DOCSLIB.ORG

Flood Contingency Public Safety

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flood Contingency Public Safety PUBLIC SAFETY FLOOD CONTINGENCY N ' 121°39'W 121°38'30"W 121°38'W 121°37'30"W 121°37'W 121°36'30"W 121°36'W 121°35'30"W 121°35'W 121°34'30"W 121°34'W 121°33'30"W 121°33'W 2 N ' 121°39'W 121°38'30"W 121°38'W 121°37'30"W 121°37'W 121°36'30"W 121°36'W 121°35'30"W 121°35'W 121°34'30"W 121°34'W 121°33'30"W 121°33'W ° 2 8 ° N 3 ' 8 2 N 3 ' C ° 2 8 a C ° 3 n a 8 a Holland Tract n 3 l 1 a Holland Tract 8 l 1 0 8 + 0 R 0 RD 2025 + d Frank's Tract 0 R 0 RD 2025 d Frank's Tract 0 The symbology presented in the legend below is global to the The symbology presented in the legend below is global to the project area, some symbols may not be present on map project area, some symbols may not be present on map H5 d R d r R TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION r e H3 e QUIMBY ISLAND p N i " Gate p 0 Gate N i " 3 P ' 0 0 1 0 + 3 P ° 0 ' 16 N " 8 1 RD 2090 ° 0 3 N ROADS " 8 3 ' 0 ROADS 3 1 3 ° 2 ' 8 1 1 ° 0 3 2 1 8 BETHEL SL + QUIMBY ISLAND 3 I AND 0 0 0 BETHEL ISLAND + 0 H 0 Major Local Trail, 150+0 Major Local Trail, 0 0 Interstate Highway Trail MUNICIPAL ID 2 RD 2090 Interstate Highway Trail 150+0 Road Road Major 2 o Road Road Major 2 0 MUNICIPAL ID 2 + 0 0 l + H2 0 0 H h l 0 H Gate a way Rd g Ga o a ylo r u te way Rd PS T n o FFM ylo r l R l Ta l FLOOD CONTINGENCY OPTIONS d d S 2 LEVEE INFORMATION Rd a 4 A FFM C N ' d 0 A D D 1 + 0 N 0 ' n u ° n 30+ Flood Contingency Special Flood 0 1 1000-Foot Levee Stationing 1 8 00 ° + 0 t N 0 3 2 3 u ' 300+00 290+00 1 8 d 1 5 N 3 2 Option Consideration o ' 0 ° PS 5 1 8 Levee Centerline + 0 C ° d M 3 R 0 + H3 8 d 3 Effluent p d 2 0 R 0 u e 6 2 0 00 Tide Gate Agricultural Return Effluent p t Pipeline Wi n e n 0 120+ e 6 H 0 ds w a + Pipeline i e 0 20+0 0 Drain/Siphon W nd + 1 o w S 2 0 s 0 7 l 2 0 Dutch Slough 0 l A Levee Access Point Levee Crossing S 7 + a Dutch Slough t o 0 LEEE INFORMATION S 0 n ne + t o 2 0 0+00 d 0 n 8 11 2 0 00 e 0 8 110+ 1000-Foot Levee Stationing 3 + 0 Historic Levee Breach R 300+00 290+00 0 0 d 3 + 0 0 0 0 + 2 0 0 Levee Centerline 0 9 T + 2 N R d 0 0 r " 0 9 0 N 0 + a 0 " 3 0 0 ' + Agricultural Return 0 00 Levee Erosion 0 Tide Gate 0 1 c + 0 3 0 ° ' + 0 N 0 00 " 8 0 1 t ° 0 3 0 N Drain/Siphon " 8 3 ' 0 3 0 3 ° ' 8 0 ° A Levee Crossing 3 Levee Access Point 3 8 1 Levee Seepage 3 0+00 31 0 R 0+ H6 H7 H10 H11 90+0 00 0 d 90+0 C O N TRA 3 C O N TRA 20+ 3 00 C O S TA 80+00 20+ H2 RESPONSE INFORMATION 00 C O S TA 80+00 RESPONSE INFORMATION C O U NTY T (type) C O U NTY T (type) T Structure [A - Agricultural; R - Residential; S - Seasonal; U - Unknown] [A - Agricultural; R - Residential; S - Seasonal; U - Unknown] # 70+00 T# Structure # (count) - [Approx. Structure Count] N ' PS 0 # (count) - [Approx. Structure Count] N 0 ' ° 0 + 0 8 30 0 3 ° 0 HOTCHKISS N 3 + ' 8 330 Boat Landing Command Post 0 N 3 ' ° 0 8 ° S A N 3 Boat Landing TRACT RD 799 8 S A N 3 60+00 Command Post J O A Q UIN 60+00 DP Supply Delivery Point HOLLAND TRACT J O A Q UIN Secondary Supply Delivery Point HOLLAND TRACT C O U NTY DP RD 2025 r C O U NTY Field Stockpile Pump Station 50+00 RD 2025 r e HOTCHKISS 50+00 Field Stockpile e v Pump Station v Flood Fight Material i FFM Livestock TRACT RD 799 Agricultural A 40+ Livestock i 360+00 00 R 40 N H1 + " Flood Fight Material H1 00 R 0 FFM N " 3 ' Helispot 0 9 3 H ' 5 N A " ° 9 0 7 5 N " ° 3 3 C y pr e ss R d ' 0 d 7 9 3 3 3 d U C y pr e ss ' 0 5 R d d + ° l Supply Staging 3 9 0 d R 7 U 0 0 