DOCSLIB.ORG

RTI INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. EUREKA SUBSEA FIBER OPTIC CABLES PROJECT February 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RTI INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. EUREKA SUBSEA FIBER OPTIC CABLES PROJECT February 2021 INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION RTI INFRASTRUCTURE, INC. EUREKA SUBSEA FIBER OPTIC CABLES PROJECT February 2021 CEQA Lead Agency: California State Lands Commission 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100 South Sacramento, California 95825 Applicant: RTI Infrastructure, Inc. 268 Bush Street, #77 San Francisco, CA 94104 MISSION STATEMENT The California State Lands Commission provides the people of California with effective stewardship of the lands, waterways, and resources entrusted to its care through preservation, restoration, enhancement, responsible economic development, and the promotion of public access. CEQA DOCUMENT WEBSITE www.slc.ca.gov/ceqa/ Geographic Location (Point at Mean High-Tide Line) Latitude: 40º 48.19’ N Longitude: 124º 12.05’ W NAD83 Datum Cover Photo: Aerial view of the cable landing site TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... ES-1 1.0 PROJECT AND AGENCY INFORMATION ...................................................... 1-1 1.1 PROJECT TITLE .................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 LEAD AGENCY AND PROJECT SPONSOR ......................................... 1-1 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................ 1-1 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ...................................................................................... 1-4 1.5 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES ..................................... 1-5 1.5.1 Project Need ................................................................................ 1-5 1.5.2 Existing Technology and Infrastructure ........................................ 1-5 1.5.3 Proposed Technology and Infrastructure ..................................... 1-5 1.5.4 Project Objectives ........................................................................ 1-5 1.6 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ........................................................ 1-6 1.7 APPROVALS AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS .......................... 1-6 1.7.1 California State Lands Commission ............................................. 1-6 1.7.2 Other Agencies ............................................................................ 1-7 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 PROJECT WORK AREAS ...................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Summary of Terrestrial Project Components ............................... 2-1 2.1.2 Summary of Marine Project Components .................................... 2-5 2.2 PROJECT WORK PHASES AND WORK SCHEDULE .......................... 2-7 2.2.1 Work Phases ................................................................................ 2-7 2.2.2 Work Schedule ............................................................................. 2-8 2.3 DETAILED TERRESTRIAL PROJECT COMPONENTS ...................... 2-10 2.3.1 Cable Landing Site ..................................................................... 2-10 2.3.2 Terrestrial Fiber Optic Cable ...................................................... 2-13 2.4 DETAILED MARINE PROJECT COMPONENTS ................................. 2-14 2.4.1 Marine Protected Areas ............................................................. 2-15 2.4.2 Humboldt Open Ocean Disposal Site ......................................... 2-15 2.4.3 Offshore Wind Farms ................................................................. 2-15 2.4.4 Horizontal Directional Drilling Fluid ............................................ 2-16 2.4.5 Inadvertent Releases of Horizontal Directional Drilling Fluid ...... 2-16 2.4.6 Landing Pipes ............................................................................ 2-17 2.4.7 Marine Fiber Optic Cable Design ............................................... 2-19 2.4.8 Signal Regenerators in the Marine Fiber Optic Cables .............. 2-20 2.4.9 Marine Project Construction Methods ........................................ 2-20 2.5 CABLE OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR ...................... 2-25 2.5.1 Cable Operations and Maintenance ........................................... 2-25 2.5.2 Emergency Cable Repair (Marine) ............................................. 2-26 February 2021 i Eureka Subsea Cables Project MND Table of Contents 2.6 RETIREMENT, ABANDONMENT, OR REMOVAL OF THE CABLE SYSTEM ............................................................................................... 2-26 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ANALYSIS .......................................... 3-1 3.1 AESTHETICS ......................................................................................... 3-3 3.1.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................. 3-3 3.1.2 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................ 3-9 3.1.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-10 3.1.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-11 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ............................... 3-12 3.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-12 3.2.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-13 3.2.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-13 3.2.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-13 3.3 AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................... 3-14 3.3.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-14 3.3.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-20 3.3.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-23 3.3.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-26 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................ 3-27 3.4.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-27 3.4.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-48 3.4.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-50 3.4.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-72 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................... 3-73 3.5.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-73 3.5.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-82 3.5.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-83 3.5.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-87 3.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES – TRIBAL ................................................... 3-88 3.6.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-88 3.6.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-91 3.6.