DOCSLIB.ORG

Honda Appendix Slipsheets

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Honda Appendix Slipsheets CITY OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA Honda Port of Entry at the Point Potrero Marine Terminal DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #2008022063 VOLUME II – TECHNICAL APPENDICES JULY 2008 Table of Contents HONDA PORT OF ENTRY Draft Environmental Impact Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................1–1 1.1 The Intent of CEQA.................................................................................................1–1 1.2 Background and Scope of this EIR.......................................................................1–2 1.3 The CEQA Process...................................................................................................1–3 2. Summary...................................................................................................................................2–1 2.1 Project Proposal........................................................................................................2–1 2.2 Project Impacts .........................................................................................................2–2 2.3 Areas of Controversy..............................................................................................2–3 2.4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project ...................................................................2–4 3. Project Description..................................................................................................................3–1 3.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................3–1 3.2 Overview ...................................................................................................................3–1 3.3 History of the Project ..............................................................................................3–3 3.4 Project Location and Site Characteristics............................................................3–4 3.5 Existing Terminal Facilities and Operations......................................................3–7 3.6 Proposed Construction.........................................................................................3–13 3.7 Proposed Project Operations...............................................................................3–20 3.8 Project Objectives...................................................................................................3–25 3.9 Required Approvals..............................................................................................3–26 3.10 Responsible Agencies ...........................................................................................3–27 4. Land Use and Planning .........................................................................................................4–1 4.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................4–1 4.2 Setting.........................................................................................................................4–2 4.3 Standards of Significance.....................................................................................4–57 4.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures......................................................................4–58 5. Traffic and Transportation....................................................................................................5–1 5.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................5–1 5.2 Vehicle Traffic Setting.............................................................................................5–1 5.3 Train Traffic Setting ..............................................................................................5–10 5.4 Marine Traffic Setting ...........................................................................................5–22 5.5 Standards of Significance ....................................................................................5–31 5.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures......................................................................5–32 Honda Port of Entry Draft EIR i Table of Contents 6. Air Quality ...............................................................................................................................6–1 6.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................6–1 6.2 Setting ........................................................................................................................6–1 6.3 Standards of Significance ....................................................................................6–17 6.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures .....................................................................6–19 7. Noise..........................................................................................................................................7–1 7.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................7–1 7.2 Setting ........................................................................................................................7–1 7.3 Standards of Significance ....................................................................................7–12 7.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures .....................................................................7–14 8. Biological Resources...............................................................................................................8–1 8.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................8–1 8.2 Terrestrial Biology Setting .....................................................................................8–1 8.3 Marine Biology Setting...........................................................................................8–7 8.4 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................8–10 8.5 Special–Status Biological Resources..................................................................8–27 8.6 Standards of Significance ....................................................................................8–35 8.7 Impacts and Mitigation Measures .....................................................................8–36 9. Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................9–1 9.