DOCSLIB.ORG

Solutions to Flooding on Pescadero Creek Road

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Solutions to Flooding on Pescadero Creek Road Hydrology | Hydraulics | Geomorphology | Design | Field Services Photo courtesy Half Moon Bay Review Solutions to Flooding on Pescadero Creek Road Prepared for: San Mateo County Resource Conservation District Prepared by: cbec, inc. eco engineering with assistance from Stillwater Sciences October 17, 2014 Project # 13-1032 SOLUTIONS TO FLOODING AT PESCADERO CREEK ROAD Prepared for San Mateo County Resource Conservation District Prepared by cbec, inc. With assistance from Stillwater Sciences 10/17/2014 cbec Project #: 13‐1032 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 5 2 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 PROJECT AREA ............................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CHRONIC FLOODING ................................................................................ 5 3 ASSESSMENT APPROACH ...................................................................................................................... 6 4 SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................. 8 4.1 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................. 8 4.1.1 SEDIMENT DELIVERY, TRANSPORT AND STORAGE ............................................................... 8 4.1.2 HYDRODYNAMIC MODEL RESULTS FOR THE CURRENT CONDITION .................................. 11 4.2 TRUST SPECIES ............................................................................................................................ 12 4.3 OTHER SPECIES ............................................................................................................................ 15 5 PERMITTING ........................................................................................................................................ 16 5.1 INFLUENCES ON PERMITTING LEVEL‐OF‐EFFORT ....................................................................... 16 5.2 SUMMARY OF PRIMARY PERMITS .............................................................................................. 19 5.2.1 CWA SECTION 404, SECTION 401, AND NEPA ..................................................................... 19 5.2.2 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ESA) ....................................................................................... 20 5.2.3 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 1602/SAA AND CEQA ................................. 21 5.2.4 CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME CODE SECTION 5050/FULLY PROTECTED SPECIES ............... 21 5.2.5 CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT .......................................... 22 5.2.6 CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (CESA) ................................................................. 23 6 PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A SOLUTION TO FLOODING OF PESCADERO ROAD ...................................................................................................................................... 23 6.1 DREDGE WITHIN COUNTY RIGHT‐OF‐WAY AT THE BRIDGE ........................................................ 24 6.2 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG HISTORICAL CHANNEL ........................................... 25 6.3 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG HISTORICAL CHANNEL AS PROPOSED BY SIGMA PRIME GEOSCIENCES .............................................................................................................................. 25 6.4 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG AN ALIGNMENT PARALLEL TO THE HISTORICAL CHANNEL ................................................................................................................................................. 26 6.5 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG AN ALIGMENT ALONG PESCADERO ROAD THROUGH BUTANO MARSH ................................................................................................................... 26 6.6 DREDGE ROW AND ~800 FT DOWNSTREAM ALONG AN ALIGNMENT PARALLEL TO PESCADERO ROAD .................................................................................................................................................... 27 6.7 EXCAVATION OF A DETENTION BASIN WITHIN BUTANO MARSH .............................................. 27 6.8 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT WITHIN THE CHANNEL ................................................................ 27 6.9 REDUCE SEDIMENT SUPPLIED FROM OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA ........................................... 28 C:\Work\Projects\13‐1032_Pescadero_Rd\Reporting\13‐1032_Pescadero_Rd_Flood_Solutions_Rpt_2014‐10‐17.docx 10/17/2014 i cbec, inc. 6.10 REDUCE SEDIMENT SUPPLIED FROM WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND RESTORE THE CREEK'S ABILITY TO STORE SEDIMENT ON FLOODPLAINS .................................................................................... 28 6.11 RAISE EASTERN ROADWAY ......................................................................................................... 30 6.12 CONSTRUCT ELEVATED CAUSEWAY ............................................................................................ 30 6.13 CREATE A BYPASS CHANNEL THROUGH THE FIRE STATION ....................................................... 31 6.14 OTHER POTENTIAL COMPONENTS .............................................................................................. 