DOCSLIB.ORG

Cosumnes River Bridge Replacement Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cosumnes River Bridge Replacement Project Cosumnes River Bridge Replacement Project Sacramento County 03-Sac-99-PM: 7.1/9.4 EA: 0F280 EFIS: 0312000069 Initial Study with Negative Declaration/Section 4(f) De Minimis Determination Prepared by the State of California, Department of Transportation May 2019 General Information about This Document The California Department of Transportation (Department), as assigned by the Federal Highway administration (FHWA), has prepared this Initial Study with Negative Declaration for the proposed project located in Sacramento County, CA. The Department is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The document tells you why the project is being proposed, what alternatives have been considered for the project, how the existing environment could be affected by the project, the potential impacts of each of the alternatives, and the proposed avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. The Initial Study circulated to the public for 30 days between March 18, 2019 and April 16, 2019. Comments received during this period are included in Chapter 5. Elsewhere throughout this document, a vertical line in the margin indicates a change made since the draft document circulation. Minor editorial changes and clarifications have not been so indicated. Additional copies of this document and the related technical studies are available for review at the Caltrans District 3 office at 703 B Street, Marysville, CA 95901. This document may be downloaded at the following website http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/envinternet/envdoc.htm. Alternative Formats: The Final Environmental Document can be made available for individuals with sensory disabilities, in Braille, in large print, on audiocassette, or on computer disk. To obtain a copy in one of these alternate formats, please call or write to Caltrans, District 3, Attn: Deanna Shoopman, 703 B Street, Marysville, CA 95901, 530-741-4572, or use the California Relay Service TTY number, 1-800-735-2929. Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... i Table of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. ii Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................................. ii Chapter 1. Proposed Project ............................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................................... 17 Chapter 3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Evaluation ............................................... 18 Chapter 4. Affected Environment, Environmental Impacts, and Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................................... 35 4.1. Human Environment ................................................................................................................... 35 4.1.1. LAND USE ............................................................................................................................ 35 4.2. Physical Environment .................................................................................................................. 38 4.2.1. Hydrology and Floodplain ................................................................................................... 38 4.3. Biological Environment ............................................................................................................... 41 4.3.1. Natural Communities .......................................................................................................... 41 4.3.2. Wetlands and Other Waters ............................................................................................... 43 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................................................... 43 4.3.3. Plant Species ....................................................................................................................... 48 4.3.4. Animal Species .................................................................................................................... 48 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................................................... 48 4.3.5. Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................. 51 4.4. Construction Impacts .................................................................................................................. 84 4.4.1. Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 84 4.4.2. Noise ................................................................................................................................... 85 4.5. Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 85 Chapter 5. Comments and Coordination .......................................................................................... 98 Chapter 6. List of Preparers ............................................................................................................ 163 Appendix A – Section 4(f) Study ................................................................................................................ 164 Appendix B – ESL Mapping........................................................................................................................ 165 Appendix C – USFWS Biological Opinion ................................................................................................... 166 Appendix D – NMFS Letter of Concurrence .............................................................................................. 167 Appendix E – Eschinger Road Southbound On/Off Ramp Layout ............................................................. 168 Cosumnes River Bridge Replacement Project i Table of Tables Table 1. TASAS Collision Summary Three Year Collision History (2013-2015) ............................................. 2 Table 2. Generalized Life History Timing for fall-run Chinook Salmon (Yoshiyama et al. 1998) ............... 54 Table 3: Personnel and Survey Dates .......................................................................................................... 58 Table 4: Heavy Machinery Reported Decibel Value.................................................................................... 