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................9–1 9.2 Setting ........................................................................................................................9–1 9.3 Standards of Significance ....................................................................................9–13 9.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures .....................................................................9–15 10. Geology and Soils .................................................................................................................10–1 10.1 Introduction............................................................................................................10–1 10.2 Setting ......................................................................................................................10–1 10.3 Standards of Significance ..................................................................................10–16 10.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...................................................................10–16 11. Hydrology and Water Quality...........................................................................................11–1 11.1 Introduction............................................................................................................11–1 11.2 Terrestrial Hydrology/Water Quality Setting ................................................11–1 11.3 Marine Hydrology/Water Quality Setting......................................................11–5 11.4 Regulatory Framework .....................................................................................11–12 11.5 Standards of Significance...................................................................................11–20 11.6 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...................................................................11–21 12. Hazards and Hazardous Materials...................................................................................12–1 12.1 Introduction............................................................................................................12–1 12.2 Setting ......................................................................................................................12–1 12.3 Standards of Significance ..................................................................................12–17 12.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...................................................................12–17 13. Visual Quality........................................................................................................................13–1 13.1 Introduction............................................................................................................13–1 13.2 Setting ......................................................................................................................13–2
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Predation by Gray Catbird on Brown Thrasher Eggs
    March 2004 Notes 101 PREDATION BY GRAY CATBIRD ON BROWN THRASHER EGGS JAMES W. RIVERS* AND BRETT K. SANDERCOCK Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 (JWR) Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 (BKS) Present address of JWR: Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 *Correspondent: [email protected] ABSTRACT The gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis) has been documented visiting and breaking the eggs of arti®cial nests, but the implications of such observations are unclear because there is little cost in depredating an undefended nest. During the summer of 2001 at Konza Prairie Bio- logical Station, Kansas, we videotaped a gray catbird that broke and consumed at least 1 egg in a brown thrasher (Toxostoma rufum) nest. Our observation was consistent with egg predation because the catbird consumed the contents of the damaged egg after breaking it. The large difference in body mass suggests that a catbird (37 g) destroying eggs in a thrasher (69 g) nest might risk injury if caught in the act of predation and might explain why egg predation by catbirds has been poorly documented. Our observation indicated that the catbird should be considered as an egg predator of natural nests and that single-egg predation of songbird nests should not be attributed to egg removal by female brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater) without additional evidence. RESUMEN El paÂjaro gato gris (Dumetella carolinensis) ha sido documentado visitando y rompien- do los huevos de nidos arti®ciales, pero las implicaciones de dichas observaciones no son claras porque hay poco costo por depredar un nido sin defensa.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of San Diego
    Port of San Diego The Port of San Diego manages San Diego Bay and its 34 miles of beautiful, natural waterfront for the people of California. The Port was established in 1962 under the Port Act and is charged with implementing the Tidelands Trust Doctrine. For over fifty years, the Port’s five-member cities - Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach, National City and San Diego - have worked together to develop and promote LEGENDPort of commerce, navigation, recreation and fisheries on and BNSFSan Diego UP/SP Trackage Rights Handling Carrier LEGEND around San Diego Bay. Self-funded, the port contributes Haulage Agreement BNSF billions annually to San Diego’s economy, benefiting the UP/SP Trackage Rights Handling Carrier community, local businesses and employees. The port’s Haulage Agreement cargo maritime business includes two cargo terminals. TERMINAL CAPABILITIES • Harbor: One (San Diego Bay) • Berths: 15 • Cranes: 1 mobile harbor crane • Depth: 30 ft. - 43 ft. • Facilities: Two marine cargo terminals • Rail-Served: On-dock terminal rail • Cargo Handled: Breakbulk Project Cargo Refrigerated Ro-Ro (Roll-on/Roll-off) Alex Williamson Brian Johnston Connie Le Fevre Greg Borossay Sales Manager Sales Manager Sr Trade Representative Maritime Commercial BNSF Railway BNSF Railway Port of San Diego Port of San Diego [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Office: 612-380-8852 Office: 817-304-6425 619-756-1949 619-686-6242 Port of San Diego TERMINAL CAPABILITIES OVERVIEW TENTH AVENUE MARINE TERMINAL • Depth: 30 ft. – 43 ft. • Berth(s): Eight, equaling 4,347 ft. • Cargo Handling Capabilities: • Port owned - 100 Ton Gottwald Crane • Stevedore owned and operated - Reach stackers, rail pusher (leased), utility trucks, fork lifts and heavy lifts • Rail-Served: On-dock rail adjacent to BNSF yard • Main yard: Seven spurs, equaling 9000 ft.