31 7 IN DEPTH DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL COMPONENTS OF A SOLUTION TO FLOODING AT PESCADERO ROAD ........................................................................................................................................................... 32 7.1 DREDGE WITHIN COUNTY ROW AT THE BRIDGE ........................................................................ 35 7.1.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 35 7.1.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIALCONSTRUCTION COSTS ................................ 36 7.1.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 37 7.1.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 37 7.2 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG HISTORICAL CHANNEL ........................................... 38 7.2.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 39 7.2.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIALCONSTRUCTION COSTS ................................ 40 7.2.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 40 7.2.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 41 7.3 DREDGE ROW AND DOWNSTREAM ALONG AN ALIGNMENT ALONG PESCADERO ROAD THROUGH BUTANO MARSH ................................................................................................................... 42 7.3.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 43 7.3.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIALCONSTRUCTION COSTS ................................ 44 7.3.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 44 7.3.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 45 7.4 DREDGE ROW AND 800 FT DOWNSTREAM ALONG AN ALIGNMENT PARALLEL TO THE ROAD . 45 7.4.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 46 7.4.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS ............................... 47 7.4.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 47 7.4.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 48 7.5 CONSTRUCT NEW CAUSEWAY .................................................................................................... 48 7.5.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 48 7.5.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIALCONSTRUCTION COSTS ................................ 49 7.5.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 49 7.5.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 49 7.6 REDUCE SEDIMENT SUPPLIED FROM WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AND RESTORE THE CREEK’S ABILITY TO STORE SEDIMENT ON FLOODPLAINS .................................................................................... 50 7.6.1 HYDRODYNAMIC AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL RESULTS ...................................... 51 7.6.2 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND POTENTIALCONSTRUCTION COSTS ................................ 53 C:\Work\Projects\13‐1032_Pescadero_Rd\Reporting\13‐1032_Pescadero_Rd_Flood_Solutions_Rpt_2014‐10‐17.docx 10/17/2014 ii cbec, inc. 7.6.3 TRUST SPECIES IMPLICATIONS ............................................................................................ 53 7.6.4 PERMITTING IMPLICATIONS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Local Agency Management Plan for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
    Local Agency Management Plan For Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health 1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300 San Jose, CA 95112 408-918-3400 www.EHinfo.org July 2014 Local Agency Management Plan for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Santa Clara County, California Submitted to: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health July 2014 Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction and Background ................................................................................ 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Geographical Area .................................................................................................................................... 1 Regulation of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems ............................................................................ 2 Santa Clara County OWTS Requirements ................................................................................................. 3 Organization of this LAMP ........................................................................................................................ 7 Section 2: Environmental Conditions, OWTS Usage and Water Quality Management in Santa Clara County .......................................................................................................................... 9 Surface
    [Show full text]
  • San Mateo County
