farm Use Permit Parcel 030-200-016 Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration Putah Creek Energy Farm Use Permit Parcel 030-200-016 Zone File # 2019-006 Lead Agency Yolo County Department of Community Services Planning Division 292 West Beamer Street Woodland, CA, 95695-2598 Technical assistance provided by September 2019 Yolo County Department of Community Services CONTENTS Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 2. Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................... 1 CEQA 1 Yolo County ........................................................................................................................................... 1 3. Environmental Checklist Form ..................................................................................................... 3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ......................................................................................... 5 Environmental Determination .............................................................................................................. 5 4. Detailed Project Description ........................................................................................................ 6 4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 Project Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 7 4.3 Project Construction ................................................................................................................... 7 Equipment Staging Areas ............................................................................................................ 7 4.4 Operation and Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 8 Project Design Features .............................................................................................................. 8 4.5 Project Schedule ......................................................................................................................... 9 4.6 Facility Closure ............................................................................................................................ 9 4.7 Applicant Proposed Measures .................................................................................................... 9 5. Environmental Setting and Environmental Impacts .................................................................... 14 5.1 Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................. 14 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 14 Applicant Proposed Measures .................................................................................................. 15 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 15 Aesthetics Impact Conclusions ................................................................................................. 17 5.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ......................................................................................... 18 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 18 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 19 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................. 20 Agriculture and Forestry Services Impact Conclusions ............................................................. 20 5.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................. 21 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 21 Applicant Proposed Measures .................................................................................................. 22 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 23 Air Quality Impact Conclusions ................................................................................................. 24 5.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................. 25 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 25 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 26 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................. 28 Biological Resources Impact Conclusions ................................................................................. 29 5.5 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 32 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 32 Cultural Setting ......................................................................................................................... 33 Ethnographic Setting ................................................................................................................ 33 Historical Background ............................................................................................................... 34 CRHR Evaluations ...................................................................................................................... 36 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 36 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................. 37 Cultural Resources Impact Conclusions .................................................................................... 38 September 2019 i Draft Initial Study Yolo County Department of Community Services PUTAH CREEK ENERGY FARM USE PERMIT 5.6 Energy ....................................................................................................................................... 39 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 39 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 40 5.7 Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................................... 41 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 41 Applicant Proposed Measures .................................................................................................. 42 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 42 Geology and Soils Impact Conclusions ..................................................................................... 44 5.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................................................... 45 Background ............................................................................................................................... 45 Applicant Proposed Measures .................................................................................................. 46 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 46 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Conclusions....................................................................... 47 5.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................ 48 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 48 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 49 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact Conclusions ............................................................ 51 5.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................... 52 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 52 Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 53 Hydrology and Water Quality Impact Conclusions ..................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Enhancing Environmental Flows of Putah Creek for Chinook Salmon Reproductive Requirements
    Enhancing environmental flows of Putah Creek for Chinook salmon reproductive requirements Written by: Chan, Brian; Jasper, Chris Reynolds; Stott, Haley Kathryn UC Davis, California ESM 122, Water Science and Management, Section: A02 Abstract: Putah creek, like many of California’s rivers and streams, is highly altered by anthropogenic actions and historically supported large populations of resident and anadromous native fish species. Now its ecosystem dynamics have changed drastically with the Monticello dam, the Solano diversion canal and the leveeing of its banks. Over time the creek has found a balance of habitats for native and non-native fish species that is mainly dictated by species-preferred temperature tolerances (Keirman et. al. 2012). Cooler temperatures and faster flows upstream from Davis prove to be ideal habitats for native species, in particular, the federally endangered Chinook salmon, which is the most widely distributed and most numerous run occurring in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries. As water moves downstream, it becomes shallower and warmer, resulting in ideal conditions for non-native species (Winters, 2005). This report analyzes the environmental flows released into putah creek and how much salmon preferred breeding habitat is available from this flow regime based on temperature. Introduction: Figure 1: Teale GIS Solutions Group (1999), US Census Bureau (2002), USGS (1993) [within Winters, 2005] The Putah Creek watershed is an important aspect in the natural, social, and economic livelihoods of the people of Yolo and Solano counties. The Putah Creek watershed begins at the highest point in Lake County, Cobb Mountain, and flows down to the Central Valley where it empties into the Yolo Bypass at near sea level.