    [Show full text]
  • March 19, 2012 by SDPTA Chair Jim Unger
    March 19, 2012 By SDPTA C hair Jim Unger Overview– Jim Unger Overview– Jim Unger Port of San Diego Facts: Port includes Five Member Cities: Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach, National City, San Diego Board of 7 Port Commissioners: Chairman Lou Smith, Coronado Commissioner Vice Chair Ann Moore, Chula Vista Commissioner Secretary Lee Burdick, San Diego Commissioner Commissioner Dan Malcolm, Imperial Beach Commissioner Bob Nelson, San Diego Commissioner Dukie Valderrama, National City Commissioner Scott Peters, San Diego Overview The San Diego Unified Port District a nd Tidelands businesses contributes 30% of Gross Regional Product 77,000 Jobs Partnership with the Port and its tenants Overview The Port is self-sustaining from revenues collected from the Port Tenants with NO TAX DOLLARS FROM CITIZENS Overview Partnership with the Port of San Diego – Participation on the Following Port/Tenant Committees: Maritime, Marketing, Real Estate, Cruise Ship, Public Art, Environmental, Accessibility, Port with no Borders Scholarship & Tidelands Forestry. Downsizing of Port - new President/CEO Wayne Darbeau 13 departments down to 6 & decreased employee headcount by 100 without lay-offs. Background California Statelands Commission Public Trust Policy (2 excerpts below t aken from Public Trust Policy) Lands are owned by t he public and held in trust for the people by t he State of California. Uses of trust lands are generally l imited to those that are water dependent or related, and include commerce, fisheries, and navigation, environmental
    [Show full text]
  • San Diego Unified Port District San Diego, CA 92101
    Page 1 of 215 3165 Pacific Hwy. San Diego Unified Port District San Diego, CA 92101 Special Meeting Minutes Board of Port Commissioners Wednesday,January16,2019 9:30 AM Don L. Nay Port Administration Boardroom Closed Session A. Roll Call. Present: 7 - Commissioner Bonelli, Chairperson Castellanos, Commissioner Malcolm, Commissioner Merrifield, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Valderrama, and Commissioner Zucchet Excused: 0 Absent: 0 Commissioner Moore was excused until she arrived at 9:36 am. Officers Present: Coniglio, DeAngelis, Monson, Morales, and Russell B. Public Communications. The following member(s) of the public addressed the Board with non agenda-related comments: None CLOSED SESSION Thomas A. Russell, General Counsel, announced the Closed Session items as follows: 1. Closed Session Item No. 1 PERSONNEL EVALUATION: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Government Code Section 54957 No reportable action was taken on this item. San Diego Unified Port District Page 1 Page 2 of 215 Board of Port Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes January 16, 2019 2. 2019-0020 Closed Session Item No. 2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: SDUPD - Chula Vista Bayfront parcel consisting of approximately 74.7 acres of land at H Street and Marina Parkway, Chula Vista Negotiating Parties: RIDA Chula Vista, LLC,- Ira Mitzner and Luke Charlton; City of Chula Vista - Gary Halbert; SDUPD - Shaun Sumner, Tony Gordon, Adam Meyer, Stephanie Shook and Sean Jones. Under Negotiations: Price and Terms
    [Show full text]
  • Wing Flashing in a Brown Thrasher and Catbird
    THE WILSON BULLETIN September 1970 330 Vol. 82, No. 3 point the snake withdrew into the hole (19:15) and did not emerge while it was still light enough to observe. Black rat snakes are noted for their climbing ability (Johnston and Gaunt, Kansas Ornithol. Sot. Bull., 12:22-23, 1961; Fitch, Copeia, 1963:649-658, 1963) and Surface (Bull. Div. Zool., Pennsylvania State Dept. Agr., 4:11>208, 1906) found 30 per cent and Fitch (op. cit.) found 23 per cent of black rat snake food consists of birds or their eggs. Though normally adult birds would be difficult prey for a snake, an incubating or brooding adult, as well as nestlings and eggs, would be easier prey. A hole-nesting bird such as a woodpecker, while having a safer nest in many respects and an easier nest to defend, has no avenue for escape if surprised by an arboreal snake. Birds are not totally helpless in the face of such an adversary, and, may at times be successful in re- pelling the predator. Boone (1960. Masters Thesis, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas) observed a male Red-bellied Woodpecker (Centurus carol&s) defending its nest against a black rat snake. N o1 an (op. cit.) and Noland (op. cit.) describe possibly fatal attacks on arboreal snakes by nesting Pileated Woodpeckers (Dryocopus pilentm). Fitch (op. cit.) mentions that Blue Jays (Cyanocitta cristata) have also been seen attacking black rat snakes. A second defense against arboreal snakes, or at least a distraction for the snake is a mobbing reaction by birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of San Francisco Maritime Cargo and Warehouse Market Analysis
    PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME CARGO AND WAREHOUSE MARKET ANALYSIS January 5, 2009 FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Port of San Francisco Prepared by: CBRE Consulting, Inc. Martin Associates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 3 II. ASSESSEMENT OF EXISTING MARKETS............................................................................ 4 1 HISTORIC MARINE CARGO ACTIVITY AT WEST COAST PORTS............................................ 4 2 ASSESSMENT OF COMPETING BAY AREA PORTS ................................................................... 6 2.1 Port of Redwood City ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Port of Richmond .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Port of Stockton ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4 Port of Sacramento........................................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Port of Benicia................................................................................................................................... 8 3 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Conservation Policy Benefits for an Umbrella and Related Sagebrush-Obligate Species Jonathan B