5 S Supply Staging + ° 3 0 l R S d 0 7 O 3 n O d a n l A a s l A I s I 380+00 380+00 C REFERENCE INFORMATION n C REFERENCE INFORMATION o o o n n c Fire Station School o n c t a r +00 t a Ferry Communication Facility 0 B a 39 r +00 a 390 B N ' 9 C N ' H9 5 C Home Care Ag. Worker Camp 9 ° o 5 N 7 ' ° o 3 s Potable Water Facility Waster Water Facility 9 N 7 ' 5 s 3 t 9 a ° t 5 +00 7 400 a ° C 3 Ferry 400+00 H8 H9 7 a 00 Dam C 3 n 0+ a 0 NG a n 0+0 Solid Waste Facility Natural Gas Facility l a l H4 Hazardous Material 10+00 0 4 0 0 0 0 Hazardous Material 0 0 0 + 0+0 0 U + 0 0 S 57 UG UG Underground Power Line + +0 0 0 U + 4 A 0 S A 57 9 0 4 4 UG UG 4 9 Underground Power Line 4 Transmission Line 4 560+00 H8 560+00 N R o c k Transmission Line UG UG " S l ough Underground Gas Line R o c k 0 S l N ough " 3 0 ' 0 + 0 8 0 0 3 0 5 ' 5 N +0 " ° 0 0 8 500 0 7 5 County Boundary N UG UG Underground Gas Line 0 0 " ° 0 0 3 3 ' 0 7 8 0 0 + + 3 3 ' 5 PS ° 8 0 0 + + 7 5 ° 3 4 3 0 PS 0 7 5 5 3 4 3 County Boundary 5 VEALE TRACT 5 RD 2065 VEALE TRACT 0 1,100 2,200 4,400 N Feet RD 2065 0 1,100 2,200 4,400 N Feet Delta Rd Delta Rd PALM-ORWOOD RD 2024 Map projection and scale: Delta Rd Delta Rd PALM-ORWOOD RD 2024 NAD 1983 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Feet, 1:28,600 Siphon 14":147+29 Map projection and scale: PUBLIC SAFETY INFORMATION FLOOD CONTINGENCY PLANNING INFORMATION NAD 1983 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Feet, 1:28,600 121°39'W 121°38'30"W 121°38'W 121°37'30"W 121°37'W 121°36'30"W 121°36'W 121°35'30"W 121°35'W 121°34'30"W 121°34'W 121°33'30"W 121°33'W 121°39'W 121°38'30"W 121°38'W 121°37'30"W 121°37'W 121°36'30"W 121°36'W 121°35'30"W 121°35'W 121°34'30"W 121°34'W 121°33'30"W 121°33'W D Holland Tract - 51 Holland Tract - 53 A.1. MONITORING S B.1. STAGING AREAS C.1. COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT A.1 SPECIAL FLOOD CONSIDERATIONS LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY C REPAIR CONTRACTORS & MATERIAL SUPPLIERS Critical gauges may be accessed on the internet at e following sites have been identied for use as staging areas for incoming resources. COUNTY OFFICES H1 - PUMP STATION 1 e general elevation ranges are shown by shading within the levee maintenance area below. General USGS Mobile Water Data areas of high ground and low ground can be derived from the mapping presented below. Large oods, m.waterdata.usgs.gov or water.weather.gov Located near station 19+00. Discharge pump may be used during a major flood event; however, additional pumps or a dam failure, could result in extreme ood depths. Flood depths may also be signicantly greater FLOOD FIGHT LABOR e QR codes presented at the right and below can be scanned FLOOD FIGHT STAGING CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SHERIFF'S CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION would be required to dewater the island. in depressions such as channels or road cuts or next to obstructions such as railroad embankments. Flood depths may also be signicantly less, depending on individual variations in terrain or where on a mobile device with any QR code scanning application to The staging area will be located at the south end of Center Road near station 472+00 OFFICE/DEPARTMENT DISTRICT Labor Ready Sacramento Labor Ready Concord Labor Ready Oakland 37°58’38.69887440’’N, 121°36’08.57300040’’W structures are raised above general ground elevation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Μ and Statewide Resources Office