    [Show full text]
  • Solano Project History
    Solano Project Zachary Redmond Bureau of Reclamation 2000 Table Of Contents The Solano Project.............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Prehistoric Setting .................................................3 Historic Setting ...................................................5 Project Authorization.....................................................8 Construction History ....................................................10 Post-Construction History................................................17 Settlement of the Project .................................................21 Uses of Project Water ...................................................22 Conclusion............................................................24 About the Author .............................................................24 Bibliography ................................................................25 Archival Collections ....................................................25 Government Documents .................................................25 Articles...............................................................25 Books ................................................................25 Web Sites.............................................................26 Index ......................................................................27 1 The Solano Project The Solano Project is a water
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Home: a Recreational Day Use and Interpretive Trail at Putah Creek Exploring Home: a Recreational Day Use and Interpretive Trail for Putah Creek
    Exploring Home: A Recreational Day Use and Interpretive Trail at Putah Creek Exploring Home: A Recreational Day Use and Interpretive Trail for Putah Creek Sage Millar Senior Project June 2008 University of California, Davis Department of Environmental Sciences Landscape Architecture Program A Senior Project Presented to the Faculty of the Landscape Architecture program University of California,Davis in fulfillment of the Requirement Exploring Home: for the Degree of A Recreational Day Use and Interpretive Bachelors of Science of Landscape Architecture Trail for Putah Creek Rob Thayer, Senior Project Advisor Presented by: Patsy Owens, Senior Project Advisor Sage Millar at University of California, Davis Steve McNeil, Committee Member on the Thirteenth day of June, 2008 This senior project consists of background research and site analysis as well as a final site plan for a recreational day use area and interpretive trail on Putah Creek. This document contains the background research, site analysis, and program develop- Abstract ment I completed before designing the final site plan. The site is 10 miles west of Winters on Hwy 128 at the base of Monticello Dam where Cold Creek enters Putah Creek. The site is in the Pu- tah Creek Wildlife area and is approximately 25 acres. Because of it’s location near the trailhead into Stebbins Reserve, and Putah and Cold Creeks, the site provides and excellent opportunity to create an educational and interpretive experience for visitors to the area. Hiking trails, informational kiosks and signage will highlight the history and various natural processes that are occur- ring on and around the site. A small interpretive center or outdoor teaching area will enhance the experience of visitors, and also provide an outdoor classroom for gatherings such as field trips.