60 Table 5. Proposed Habitat Level Compensation VELB ............................................................................... 73 Table 6. Temporary In-water Impacts to Steelhead .................................................................................. 77 Table 7. Permanent Impacts to EFH ........................................................................................................... 81 Table 8. Temporary EFH Impacts ............................................................................................................... 82 Table 9. Temporary Impacts to Shaded Riverine Area............................................................................... 83 Table 10. Construction Emissions ............................................................................................................. 92 Table of Figures Figure 1. Project Location Map – Cosumnes River Bridge Replacement Project ........................................ 7 Figure 2. Environmental Study Limit (ESL) Mapping .................................................................................... 8 Figure 3. Potential Activity and Infill Areas In Elk Grove ............................................................................ 37 Figure 4. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)............................................................................................... 39 Figure 5. Permanent and Temporary Impacts to Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. and State ................. 46 Figure 6: CNDDB known occurrences in project area for Range of SWHA in the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan Area. .............................................................................................................................. 56 Figure 7 Range of SWHA in the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan Area ................................. 57 Figure 8. Vernal Pool Locations and Acreage ............................................................................................. 65 Figure 9. Elderberry Group Mapping Within the Biological Study Area (BSA)........................................... 68 Figure 10. Elderberry Groups 1 through 3 ................................................................................................. 70 Figure 11. Elderberry Groups 4 through 8 ................................................................................................. 71 Figure 12. 2020 Business as Usual (BAU) Emissions Projection 2014 Edition............................................ 91 Figure 13. The Governor’s Climate change pillars: 2030 Greenhouse
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Geography and Dialects of the Miwok Indians
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS IN AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY VOL. 6 NO. 2 THE GEOGRAPHY AND DIALECTS OF THE MIWOK INDIANS. BY S. A. BARRETT. CONTENTS. PAGE Introduction.--...--.................-----------------------------------333 Territorial Boundaries ------------------.....--------------------------------344 Dialects ...................................... ..-352 Dialectic Relations ..........-..................................356 Lexical ...6.................. 356 Phonetic ...........3.....5....8......................... 358 Alphabet ...................................--.------------------------------------------------------359 Vocabularies ........3......6....................2..................... 362 Footnotes to Vocabularies .3.6...........................8..................... 368 INTRODUCTION. Of the many linguistic families in California most are con- fined to single areas, but the large Moquelumnan or Miwok family is one of the few exceptions, in that the people speaking its various dialects occupy three distinct areas. These three areas, while actually quite near together, are at considerable distances from one another as compared with the areas occupied by any of the other linguistic families that are separated. The northern of the three Miwok areas, which may for con- venience be called the Northern Coast or Lake area, is situated in the southern extremity of Lake county and just touches, at its northern boundary, the southernmost end of Clear lake. This 334 University of California Publications in Am. Arch.
    [Show full text]
  • Riparian and Floodplain Restoration at the Cosumnes River Preserve
    Restoring Floods to Floodplains: Riparian and Floodplain Restoration at the Cosumnes River Preserve RAMONA O. SWENSON, KEITH WHITENER, AND MIKE EATON The Nature Conservancy, Cosumnes River Preserve, Galt, CA 95616 ABSTRACT. Riparian and floodplain ecosystems are shaped and sustained by the river’s hydrologic processes, such as flooding. The Cosumnes River Preserve is a multi-partner effort to protect and restore natural habitats within the floodplain of the Cosumnes River. This landscape-scale project protects over 40,000 acres of riparian forest, wetlands, and vernal pool grasslands. Early restoration efforts relied on active measures, such as hand planting of oaks and willows. This method, however, was expensive and labor intensive, and sometimes plantings failed. In the last several years we have focused on restoring natural processes that sustain and create habitat, such as flooding. Natural process restoration is now an integral part of the restoration program and central to our planning for property acquisition. Intentional levee breaches have restored the hydrologic connection between the lower Cosumnes River and its floodplain. Floods passing through levee breaches created in 1995 and 1997 have deposited sediment, seeds and plant cuttings on former farm fields, and stimulated natural recruitment of cottonwood and willow riparian forests. This method also provided valuable habitat for chinook salmon and Sacramento splittail. Creating seasonally flooded habitat rather than permanent ponds benefits native fishes more than non-native fishes. Monitoring by the Cosumnes Research Group and others is providing feedback for adaptive management. INTRODUCTION California’s riparian and floodplain ecosystems Valley and, as such, it retains much of its natural have been greatly modified and impaired.