    Steelhead/rainbow trout resources of San Mateo County San Pedro San Pedro Creek flows northwesterly, entering the Pacific Ocean at Pacifica State Beach. It drains a watershed about eight square miles in area. The upper portions of the drainage contain springs (feeding the south and middle forks) that produce perennial flow in the creek. Documents with information regarding steelhead in the San Pedro Creek watershed may refer to the North Fork San Pedro Creek and the Sanchez Fork. For purposes of this report, these tributaries are considered as part of the mainstem. A 1912 letter regarding San Mateo County streams indicates that San Pedro Creek was stocked. A fishway also is noted on the creek (Smith 1912). Titus et al. (in prep.) note DFG records of steelhead spawning in the creek in 1941. In 1968, DFG staff estimated that the San Pedro Creek steelhead run consisted of 100 individuals (Wood 1968). A 1973 stream survey report notes, “Spawning habitat is a limiting factor for steelhead” (DFG 1973a, p. 2). The report called the steelhead resources of San Pedro Creek “viable and important” but cited passage at culverts, summer water diversion, and urbanization effects on the stream channel and watershed hydrology as placing “the long-term survival of the steelhead resource in question”(DFG 1973a, p. 5). The lower portions of San Pedro Creek were surveyed during the spring and summer of 1989. Three O. mykiss year classes were observed during the study throughout the lower creek. Researchers noticed “a marked exodus from the lower creek during the late summer” of yearling and age 2+ individuals, many of which showed “typical smolt characteristics” (Sullivan 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Ohlone-Portola Heritage Trail Statement of Significance
    State of California Natural Resources Agency Primary# DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # Trinomial CONTINUATION SHEET Property Name: __California Historical Landmarks Associated with the Ohlone-Portolá Heritage Trail______ Page __1___ of __36__ B10. Statement of Significance (continued): The following Statement of Significance establishes the common historic context for California Historical Landmarks associated with the October-November 1769 expedition of Gaspar de Portolá through what is now San Mateo County, as part of a larger expedition through the southern San Francisco Bay region, encountering different Ohlone communities, known as the Ohlone-Portolá Heritage Trail. This context establishes the significance of these landmark sites as California Historical Landmarks for their association with an individual having a profound influence on the history of California, Gaspar de Portolá, and a group having a profound influence on the history of California, the Ohlone people, both associated with the Portolá Expedition Camp at Expedition. This context amends seven California Historical Landmarks, and creates two new California Historical Landmark nominations. The Statement of Significance applies to the following California Historical Landmarks, updating their names and historic contexts. Each meets the requirements of California PRC 5024.1(2) regarding review of state historical landmarks preceding #770, and the criteria necessary for listing as California Historical Landmarks. Because these landmarks indicate sites with no extant
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Steelhead Resources Evaluation Identifying Promising
    Southern Steelhead Resources Evaluation Identifying Promising Locations for Steelhead Restoration in Watersheds South of the Golden Gate Gordon S. Becker Katherine M. Smetak David A. Asbury This report should be cited as: Becker, G.S., K.M. Smetak, and D.A. Asbury. 2010. Southern Steelhead Resources Evaluation: Identifying Promising Locations for Steelhead Restoration in Watersheds South of the Golden Gate. Cartography by D.A. Asbury. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration. Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Approach and Methods ..................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 1. San Mateo County .......................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 2. Santa Cruz County .......................................................................................................... 35 Chapter 3. Montery County .............................................................................................................. 67 Chapter 4. San Luis Obispo County ............................................................................................... 97 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Butano State Park Preliminary General Plan and Draft EIR March 2008
    2 E XISTING C ONDITIONS Photo on reverse: View from Butano ridge Butano State Park Preliminary General Plan and Draft EIR March 2008 C HAPTER 2: E XISTING C ONDITIONS 2.1 REGIONAL LAND USE Land use patterns in the Santa Cruz Mountains as well as on the San Mateo and Santa Cruz county coasts have not changed dramatically in the recent past. The general character of land use surrounding Butano SP is a mix of natural lands, coastal terrace and valley agriculture, hillside grazing, timber production, and small residential properties. The community of Pescadero is located approximately 3.5 miles north of the park at the intersection of Cloverdale Road and Pescadero Road. Butano SP shares its southern border with Año Nuevo SP, with Año Nuevo State Natural Reserve (SNR) and Big Basin Redwoods SP in proximity. Pescadero State Beach (SB), Bean Hollow SB, and Pigeon Point Light Station State Historic Park (SHP) are to the northwest along the coast. Portola Redwoods SP, Pescadero Creek County Park, Michelson Ranch, and several other recreational and open space lands are located north of the park. Large undeveloped Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) properties are located adjacent to the park’s west side. Año Nuevo Point and the Santa Cruz Mountains, viewed from Private ownership around the park generally consists of Pigeon Point. relatively large or very small parcels of land. Large parcels of private forested lands, some in timber production, are located between Butano SP and Big Basin Redwoods SP to the east, and also on the park’s northern border.