    [Show full text]
  • Putah Creek Corridor Connecting the Pieces
    Putah Creek Corridor Connecting the Pieces Putah Creek Corridor Connecting the Pieces Accepted and Approved by A Senior Project Presented to the Faculty of the Landscape Architecture Program University of California, Davis Steve Greco, Faculty Committee Member in Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Bachelors of Science in Landscape Architecture Tara Hanlon, Committee Member Rich Marovich, Committee Member Presented by: Claire Napawan, Senior Project Faculty Advisor Kathryn Salfen at University of California, Davis on the Tenth Day of June, 2011 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my senior project committee members for their tremendous help. They all provided me with their knowledge, time and encouragement. THANK YOU! Claire Napawan Steve Greco Rich Marovich Tara Hanlon In addition to my senior project committee members, I would like to thank my parents for all their help not only during this project but for helping through everything! i Abstract This project focuses on Putah Creek as it runs from Lake Berryessa to the Yolo Wildlife Area. It examines the corridor as both a wildlife corridor and as a local trail corridor. With many existing patches of wildlife reserves located along Putah creek, the restoration of riparian forest along the channel will provide full connectivity and functionality to the corridor. On the social scale Putah Creek runs between Winters and Davis. Connecting the existing trails of the UC Davis Riparian Reserve and Winters Putah Creek Nature Park will establish a local trail corridor. This project also examines the need of the design of the trails at Win- ter’s Putah Creek Nature Park to Preserve linear corridors and creating multi-use trails that can allow wildlife movement across the landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Updates Around the Creek
    Volume 15, No. 2, Fall 2004 We envision Putah Creek as a thriving corridor of native riparian and aquatic ecosystems connecting the Coast Ranges to the Sacramento River and the Delta. We envision a Putah Creek watershed community of people who value their creek and are committed to its stewardship. Updates Around the Creek Lower Putah Creek Coordinating Committee: Grants and Dams Rich Marovich CALFED Grant On April 6, the State Water Resources Control Board announced an award to the LPCCC of $992,236 from the Prop 50 CALFED Watershed Program to continue the PCC Adopt-A-Reach Project (volun- teer activism), continue the Putah Creek Above: The Spring Cleanup gathered Discovery Corridor Project (public edu- this recliner, among other things. cation opportunities on public lands), de- Right: Tom Cahill speaks to a good velop bioindicators of restoration success crowd during the June field trip. (UC Davis studies), update the PCC guide to Putah Creek, and update the Watershed Putah Creek Council: Restoration, Cleanup, and Education Management Action Plan. Dawn Lindstrom Putah Creek Council Website Coast and Creek Cleanup for the past 6 Wildlife Conservation Board Gets a Facelift! years and has been the lead organization Grant If you have not had the opportunity to for Yolo County for the past two years. On August 12, the WCB approved $1,207 take a look at the redesigned Putah Creek On September 18, 2004, volunteers along million for implementation projects in the Council website, you will be surprised at Putah Creek went to sites at Yolo Housing Lower Putah Creek Watershed, including the wealth of knowledge you will find.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Sanitary Survey
    LAKE BERRYESSA 2018 WATERSHED SANITARY SURVEY Final Report October 2018 Prepared for Napa County Flood Control Water Conservation District and Solano County Water Agency Lake Berryessa 2018 Watershed Sanitary Survey FINAL REPORT October 2018 Technical Committee: Napa County Flood Control Water Conservation District Annamaria Martinez Phillip Miller Solano County Water Agency Justin Pascual Prepared By: Leslie Palencia, Palencia Consulting Engineers PREPARED BY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number Section 1 – Introduction Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1 Objectives of the Update .............................................................................................. 1-1 Constituents and Potential Contaminating Activities Covered in the Current Update ... 1-2 Report Organization ..................................................................................................... 1-3 Section 2 – Watershed and Water Supply Systems Background .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Watershed Description ................................................................................................. 2-2 Land Use ........................................................................................................... 2-2 Precipitation ....................................................................................................... 2-2 Water Treatment Plants ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water and the Future of the San Joaquin Valley 3