    [Show full text]
  • CRP Driving Tour 2021 Final
    CCoossuummnneess RRiivveerr PPrreesseerrvvee Self-Guided Driving Tour Safety First This tour is designed to guide you through the public roads that wind throughout the entire scope of Cosumnes River Preserve. These are public roads, please pay You'll start at the Preserve's Visitor Center and finish just east of attention to other traffic and pull off to the shoulder when needed. Highway 99. Stay on the road or shoulder. Do not We suggest you bring along a co-pilot, pair of binoculars, and full walk/drive on levees or trespass onto tank of gas! Depending on frequency of stops, this tour will take private property. approximately 1-2 hours. Buckle up! Start at the Visitor Center 01 The Visitor Center is the heart of public access at the Preserve. From the Visitor Center you can access the trail head to our trails, boat launch, and the beginning of this guided tour! Cosumnes River Preserve is one of California's largest remaining examples of native Central Valley habitats and wildlife. It is characterized by a mosaic of grassland, natural and managed wetlands, riparian forests, and valley oak woodlands. Due primarily to development and urbanization, less than 2% of what existed in the mid-1800's exists today. 13501 Franklin Blvd. Galt, CA Cosumnes River A Place On the Pacific Flyway The Cosumnes River is the last free-flowing river west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. This means that there are no major dams or levees preventing The Preserve's location is along the the river from flowing and flooding freely.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Moisture Availability As a Factor Affecting Valley Oak (Quercus
    Soil Moisture Availability as a Factor Affecting Valley Oak (Quercus lobata Neé) Seedling Establishment and Survival in a Riparian Habitat, Cosumnes River Preserve, 1 Sacramento County, California Virginia C. Meyer2 Abstract The lack of valley oak (Quercus lobata Neé) regeneration throughout much of its historical range appears to be related to both habitat destruction and soil moisture availability. The water relations, growth and survival of greenhouse potted seedlings, field-planted and natural seedlings were monitored through the growing season, 1989. The age structure of the valley oak population of a riparian forest at the Cosumnes River Preserve was determined. The history of fluvial events of the Cosumnes River was ascertained to determine whether such fluvial events are associated with past seedling establishment within the forest. Natural and non-irrigated field-planted seedlings exhibited considerable water stress, little stem growth and leaf loss, while greenhouse potted and irrigated field-planted seedlings displayed limited water stress. Irrigated field-planted seedlings grew vigorously. Past seedling establishment within the forest showed a positive relationship with historical fluvial events. These studies suggest that soil moisture availability is fundamentally important for successful establishment of valley oak seedlings. Significant recruitment of valley oak seedlings may be limited to years in which plentiful soil moisture is available into the growing season, i.e. with the natural flooding of unconfined riparian systems. Introduction The California endemic valley oak (Quercus lobata Neé) is found as a dominant species in riparian forests. Valley oak forests, woodlands and savanna are found on higher portions of the floodplain above riparian forests dominated by Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) (Holstein 1984).
    [Show full text]
  • Word Search and Fact Sheet
    Cosumnes River Preserve Can you find these important words related to the Preserve? W E H R N P T O S R M E J D S A Z V E A R H L J O U B M R N T M P R E P A S K E P T E I L E I I E E M T E I M O W X B L R Q S G M S L O Q F O R Y G S S F E A R U E F R L S I X N Y H E M Z M A V R F I A V T O V E W C N X R T D P P H E J S F D J E C P S L O O P F R T V S F B K O W I M L R W C Q L W J K N U M W T S N P Y Q Q G B P S E N M U S O C Y F V I T Y G J U L C C W A T E R F O W L J W S U G R A S S E S U H T G B T S K S T D G A P T D G K B E COSUMNES FISH WILDFLOWERS GRASSES MAMMALS MIGRATORY MIWOK MOKELUMNE PRESERVE RAPTOR RIVER SONGBIRD TREES WATERFOWL WATERSHED ©Cosumnes River Preserve, 2020 Learn More! Cosumnes River Preserve The Cosumnes River Preserve is over 50,000 acres of protected land centered around the Cosumnes River! It is owned and managed by 10 different partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Amendments to the 1994 Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins The Third Edition of the Basin Plan was adopted by the Central Valley Water Board on 9 December 1994, approved by the State Water Board on 16 February 1995 and approved by the Office of Administrative Law on 9 May 1995. The Fourth Edition of the Basin Plan was the 1998 reprint of the Third Edition incorporating amendments adopted and approved between 1994 and 1998. The Basin Plan is in a loose-leaf format to facilitate the addition of amendments. The Basin Plan can be kept up-to-date by inserting the pages that have been revised to include subsequent amendments. The date subsequent amendments are adopted by the Central Valley Water Board will appear at the bottom of the page. Otherwise, all pages will be dated 1 September 1998. Basin plan amendments adopted by the Regional Central Valley Water Board must be approved by the State Water Board and the Office of Administrative Law. If the amendment involves adopting or revising a standard which relates to surface waters it must also be approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) [40 CFR Section 131(c)].