    [Show full text]
  • The Occurrence and Distribution of Umbellularia Californica
    THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Hayward In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Geography By Steven D. Guiney October 1990 THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA By Steven D. Guiney Approved: Date: s ~ /?f't1 ~7f~~/W /2 /Vt1Y6H~~ /9?a ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ·· · · · ·· · · 1 II. AN OVERVIEW ·· · · · ·· · ·· · ·· · · 6 III. BIG BASIN PHYTO-PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY ···· 9 IV. HISTORICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · 44 V. ECOLOGICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · 47 VI. PHYSIOGRAPHIC PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · · · 52 VII. DISTURBANCE FACTORS · · · 54 VIII. CONCLUSIONS · · · · · ··· · · · · · 58 BIBLIOGRAPHY · · · ·· · ·· · ·· 61 iii '""-<-- LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure Page 1 Study Area .. · ·· · ··· . 4 2 Elevations . .. · ···· · 11 3 Climatograph Explanation · · · · · · 17 4 Santa Cruz Climatograph · · · 18 5 Henry Cowell Climatograph ·· · 19 6 Ben Lomond Climatograph ·· ·· · · 20 7 Big Basin Climatograph · · ·· · 21 8 Henry Cowell Transects · 24 9 Portola Transects · ·· 25 10 Big Basin Soils ···· . 26 11 Big Basin Vegetation · · ·· 28 Table 1 Individuals/Species. 34 2 Density 35 3 Coverage . 36 iv LIST OF PHOTOS Photo Page SITE 1 37 SITE 2 38 SITE 3 41 SITE 4 42 SITE 5 43 v INTRODUCTION The coastal redwood forest of Central California is composed principally of four kinds of trees: coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflora) and California bay (Umbellularia californica). All of these are found in Big Basin Redwoods State Park and adjacent areas in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • (Mrs.) A-1 850 Facey, John A-3 108 Fachter, Jaco
    264 Index to Rowland Cards. Transcribed by Joan Gilbert Martin & Stanley D. Stevens Containing references to Santa Cruz County, California, Events, People, Subjects F Fair Pavilion - Santa Cruz 1883 B-1 944; built 1882 on site of old Fabing, Etta (Mrs. A. A. Wood, Williams house, Soquel Ave. B-2 Woods) A-3 107; A-5 781.03 870; Masonic Hall of 1886 Fablenger (Fablinger) (Mrs.) A-1 850 adjoined Otis A. Longley’s old Facey, John A-3 108 bldg. B-2 880 Fachter, Jacob (Frachter) C-207 Fair Pavilion (Naval Reserve Armory) Factories - Soquel B-3 686-687 - burned in fire of Jan. 16, 1920 Faculty - Santa Cruz High School B- B-2 266.3 3 530 Fair, A. J. - Road District #3, 1852 Fagalde, John E. A-3 109 List of Land Owners B-2 6.1 Fagan, Benjamin Franklin A-3 110 Fair, James G. (Senator) B-3 20.09; Fagan, H. D. (Mrs.) A-3 29.01 owned land at corner of Water Fagan, William A-3 110 and Front/Pacific Av. B-2 891; Fagen, Alice Stafford (Mrs. Clarence South Pacific Coast Railroad B-3 E. Fagen) A-3 111 40.01, 45 Fagen, Clarence E. A-3 111, 113.02 Fair, Mertha (Martha?) (Mrs. Edward Fagen, H. - Baseball Players B-3 H. Rountree) A-5 246.03 739.02 Fair, Samuel (Gold mining, Santa Fagen, Herbert A-3 111 Cruz, 1863) C-249, 255, 258 Fagen, Herbert D. A-3 113.03 Fair, William D. - California Senator, Fagen, Madeline A-3 111 1850 B-2 429.1 Fagen, Marion M.