    Human–Wildlife Interactions 13(3):447–458, Winter 2019 • digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi Comparison of conservation policy benefits for an umbrella and related sagebrush-obligate species Jonathan B. Dinkins, Department of Ecosystem Science and Management, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA, and Department of Animal and Rangeland Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97333, USA [email protected] Jeffrey L. Beck, Department of Ecosystem Science and Management, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA Abstract: Many conservation strategies promote the potential of multiple species benefitting from protection of large areas necessary for the continued viability of 1 species. One prominent strategy in western North America is Wyoming’s Sage-grouse Core Area Policy, which was designed to conserve greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter, sage- grouse) breeding habitat, but may also serve as an umbrella to conserve other sagebrush (Artemisia spp.)-obligate wildlife, including songbirds. Sagebrush-obligate songbirds and sage-grouse have undergone population declines throughout the western United States attributed to similar habitat issues. We compared trends of sagebrush-obligate songbirds from the Breeding Bird Survey and sage-grouse lek counts in 2 sage-grouse populations in Wyoming (Powder River Basin and Wyoming Basins), USA from 1996–2013. Our evaluation was focused on similarities among population performance of the umbrella species and the species under that umbrella. Sagebrush-obligate songbird and both sage-grouse populations occupied habitat within and outside of protected core areas. Trends of sagebrush-obligate songbirds were not parallel or consistently similar in trajectory to sage-grouse in either core or non-core areas.
    [Show full text]
  • On-Call Engineering and Professional Services Contracts M
    Digital Copy • December 20, 2018 • RFP No. 19-016CA ON-CALL ENGINEERING AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS M. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT Kleinfelder Construction Services,Inc. 2280 Market Street, Suite 300 Riverside, CA 92501 951-801-3681 951-682-0192 December 20, 2018 City of Corona Administrative Services Department - Purchasing Division Attn: Carol Appelt 400 South Vicentia Ave., Suite 320 Corona, CA 92882 RE: Letter of Transmittal for RFP No. 19-016CA On-call Engineering and Professional Services Contracts M. Construction Management and Support Dear Ms. Appelt: Kleinfelder Construction Services (KCS) appreciates this opportunity to present our qualifications to the City of Corona Department of Water and Power (City) for the Construction Management and Support category (M) of the above-mentioned on- call engineering and professional services contract. We are excited to continue our relationship with the City through this new contract, and offer an exceptionally qualified team with the expertise, experience, and resources required to support the City on any task order assignment. We have carefully reviewed the City’s request for qualifications and are confident that we have a capable and qualified team to meet your needs for this contract and to ensure your Capital Improvement Program goals are achieved. The KCS team offers the following differentiators: ✓ Extensive and relevant experience on projects similar to ✓ A deep bench of qualified staff members to support those anticipated by City any task ✓ Experts at managing and staffing on-call contracts with ✓ Ability to provide full-scope construction management multiple task orders and various project needs from pre-construction to close-out ✓ Expert Project Manager, Construction Managers, ✓ In-depth knowledge of the City’s procedures, Scheduling, and Administrative Staff expectations, and goals ABOUT KCS: KCS is a leader in managing and staffing on-call construction management contracts as a prime consultant.
    [Show full text]
  • Bendire's Thrasher
    Bendire’s Thrasher: 2016 Arizona Project Information and Survey Protocol for Arizona Volunteers Species Description The Bendire’s Thrasher (Toxostoma bendirei) is a medium sized pale brown song bird (60g), with small triangle patterns on the breast, a pale lower mandible and base, yellow to orange iris, and a short slightly curved bill (bill to nare 19-21 mm). The call is a quick “tirup” and the song is a continuous warbly mumble - in comparison to the Curve-billed Thrasher (Toxostome curvirostre) which has a crisp continuous song. As far as flight patterns, the Bendire’s Thrasher can be seen doing short flights in between vegetation - unlike desert thrashers such as the LeConte’s Thrasher (Tomostoma lecontei) which travel running on the ground between vegetation. Bendire’s Thrashers nests can be found in a variety of vegetation types in their natural habitat with a range height of 1.9 to 9.8 ft (0.6-3 m) (2005). In the urban areas, nesting habits can be similar as these birds place their nests in the average known range of 1.9 to 9.8 ft (0.6-3 m) in vegetation along fence lines – nests have also been observed in a patio awning at 4 m high. The Bendire’s Thrasher occurs within a variety of lowland to upland deserts across northwestern Mexico and in the U.S. - Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah. The Bendire’s Thrasher (BETH) is listed as a USFWS Species of Conservation Concern (2002), an IUCN red list category VU, National Audubon red list (2002), and already a third priority as a species of special concern by the California Department of Fish and Game (2008).