    [Show full text]
  • Cosumnes Subbasin SGMA Working Group Meeting Meeting #29 Meeting Held May 13, 2019 Prepared by the Consensus Building Institute and the Water Forum
    Cosumnes Subbasin SGMA Working Group Cosumnes Subbasin SGMA Working Group Meeting Meeting #29 Meeting held May 13, 2019 Prepared by the Consensus Building Institute and the Water Forum MEETING-IN-BREIF At the Cosumnes Subbasin Working Group’s twenty-ninth meeting, the EKI technical consulting team presented its preliminary Phase I data gaps assessment. Groundwater Sustainability Agencies will receive Technical Memo #2: Phase I Data Gaps Assessment from EKI at the end of May. The Working Group also discussed Proposition 68 grant funding, which a small group of GSA representatives will discuss further via teleconference in early June. EKI provided an update on cross-basin coordination, reporting that Eastern San Joaquin subbasin released Bundle 1 of its draft groundwater sustainability plan. The Cosumnes Working Group will jointly submit comments on Bundle 1, to be compiled by EKI and submitted by Sacramento County. The next Working Group meeting will take place on Wednesday, June 19, 2019. At its June meeting, the Working Group will confirm EKI’s data gaps assessment and plan to fill priority data gaps. ACTION ITEMS Who What Amador County Seek data from CASGEM well and new well in Jackson Creek OHWD Provide EKI with login for real-time well data Mike Wackman Reach out to Laura Foglia and Trevor Kennedy regarding well data Kerry Schmitz Reach out to Environmental Management regarding data OHWD and Water Continue discussion of Technical Support Services (TSS) proposal Forum Clay, Galt ID, SRCD Consider whether there is a TSS grant opportunity
    [Show full text]
  • San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Consumnes Subbasin
    San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region California’s Groundwater San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Bulletin 118 San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Cosumnes Subbasin • Groundwater Basin Number: 5-22.16 • County: Sacramento, San Joaquin • Surface Area: 281,000 acres (439 square miles) Basin Boundaries and Hydrology The San Joaquin Valley comprises the southern portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California. The Great Valley is a broad structural trough bounded by the tilted block of the Sierra Nevada on the east and the complexly folded and faulted Coast Ranges on the west. The Cosumnes Subbasin is defined by the areal extent of unconsolidated to semiconsolidated sedimentary deposits that are bounded on the north and west by the Cosumnes River, on the south by the Mokelumne River, and on the east by consolidated bedrock of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The Cosumnes Subbasin is bounded on the south and southwest by the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and on the north to northwest by the South American Subbasin of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin. The subbasin drains westward through three major rivers namely, the Cosumnes on the north, Dry Creek in the middle of the basin, and the Mokelumne River on the south. A large surface water body, the Camanche Reservoir, is located along a portion of the Mokelumne River in the southeast part of the subbasin. Annual precipitation within the subbasin ranges from approximately 15 inches on the west to about 22 inches on the east. Hydrogeologic Information Water Bearing Formations The Cosumnes subbasin aquifer system is comprised of continental deposits of Late Tertiary to Quaternary age.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Status of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha) from Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho Under the U.S
    Review of the Status of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho under the U.S. Endangered Species Act Prepared by the West Coast Chinook Salmon Biological Review Team 17 Dec 1997 The Biological Review Team (BRT) for chinook salmon included, from NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center: Peggy Busby, Dr. Stewart Grant, Dr. Robert Iwamoto, Dr. Robert Kope, Dr. Conrad Mahnken, Gene Matthews, Dr. James Myers, Philip Roni, Dr. Michael Schiewe, David Teel, Dr. Thomas Wainwright, F. William Waknitz, Dr. Robin Waples, and Dr. John Williams; NMFS Southwest Region: Gregory Bryant and Craig Wingert; NMFS Southwest Region (Tiburon Laboratory): Dr. Steve Lindley, and Dr. Peter Adams; NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center (Auke Bay Laboratory): Alex Wertheimer; and from the USGS National Biological Service: Dr. Reginald Reisenbichler. iii CONTENTS List of Figures ................................................................... ix List of Tables .................................................................. xiii Executive Summary ............................................................... xv Acknowledgments .............................................................. xxvii Introduction ...................................................................... 1 The "Species" Question ....................................................... 3 Background of Chinook Salmon under the ESA ..................................... 4 Summary of Information Presented by the Petitioners ................................