    Woodland RD Name RD Number Atlas Tract 2126 5 !"#$ Bacon Island 2028 !"#$80 Bethel Island BIMID Bishop Tract 2042 16 ·|}þ Bixler Tract 2121 Lovdal Boggs Tract 0404 ·|}þ113 District Sacramento River at I Street Bridge Bouldin Island 0756 80 Gaging Station )*+,- Brack Tract 2033 Bradford Island 2059 ·|}þ160 Brannan-Andrus BALMD Lovdal 50 Byron Tract 0800 Sacramento Weir District ¤£ r Cache Haas Area 2098 Y o l o ive Canal Ranch 2086 R Mather Can-Can/Greenhead 2139 Sacramento ican mer Air Force Chadbourne 2034 A Base Coney Island 2117 Port of Dead Horse Island 2111 Sacramento ¤£50 Davis !"#$80 Denverton Slough 2134 West Sacramento Drexler Tract Drexler Dutch Slough 2137 West Egbert Tract 0536 Winters Sacramento Ehrheardt Club 0813 Putah Creek ·|}þ160 ·|}þ16 Empire Tract 2029 ·|}þ84 Fabian Tract 0773 Sacramento Fay Island 2113 ·|}þ128 South Fork Putah Creek Executive Airport Frost Lake 2129 haven s Lake Green d n Glanville 1002 a l r Florin e h Glide District 0765 t S a c r a m e n t o e N Glide EBMUD Grand Island 0003 District Pocket Freeport Grizzly West 2136 Lake Intake Hastings Tract 2060 l Holland Tract 2025 Berryessa e n Holt Station 2116 n Freeport 505 h Honker Bay 2130 %&'( a g strict Elk Grove u Lisbon Di Hotchkiss Tract 0799 h lo S C Jersey Island 0830 Babe l Dixon p s i Kasson District 2085 s h a King Island 2044 S p Libby Mcneil 0369 y r !"#$5 ·|}þ99 B e !"#$80 t Liberty Island 2093 o l a Lisbon District 0307 o Clarksburg Y W l a Little Egbert Tract 2084 S o l a n o n p a r C Little Holland Tract 2120 e in e a e M Little Mandeville
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2015 CCSDA Newsletter
    Contra Costa Special Districts Association Newsletter Contra Costa Chapter of the California Special Districts Association Fall 2015 October 2015 Ironhouse Sanitary District General Ironhouse new General Manager Manager Tom Williams Retires Chad Davisson, the new General Manager for Ironhouse You don’t have to look too hard to see the changes, Sanitary District (ISD), started on July 13, 2015. Chad innovations and conservation techniques that Tom comes to the District with over 25 years of wastewater Williams has helped bring to Ironhouse Sanitary District industry experience. (ISD) during his 15 years there, including the past 10 as He also has 10 years of general manager. It is those lasting contributions that executive level organization Williams leaves behind. management experience. He has a Bachelor of Arts Congratulations Degree in Public Administration Tom Williams for 15 from San Diego State University and is scheduled to receive his years’ service, ten MBA Degree from Saint Mary’s College in Moraga January years as Manager! 2016. He served as the General Manager of the Richmond First hired as the district’s engineer under the Municipal Sewer District, worked for the City of San leadership of then GM David Bauer, Williams dove in Mateo as the Environmental Services Division Manager, on existing projects around the old treatment plant. the Water Reclamation Systems Plant Manager for When Bauer retired, Williams easily made the transition Olivenhain Water District and the Industrial Waste to overseeing the day-to-day operations of the district. Control Representative for the County of San Diego. One of his first major projects was building a railroad He has also worked as a consultant for Crescent City, undercrossing to safely bring workers and the public the City of Ontario, the City of Montclair and the past what had been a non-signalized grade crossing Olivenhain Municipal Water District.