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 San Diego
    BINATIONAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PREVENTION AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN AMONG THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA AND THE CITY OF TIJUANA, BAJA CALIFORNIA January 14, 2013 Binational Hazardous Materials Prevention and Emergency Response Plan Among the County Of San Diego, the City of San Diego, California, and the City of Tijuana, Baja California January 14, 2013 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 2005-Present ...................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 2003 .................................................................................................... 6 FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................... 10 PARTICIPATING AGENCIES................................................................................................... 17 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 23 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 23 1.0 TIJUANA/SAN DIEGO BORDER REGION ................................................................. 25 1.1 General Aspects of the Region ........................................................................................ 25 1.1.1 Historical and Cultural Background ................................................................ 25 1.1.2 Geographic Location
    [Show full text]
  • San Diego's PEV Roadmap: Planning for Plug-In Electric Vehicles
    San Diego Regional PEV Planning through The EV Project REVI Meeting Agenda Item 7A SDG&E Energy Innovation Center March 21, 2013 Overview • EV Project regional planning components • San Diego’s regional approach o What made an “optimal” charging site? o GIS modeling and mapping • Long-term goals and near-term needs • From planning to implementation PEV Infrastructure Planning • Near-Term Needs o Identify method to best site PEV chargers o Use visual tools through GIS mapping o Plan for 1,500 publicly accessible chargers • Long-Term Goals o Select [public] sites where it makes sense for the region o Reduce driver “range anxiety” o Develop interregional network o Enhance future siting capabilities The EV Project Project and advisory meetings led by Ecotality Stakeholder Advisory Committee • SANDAG • SDG&E • County of San Diego • Nissan • City of San Diego • Qualcomm • Santee • UCSD • SDSU • Chula Vista • California Center for • Escondido Sustainable Energy • Oceanside • San Diego Regional • Port of San Diego Clean Cities Coalition What Makes an Optimal Site for Level 2 PEV chargers? What Makes an Optimal Fast Charge Site? Site characteristics 5 minute to half hour stay Part of daily routine Regular turnover in vehicles Available to many different users Convenient Not necessarily a destination stop 1,500 PEV chargers Target dark and light GREEN areas Mission Valley, San Diego High Above Average land use categories Availability throughout year Daily hours of availability Qualcomm Available to many users Stadium Trip attractors and employment
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution, Ecology, and Life History of the Pearly-Eyed Thrasher (Margarops Fuscatus)
    Adaptations of An Avian Supertramp: Distribution, Ecology, and Life History of the Pearly-Eyed Thrasher (Margarops fuscatus) Chapter 6: Survival and Dispersal The pearly-eyed thrasher has a wide geographical distribution, obtains regional and local abundance, and undergoes morphological plasticity on islands, especially at different elevations. It readily adapts to diverse habitats in noncompetitive situations. Its status as an avian supertramp becomes even more evident when one considers its proficiency in dispersing to and colonizing small, often sparsely The pearly-eye is a inhabited islands and disturbed habitats. long-lived species, Although rare in nature, an additional attribute of a supertramp would be a even for a tropical protracted lifetime once colonists become established. The pearly-eye possesses passerine. such an attribute. It is a long-lived species, even for a tropical passerine. This chapter treats adult thrasher survival, longevity, short- and long-range natal dispersal of the young, including the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of natal dispersers, and a comparison of the field techniques used in monitoring the spatiotemporal aspects of dispersal, e.g., observations, biotelemetry, and banding. Rounding out the chapter are some of the inherent and ecological factors influencing immature thrashers’ survival and dispersal, e.g., preferred habitat, diet, season, ectoparasites, and the effects of two major hurricanes, which resulted in food shortages following both disturbances. Annual Survival Rates (Rain-Forest Population) In the early 1990s, the tenet that tropical birds survive much longer than their north temperate counterparts, many of which are migratory, came into question (Karr et al. 1990). Whether or not the dogma can survive, however, awaits further empirical evidence from additional studies.
    [Show full text]