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 HYDROLOGY and WATER QUALITY Sacramento River
    4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section of the DEIR identifies the hydrological resources, the existing drainage conditions, and the surface and groundwater quality in the General Plan Planning Area. This section also evaluates the potential impacts with respect to flooding, drainage, erosion, water quality, and water supply, and identifies appropriate mitigation measures to lessen the identified impacts. 4.9.1 EXISTING SETTING REGIONAL HYDROLOGY Surface watersheds are those land areas that catch rain or snow and drain to specific marshes, streams, rivers, lakes, or the groundwater table. There are several watersheds in Sacramento County, including: the Lower Sacramento, the Lower American, the North Fork of the American, the Upper Butte, the Upper Yuba, the South Fork of the American, and the Upper Cosumnes. The largest watershed in the County is the Lower Sacramento Watershed, which covers approximately 27,000 square miles and drains the Sacramento Valley, the Modoc Plateau, and parts of the Cascade Range and Sierra Nevada Range. The Lower Sacramento Watershed is one of the largest watersheds in the United States and covers most of northern California. The main tributaries in the Lower Sacramento Watershed are the Feather, Yuba, Pit, and American Rivers. The Lower American, North Fork American, South Fork American, and Upper Cosumnes watersheds are adjacent to the Lower Sacramento Watershed. In addition to the natural hydrologic processes of rainfall runoff, snowmelt, and base flow from groundwater, the flows in the Sacramento River are greatly affected by reservoir releases, water diversions, irrigation return flows, and diversions through bypasses. Both the Sutter and Yolo bypasses have the capacity to carry larger volumes of water than the Sacramento River channel, and are used to prevent flooding during wetter years and higher flows.
    [Show full text]
  • Floods in Northern California, January 1997
    science for a changing world &2CV FLOODS IN NORTHERN fl' CALIFORNIA, JANUARY 1997 Photo by John Trotter, Jan.4, 1997/Sacramento Bee Photo: The community of Olivehurst was inundated with water after a levee failed on the Feather River INTRODUCTION Flooding in California in recent years has been increased evaporation from the warmer surface water. attributed mostly to climate conditions referred to as the The result is an increase in the number and intensity of "El Nino" effect. However, floods in California also have storms. La Nina, characterized by colder than average been associated with other climate conditions (table 1). ocean temperatures, does not entirely prevent storms of The flood of January 1997 occurred during a weak "La sufficient precipitation to cause flooding in California. Nina" or near-normal (average) climate condition (U.S. Precipitation in the Sierra Nevada mountain range Department of Commerce, 1997). These climate produced an above-normal snowpack and saturated conditions are based on sea-surface water temperatures soils during November and December 1996. A series of and trade-wind velocities in the Pacific Ocean. storms from December 29, 1996, through January 4, Precipitation from storms during any climate condition 1997. brought heavy and relatively warm precipitation generally increases with orographic uplift as the storms across much of California. Precipitation totals of up to move easterly across the mountains of California. 24 inches were recorded for the week. Virtually all of During El Nino, trade winds diminish, and upwelling of this precipitation was rain because temperatures were colder water in the ocean is inhibited along the Pacific above freezing at elevations as high as about 9,000 feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation Draft Feasibility Report
    Chapter 13 Hydrology – Groundwater This chapter describes the affected environment for groundwater, as well as potential environmental consequences and associated mitigation measures, as they pertain to implementing the alternatives. It focuses primarily on identified groundwater basins that occur in the extended study area (San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the Merced River, the San Joaquin River from the Merced River to the Delta, the Delta, and the CVP and SWP water service areas). Affected Environment This section describes the affected environment related to groundwater resources in the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake hydrologic regions (see Figure 13-1). Both of these regions have historically relied greatly on groundwater extracted from the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region consists of surface water basins draining into the San Joaquin River system, from the Cosumnes River Basin on the north through the southern boundary of the San Joaquin River Basin (DWR 2009). In addition to the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region also includes Yosemite Valley, Los Banos, and Creek Valley groundwater basins (DWR 2009). The Yosemite, Los Banos, and Creek Valley groundwater basins are discrete, peripheral basins, unconnected to the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, and will not be further discussed in this chapter. The Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region is a closed drainage basin at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, south of the San Joaquin River Basin, encompassing surface water basins draining to the Kern Lake bed, Tulare Lake bed, and Buena Vista Lake bed (DWR 2009).
    [Show full text]