    [Show full text]
  • GRA 9 – South Delta
    2-900 .! 2-905 .! 2-950 .! 2-952 2-908 .! .! 2-910 .! 2-960 .! 2-915 .! 2-963 .! 2-964 2-965 .! .! 2-917 .! 2-970 2-920 ! .! . 2-922 .! 2-924 .! 2-974 .! San Joaquin County 2-980 2-929 .! .! 2-927 .! .! 2-925 2-932 2-940 Contra Costa .! .! County .! 2-930 2-935 .! Alameda 2-934 County ! . Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, 2013 Calif. Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Area Map Office of Spill Prevention and Response I Data Source: O SPR NAD_1983_C alifornia_Teale_Albers ACP2 - GRA9 Requestor: ACP Coordinator Author: J. Muskat Date Created: 5/2 Environmental Sensitive Sites Section 9849 – GRA 9 South Delta Table of Contents GRA 9 Map ............................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 2 Site Index/Response Action ...................................................................................................... 3 Summary of Response Resources for GRA 9......................................................................... 4 9849.1 Environmentally Sensitive Sites 2-900-A Old River Mouth at San Joaquin River....................................................... 1 2-905-A Franks Tract Complex................................................................................... 4 2-908-A Sand Mound Slough ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 22 AUG 2021 Index Acadia Rock 14967
    19 SEP 2021 Index 543 Au Sable Point 14863 �� � � � � 324, 331 Belle Isle 14976 � � � � � � � � � 493 Au Sable Point 14962, 14963 �� � � � 468 Belle Isle, MI 14853, 14848 � � � � � 290 Index Au Sable River 14863 � � � � � � � 331 Belle River 14850� � � � � � � � � 301 Automated Mutual Assistance Vessel Res- Belle River 14852, 14853� � � � � � 308 cue System (AMVER)� � � � � 13 Bellevue Island 14882 �� � � � � � � 346 Automatic Identification System (AIS) Aids Bellow Island 14913 � � � � � � � 363 A to Navigation � � � � � � � � 12 Belmont Harbor 14926, 14928 � � � 407 Au Train Bay 14963 � � � � � � � � 469 Benson Landing 14784 � � � � � � 500 Acadia Rock 14967, 14968 � � � � � 491 Au Train Island 14963 � � � � � � � 469 Benton Harbor, MI 14930 � � � � � 381 Adams Point 14864, 14880 �� � � � � 336 Au Train Point 14969 � � � � � � � 469 Bete Grise Bay 14964 � � � � � � � 475 Agate Bay 14966 �� � � � � � � � � 488 Avon Point 14826� � � � � � � � � 259 Betsie Lake 14907 � � � � � � � � 368 Agate Harbor 14964� � � � � � � � 476 Betsie River 14907 � � � � � � � � 368 Agriculture, Department of� � � � 24, 536 B Biddle Point 14881 �� � � � � � � � 344 Ahnapee River 14910 � � � � � � � 423 Biddle Point 14911 �� � � � � � � � 444 Aids to navigation � � � � � � � � � 10 Big Bay 14932 �� � � � � � � � � � 379 Baby Point 14852� � � � � � � � � 306 Air Almanac � � � � � � � � � � � 533 Big Bay 14963, 14964 �� � � � � � � 471 Bad River 14863, 14867 � � � � � � 327 Alabaster, MI 14863 � � � � � � � � 330 Big Bay 14967 �� � � � � � � � � � 490 Baileys
    [Show full text]
  • RD799 Five Year Plan
    Reclamation District 799 Five Year Capital Improvement Plan May 2012 Prepared by 2365 Iron Point Road, Suite 300 Folsom, CA 95630 This page intentionally left blank. RD 799 Five Year Plan Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Brief History of Hotchkiss Tract .......................................................................................... 3 2.1 Location .............................................................................................................................................. 3 2.2 Geomorphic Evolution ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Historical Flood Events ....................................................................................................................... 6 2.3.1 Existing level of protection ........................................................................................................... 6 3.0 Identification of Need for Improvements to Alleviate or Minimize Existing Hazards ........................................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Local Assets ....................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Non-local Assets and Public Benefit ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transitions for the Delta Economy