    FEBRUARY 2019 Ellen Hanak, Water and the Future of Alvar Escriva-Bou, Brian Gray, the San Joaquin Valley Sarge Green, Thomas Harter, Jelena Jezdimirovic, Jay Lund, Josué Medellín-Azuara, Peter Moyle, Nathaniel Seavy Supported with funding from the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, the TomKat Foundation, the US Department of Agriculture, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Water Foundation © 2019 Public Policy Institute of California PPIC is a public charity. It does not take or support positions on any ballot measures or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders or of the staff, officers, advisory councils, or board of directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. SUMMARY CONTENTS The San Joaquin Valley—California’s largest agricultural region and an important contributor to the nation’s food supply—is in a time of great change. Acronyms 5 The valley is ground zero for many of California’s most difficult water Chapter 1. Introduction 6 management problems—including groundwater overdraft, drinking water contamination, and declines in habitat and native species. Chapter 2. Balancing Water Supplies Local water supplies are limited, particularly in the southern half of the region. and Demands 14 To irrigate their crops, many farmers use water imported from the Sacramento– Chapter 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Yolo County, California
    Yolo County Operational Area Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Yolo County, California December 2012 Yolo County Operational Area Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 625 Court Street, Room 202, Woodland, CA 95695 December 2012 Final Page 1 Yolo County Operational Area Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This Page Intentionally Blank December 2012 Final Page 2 Yolo County Operational Area Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements Yolo County would like to thank those Yolo County Operational Area collaborators and partners who participated in the planning and development of this document. The official Yolo County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee provided the oversight and dedication to this project that was required and without their commitment; this project would not be possible. As with any working plan, this document represents planning strategies and guidance as understood as of the date of this plan’s release. This plan identifies natural hazards and risks and identifies the hazard mitigation strategy to reduce vulnerability and make the communities of Yolo County more disaster resistant and sustainable. December 2012 Final Page 3 Yolo County Operational Area Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Berryessa Region Sides Move, Opening a Sort of Parallelogram, Which, Among a Geology, Nature, and History Tour the Undiscovered Landscape Jr
    “Where a transform fault BERRYESSA SNOW MOUNTAIN develops any kind of bend — NATIONAL MONUMENT which is not uncommon — the bend will pull apart as the two Exploring the Berryessa Region sides move, opening a sort of parallelogram, which, among A Geology, Nature, and History Tour The Undiscovered Landscape Jr. Sawyer, O. John & Jr. Smith, P. James soft mountains, will soon be Exploring the Berryessa Region tells the story of a landscape, just west of Sacramento and north of San Francisco, born through plate vastly deeper than an ordinary tectonic forces. The Berryessa Region anchors the southern end of water-sculpted valley. Lake the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument and holds geologic wonders including subduction zones, thrust faults, ophio- Berryessa lies in a pull-apart lites, turbidites, mud volcanoes, and pull apart basins. These features nurture world-renowned biological diversity which, over basin, and so does Clear Lake." time, has fostered a rich history of human cultures—including ... Those two sentences are Native Americans. Today recreational opportunities draw new visitors with hiking, camping, birding, botanizing, horse riding, mine, legally, but they belong, boating, and managed off-highway vehicle use. Regional ecosystem services include water, forests, and ranchlands. in a much deeper sense, to Full of rich details, this book helps visitors explore this fascinating Eldridge Moores, who taught region by car and discover how regional diversity developed. Read- ers can use the mile by mile descriptions as a field guide
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Putah Creek Watershed Researcher: Jeff Borchers
    Case Study: Solano County Water Agency Watershed: Lower Putah Creek watershed Researcher: Jeff Borchers Year Grant Program Project Title Watershed Award Amount 2000-2001 CalFed Watershed Lower Putah Creek Lower Putah Creek, $600,000 Program Watershed Assessment and 18020162 Stewardship Implementation Program 2002-2003 CalFed Watershed Putah Creek - Yolo Housing Lower Putah Creek, $279,655 Program Authority Project 18020162 2003-2004 CalFed Watershed Community-Based Lower Putah Creek, $992,236 Program Restoration of Lower Putah 18020162 Creek Watershed 2007 CalFed Watershed Lower Putah Creek Winters Lower Putah Creek, $536,490 Program Area Riparian Restoration 18020162 Projects 2008 CalFed Watershed Lower Putah Creek Lower Putah Creek, $1,987,000 Program Watershed Plan Priority 18020162 Projects Overview This case study involved an assessment of five CalFed Watershed Program grants to Solano County Water Agency between 2000 and 2008. Findings of this research are based on interviews with stakeholders involved and a review of documents associated with the grants. Lower Putah Creek Watershed1 Located in west-central California, Putah Creek watershed encompasses 638 square miles and is a tributary of the Sacramento River. The creek originates in the Macaymas Mountains in Napa and Lake counties, and flows eastward 81 miles into Berryessa Reservoir behind Monticello Dam. Water released from the dam flows an additional 8 miles to a second dam, the Putah Diversion Dam (PDD), where most is diverted south to users in Solano County. The stream section below the PDD is the central focus of this case study, hereafter referred to as lower Putah Creek. This section of the creek flows 23 miles across Yolo and Solano Counties to the Yolo 1 This section draws from several sources: Rubin (1988); Smith, 1991; Kiernan, Moyle, & Crain, 2012; and Moyle, Marchetti, Baldrige, & Taylor, 1998).