    [Show full text]
  • 38Th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference
    Salmonid Restoration Federation’s Mission Statement 38th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference Salmonid Restoration Federation was formed in 1986 to help stream March 31 – April 3, 2020 Santa Cruz, CA restoration practitioners advance the art and science of restoration. Salmonid Restoration Federation promotes restoration, stewardship, 2020 Vision for California’s Salmonscape and recovery of California native salmon, steelhead, and trout populations through education, collaboration, and advocacy. 38 th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference • 2020, Santa Cruz, CA Conference • 2020, Restoration Salmonid Annual SRF Goals & Objectives 1. To provide affordable technical education and best management practices trainings to the watershed restoration community. Conference Co-Sponsors Balance Hydrologics, Inc., Bear River Band of the Rohnerville Rancheria, 2. Conduct outreach to constituents, landowners, and decision-makers Cachuma Operation and Maintenance Board, California American Water, California Conservation Corps, to inform the public about the plight of endangered salmon and California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Department of Water Resources, the need to preserve and restore habitat to recover salmonid California State Coastal Conservancy, CalTrans, California Trout - North Coast, Cardno, cbec, inc., City of Santa Cruz-Water Branch, County of Santa Cruz, East Bay Municipal Utility District, populations. Environmental Science Associates, Eureka Water Probes, FISHBIO, GHD, Green Diamond Resource Company - CA Timberlands
    [Show full text]
  • Pescadero Creek Bridge Rails
    Pescadero Creek Bridge Rails SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CALTRANS DISTRICT 04 STATE ROUTE 1, POST MILE 14.0 EA: 04- 4J870 EFIS: 0416000029 Initial Study with Negative Declaration Prepared by the California Department of Transportation October 2020 General Information about this Document What’s in this document: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has prepared this Initial Study with Negative Declaration (IS/ND) to examine the potential environmental impacts of replacing the bridge railing on the Pescadero Creek Bridge on State Route 1 in San Mateo County, California (Project). Caltrans is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The document tells you why the Project is being proposed, how the existing environment could be affected by the Project, the potential impacts of each proposed activity, and the proposed avoidance and minimization measures. The IS/ND was circulated to the public for 30 days beginning on September 2, 2020 and ending on October 1, 2020. One comment was received during the public comment period and a response to this comment is included in Appendix F. Throughout this document, a vertical line in the margin indicates changes made since the IS/ND was circulated for public review. Minor editorial changes and clarifications have not been indicated. Alternative Formats: For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document can be made available in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk by writing to the above address or email or calling California Relay Service 1 (800) 735-2929 (TTY), 1 (800) 735-2929 (Voice), or 711. An ADA-compliant electronic copy of this document is available to download at: the Caltrans environmental document website (https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district- 4/d4-popular-links/d4-environmental-docs).
    [Show full text]
  • Pescadero Creek Park
    Pescadero Creek Park Master Plan Pescadero Creek Park Master Plan I Prepared for the County of San Mateo, California by Sasaki, Walker, Roberts, Inc. Sausalito, California July 1975 Contents Text Page Graphics Page I Prologue 4 Existing II Introduction San Mateo Co: Urban Fabric 5 Ill The Park General San Mateo Co.: Open Space 6 Purpose, Objectives & Methodology 8 The Region: Time Distance 7 A Look at Cultural Resources 10 Land Ownership 9 Portola Area Use 15 Visual Sensitivity 11 Pescadero Area Use Social-Historic Sensitivity 12 Memorial Area Use Orientation & Land Massing 13 Existing Utilities Summary Cultural Sensitivities 14 A Look at Natural Resources 16 Relief Map 20 Soils & Geology 18 Slope Sensitivity 21 Hydrology Soils and Gelogical Sensitivity 22 Vegetation Hydrology Sensitivity 23 Wildlife Vegetation Sensitivity 24 Composit Summary Wildlife Sensitivity 25 IV Land Use Concepts Summary-Natural Sensitivities 26 V The Recommended Park Plan Concept 27 VI The Park Plan Specific 31 Proposed Architectural Character 34 Conceptual Alternatives 