    Transitions for the Delta Economy January 2012 Josué Medellín-Azuara, Ellen Hanak, Richard Howitt, and Jay Lund with research support from Molly Ferrell, Katherine Kramer, Michelle Lent, Davin Reed, and Elizabeth Stryjewski Supported with funding from the Watershed Sciences Center, University of California, Davis Summary The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta consists of some 737,000 acres of low-lying lands and channels at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers (Figure S1). This region lies at the very heart of California’s water policy debates, transporting vast flows of water from northern and eastern California to farming and population centers in the western and southern parts of the state. This critical water supply system is threatened by the likelihood that a large earthquake or other natural disaster could inflict catastrophic damage on its fragile levees, sending salt water toward the pumps at its southern edge. In another area of concern, water exports are currently under restriction while regulators and the courts seek to improve conditions for imperiled native fish. Leading policy proposals to address these issues include improvements in land and water management to benefit native species, and the development of a “dual conveyance” system for water exports, in which a new seismically resistant canal or tunnel would convey a portion of water supplies under or around the Delta instead of through the Delta’s channels. This focus on the Delta has caused considerable concern within the Delta itself, where residents and local governments have worried that changes in water supply and environmental management could harm the region’s economy and residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    comparing futures for the sacramento–san joaquin delta jay lund | ellen hanak | william fleenor william bennett | richard howitt jeffrey mount | peter moyle 2008 Public Policy Institute of California Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation ISBN: 978-1-58213-130-6 Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. Summary “Once a landscape has been established, its origins are repressed from memory. It takes on the appearance of an ‘object’ which has been there, outside us, from the start.” Karatani Kojin (1993), Origins of Japanese Literature The Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta is the hub of California’s water supply system and the home of numerous native fish species, five of which already are listed as threatened or endangered. The recent rapid decline of populations of many of these fish species has been followed by court rulings restricting water exports from the Delta, focusing public and political attention on one of California’s most important and iconic water controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Implications for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Economics of a Changing Agricultural Mosaic in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/99z2z7hb Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 15(3) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Deverel, Steven Jacobs, Paul Lucero, Christina et al. Publication Date 2017 DOI 10.15447/sfews.2017v15iss3art2 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California SEPTEMBER 2017 RESEARCH Implications for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Economics of a Changing Agricultural Mosaic in the Sacramento – San Joaquin Delta Steven Deverel1, Paul Jacobs2, Christina Lucero1, Sabina Dore1, and T. Rodd Kelsey3 profit changes relative to the status quo. We spatially Volume 15, Issue 3 | Article 2 https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2017v15iss3art2 assigned areas for rice and wetlands, and then allowed the Delta Agricultural Production (DAP) * Corresponding author: [email protected] model to optimize the allocation of other crops to 1 HydroFocus, Inc. maximize profit. The scenario that included wetlands 2827 Spafford Street, Davis, CA 95618 USA decreased profits 79% relative to the status quo but 2 University of California, Davis -1 One Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 USA reduced GHG emissions by 43,000 t CO2-e yr (57% 3 The Nature Conservancy reduction). When mixtures of rice and wetlands were 555 Capitol Mall Suite 1290, Sacramento, CA 95814 USA introduced, farm profits decreased 16%, and the GHG -1 emission reduction was 33,000 t CO2-e yr (44% reduction).