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Berryessa Project
    MP Region Public Affairs, 916-978-5100, http://www.usbr.gov/mp, May 2017 Mid-Pacific Region, Lake Berryessa Project History Solano Project, including the Hydroelectric Plant, is owned by Reclamation and Lake Berryessa is a federal reservoir formed operated under a cooperative agreement by when the Bureau of Reclamation built the Solano County Water Agency/Solano Monticello Dam on Putah Creek in 1957. Irrigation District. The lake is managed by Reclamation’s Mid-Pacific Region, Central California Area Office. Nestled between Blue Ridge and Cedar Roughs, east of the Napa Valley, Lake Berryessa can store 1.6 million acre-feet of water and is one of the largest bodies of fresh water in California. The lake is 26 miles long and 3 miles wide with 165 miles of shoreline. Reclamation and Blue Ridge Berryessa Partnership co-manage a 2,000- acre wildlife area along the east side of the lake, the Lake Berryessa Wildlife Area. Monticello Dam on Putah Creek that forms Lake Solano Project Berryessa Lake Berryessa is part of Reclamation’s Solano Project, built during the 1950s and Recreation early 1960s, which distributes agricultural Just 70 miles northeast of San Francisco and water to farmland in Solano County and 40 miles west of Sacramento, Lake municipal and industrial water to the Berryessa’s central location offers county’s principle cities, including exceptional year-round recreation. The Vacaville, Vallejo and Fairfield. The lake’s water reaches temperatures of up to Project’s primary features include 75 degrees in the summer, making it an ideal Monticello Dam and Lake Berryessa, Putah place for water sports.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit 3.10-1 Utility Infrastructure and Potential Connections to the Project Site
    Ascent Environmental Utilities and Service Systems Source: Data provided by the City of Napa and NSD in 2013; adapted by Ascent Environmental in 2013 Exhibit 3.10-1 Utility Infrastructure and Potential Connections to the Project Site Napa County County Jail Project EIR 3.10-17 Ascent Environmental Utilities and Service Systems ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS Electricity and natural gas service to the site would be provided by PG&E. Major energy producing facilities within Napa county include Monticello Dam, American Canyon Powerplant, Napa State Hospital, Pacific Union College, Yountville Cogeneration facility, and the Soscol Water Recycling Facility. Napa County does not have any natural gas production (Napa County 2008). Table 3.10‐16 provides information related to electricity and natural gas use at the existing Napa County Jail from December 2002 through June 2012. Electrical and natural gas connections are currently available at the project site (Owens, pers. comm., 2013b). Table 3.10-16 Electricity and Natural Gas Use at the Existing Napa County Jail Cumulative Monthly Demand December 2002 through June 2012 Average Minimum Maximum Gas 5,970 therms 2,290 therms 12,389 therms Electric 186,890 kWh 5,860 kWh 395,700 kWh Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour Source: Cahill, pers. comm., 2013 SOLID WASTE The Napa Recycling and Waste Services (NRWS) and the Napa County Recycling and Waste Services (NCRWS) provide recycling, garbage, and yard waste collection services in the City and southern unincorporated Napa County. NRWS and NCRWS work together with the City, Napa County, and customers within their service area. (NRWS 2013). NRWS collects waste and transports it to the Devlin Road Transfer Station, located in American Canyon, which is owned and operated by the Napa‐Vallejo Waste Management Authority (NVWMA).
    [Show full text]