28 Utilities 36 Conceptual Plan 29 VII Implementation 40 General Development Plan 30 Appendix A: Water Use Model 44 Portola Area Schematic 33 Bibliography 46 Memorial Area Schematic 35 Acknowledgements 48 SWR Team Composition I. Prologue reduction in travel to distant recreation areas, if fuel becomes scarce again. This reduction in mobility, coupled San Mateo County can be considered one of the most with shorter work weeks, greater vacation periods, and sophisticated counties in the United States in providing extended weekends will, undoubtedly, lead to an parks and open space for its citizens. Early in the 1960's, increased utilization of already heavily used local and the National Outdoor Recreation Resources Review regional parks.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents Revised Basin Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report--Appendices
    Draft Appendices PAJARO VALLEY WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY REVISED BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2000062030 October 2001 Prepared for Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency Draft Appendices PAJARO VALLEY WATER MANAGEMENT AGENCY REVISED BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2000062030 October 2001 Prepared for Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency 700 University Avenue, Suite 130 225 Bush Street, Suite 1700 2685 Ulmerton Road, Suite 102 Sacramento, California 95825 San Francisco, California 94104 Clearwater, Florida 33762 (916) 564-4500 (415) 896-5900 (727) 572-5226 1000 Broadway, Suite 410 4221 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 480 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4120 Oakland, California 94607 Los Angeles, California 90010 Seattle, Washington 98104 (510) 839-5066 (323) 933-6111 (206) 206-0900 200179 TABLE OF CONTENTS REVISED BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT--APPENDICES Page MAP APPENDIX A1-A4 Proposed Pipeline Alignment; Seismic Hazards in the Project Area B1-B4 Proposed Pipeline Alignment; Habitat Characterization in the Project Area APPENDICES A. Plant Species Observed in the Study Area A-1 B. Bird Species Observed During Breeding Surveys B-1 C. Fisheries Resources of the Lower Pajaro River and its Tributaries C-1 D. Determination of the Minimum Bypass Flow in Corralitos Creek for the Expanded College Lake Project D-1 E. Alternative Alignments to the Import Pipeline E-1 F. Technical Memorandum 2.2 – Hydrologic Analysis and Modeling F-1 MAP APPENDIX II 0+00 10+00 II 20+00 30+00 I 40+00 50+00 60+00 70+00 80+00 90+00 Sargent 100+00 II Fault FRAZIER Zone 110+00 II II 120+00 Mapped Fault Trace 130+00 Surface Fault Rupture II Hazard Zone LAKE 140+00 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 20 Year Trend Report
    20 YEAR REPORT for Report prepared by: Pam Krone (CMSF), Lisa Emanuelson (CMSF) and Bridget Hoover (MBNMS) MBNMS Snapshot Day organized by: Monterey Bay Sanctuary Citizen Watershed Monitoring Network Supporting citizen monitoring programs throughout the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. (831) 647 -4227 www.montereybay.noaa.gov Coastal Watershed Council A public education non-profit advocating the preservation and protection of coastal watersheds through the establishment of community-based stewardship programs. (831) 464 -9200 www.coastal- watershed.org Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Water Quality Protection Program Promoting clean water in the watersheds along nearly 300 miles of the Sanctuary’s coastline. (831) 647 -4217 www.montereybay.noaa.gov With assistance from: San Mateo County Resource Conservation District Helping people help the land since 1939. (650) 712-7765 www.sanmateorcd.org Watsonville Wetlands Watch Advocating for wetlands, teaching school students, restoring habitats and preserving what remains. (831) 728-1156 www.watsonvillewetlandwatch.org Upper Salinas-Las Tablas RCD Provide services and education to landowners supporting their management and stewardship of soil, water and natural resources. (805) 434-0396 www.us-ltrcd.org Executive Summary Snapshot Day began as a volunteer monitoring effort on April 22, 2000, the first official Earth Day, through a joint collaboration with the Coastal Watershed Council (CWC), The Ocean Conservancy and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). Snapshot Day was intended to provide a “snapshot” of the quality of water flowing into MBNMS while raising awareness about watershed health. Snapshot Day (SSD) has become an annual event that has created partnerships, drawn over 3,395 volunteers to date, and has helped foster an ethic of watershed stewardship for local citizens.
    [Show full text]