    [Show full text]
  • Section 11 – Reclamation Districts
    Section 11 Reclamation Districts Contra Costa LAFCO August 2019 Directory of Local Agencies Section 11 – Reclamation Districts This page left intentionally blank Contra Costa LAFCO August 2019 Directory of Local Agencies Section 11 – Reclamation Districts Reclamation District RECLAMATION DISTRICT 799 (Hotchkiss Tract) (Special Act of California Legislature, Statutes 1911:342, California Water Code §50300 et seq.) Location of office 6325 Bethel Island Rd. Bethel Island, CA 94511 Mailing address PO Box 353 Bethel Island, CA 94511 Telephone numbers (925) 684-2398 FAX number (925) 684-2399 Web page www.rd799.com E-mail address [email protected] BOARD OF DIRECTORS Five members elected for four-year terms Meetings: Last Thursday of each month; 6:00 PM District Board Members Began serving Expiration of term Walter Pierce 10/2016 11/2021 Jim Price 11/2014 11/2021 Arthur Hanson 11/2013 11/2021 Richard Kent 3/2014 11/2019 Karla Fratus 1/2015 11/2019 STAFF Mike Alvarez District Manager Dina Holder District Secretary Barbara Brenner (Churchwell White) Legal Counsel INFORMATION Year Formed: 1911 Area Served: Oakley Population Served: 2,000 per CCC Dept. of Conservation & Development Size: Approximately 3,100 acres Services provided Maintenance and operation of levees and related drainage facilities Contra Costa LAFCO Directory of Local Agencies August 2019 Page 11-1 Contra Costa LAFCO Directory of Local Agencies August 2019 Page 11-2 Reclamation District RECLAMATION DISTRICT 800 (Byron Tract) (California Water Code §50300 et seq.) Location of
    [Show full text]
  • Structured Decision Making for Delta Smelt Demo Project
    Structured Decision Making for Delta Smelt Demo Project Prepared for CSAMP/CAMT Project funded by State and Federal Water Contractors Prepared by Graham Long and Sally Rudd Compass Resource Management Ltd. 604.641.2875 Suite 210- 111 Water Street Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6B 1A7 www.compassrm.com Date May 4, 2018 April 13th – reviewed by TWG and comments incorporated Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... i Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... iii Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 Approach .......................................................................................................................... 1 Problem Definition ........................................................................................................... 4 Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 5 Alternatives ...................................................................................................................... 9 Evaluation of Trade-offs ................................................................................................. 17 Discussion and Recommendations ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Century of Delta Salt Water Barriers
    A Century of Salt Water Barriers in the Delta By Tim Stroshane Policy Analyst Restore the Delta June 5, 2015 edition Since the late 19th century, California’s basic plan for water resource development has been to export water from the Sacramento River and the Delta to the San Joaquin Valley and southern California. Unfortunately, this basic plan ignores the reality that the Delta is the very definition of an estuary: it is where fresh water from the Central Valley’s rivers meets salt water from tidal flow to the Delta from San Francisco Bay. Productive ecosystems have thrived in the Delta for millenia prior to California statehood. But for nearly a century now, engineers and others have frequently referred to the Delta as posing a “salt menace,” a “salinity problem” with just two solutions: either maintain a predetermined stream flow from the Delta to Suisun Bay to hydraulically wall out the tide, or use physical barriers to separate saline from fresh water into the Delta. While readily admitting that the “salt menace” results from reduced inflows from the Delta’s major tributary rivers, the state of California uses salt water barriers as a technological fix to address the symptoms of the salinity problem, rather than the root causes. Given complex Delta geography, these two main solutions led to many proposals to dam up parts of San Francisco Bay, Carquinez Strait, or the waterway between Chipps Island in eastern Suisun Bay and the City of Antioch, or to use large amounts of water—referred to as “carriage water”— to hold the tide literally at bay.
    [Show full text]