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-92 3.6.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-92 3.7 ENERGY ............................................................................................... 3-93 3.7.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-93 3.7.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-93 3.7.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................... 3-93 3.7.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................... 3-94 3.8 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......... 3-95 3.8.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................ 3-95 3.8.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................................... 3-99 Eureka Subsea Cables Project MND ii February 2021 Table of Contents 3.8.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................ 3-102 3.8.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................. 3-105 3.9 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ..................................................... 3-106 3.9.1 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 3-106 3.9.2 Regulatory Setting .................................................................... 3-109 3.9.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................ 3-111 3.9.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................. 3-114 3.10 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ..................................... 3-115 3.10.1 Environmental Setting .............................................................. 3-115 3.10.2 Regulatory Setting .................................................................... 3-117 3.10.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................ 3-117 3.10.4 Mitigation Summary ................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Overview of the Potential Interactions and Impacts of Commercial Fishing Methods on Marine Habitats and Species Protected Under the Eu Habitats Directive
    THE N2K GROUP European Economic Interest Group OVERVIEW OF THE POTENTIAL INTERACTIONS AND IMPACTS OF COMMERCIAL FISHING METHODS ON MARINE HABITATS AND SPECIES PROTECTED UNDER THE EU HABITATS DIRECTIVE Contents GLOSSARY................................................................................................................................................3 1. BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................6 1.1 Fisheries interactions ....................................................................................................................7 2. FISHERIES AND NATURA 2000 - PRESSURES, INTERACTIONS, AND IMPACTS ....................................8 2.1 POTENTIAL PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL PRESSURES AND IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMERCIAL FISHING METHODS ............................................................................................8 DREDGES .......................................................................................................................................11 TRAWL - PELAGIC ..........................................................................................................................12 HOOK & LINE.................................................................................................................................12 TRAPS ............................................................................................................................................12 NETS ..............................................................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • List of Authorized Fisheries and Fishing Gear
    Tab E, No. 7c Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 231 / Thursday, December 2, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 67511 This is a condensed version of the Federal Register notice DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE January 27, 1999, NMFS by final rule SUMMARY: NMFS revises the list of published the LOF (64 FR 4030). On National Oceanic and Atmospheric authorized fisheries and fishing gear July 28, 1999, NMFS delayed the Administration used in those fisheries (LOF) effectiveness of the LOF and invited contained in 50 CFR 600.725(v). additional public comments (64 FR 50 CFR Part 600 Effective December 1, 1999, no person 40781). This final rule revises the LOF or vessel may employ fishing gear or [Docket No. 980519132–9315–03; participate in a fishery in the and makes it effective on December 1, I.D.022498F] exclusive economic zone (EEZ) not 1999. RIN 0648–AK49 included in this LOF without giving 90 days’ advance notice to the Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; appropriate Fishery Management List of Fisheries and Gear, and Council (Council) or, with respect to Notification Guidelines Atlantic highly migratory species AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries (HMS), the Secretary of Commerce Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and (Secretary). Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), DATES: Effective December 1, 1999. Commerce. ADDRESSES: Copies of the regulatory ACTION: Final rule impact review for the final rule for . this action can be obtained from Dr. Gary C. Matlock, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Send comments regarding the collection-of-information requirements associated with this rule to the above address and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    1 Geographic Area and Content 2 Some Terminology: ‘Trails’ and ‘Access’ 3 Why the Focus on Non-Motorized Access? 1 Natural History 2 Cultural History 1 Pedestrian Access 2 Bicycle Access 3 Access for People with Disabilities 4 Equestrian Access 5 Canoe and Kayak Access 6 Camping 7 Other Amenities 1 State Coastal Conservancy 2 California Coastal Commission 2.1 Offer to Dedicate Public Access Easement Program 2.2 Prescriptive Rights 2.3 The California Coastal Trail 1 Existing Conditions 2 Proposed Project 2.1 Truesdale Avenue to Corner of Hilfiker Lane 2.2 Corner of Hilfiker Lane to End of Hilfiker Lane 2.3 Existing Elk River Wildlife Area Trail 2.4 Potential Project Components 3 Other Site Considerations 1 Existing Conditions 2 Proposed Project 2.1 Salmon Creek Headquarters (Phase I) 2.2 Headquarters Loop Trail (Phase 1) 2.3 Long Pond Trail Segment (Phase I or Phase II) 2.4 Hookton Slough Unit Visitor Amenities (Phase I) 2.5 Seasonal Loop Trail (Phase II) 3 Other Site Considerations 1 Signing Program Goals 2 Existing Access Signage 3 Roadway Directional Signing 3.1 Directional Information Program 3.2 Coastal Access Signs 3.3 Other Directional Signs 4 On-Site Informational Signs 4.1 Kiosks 4.2 Intermediate Interpretive or Informational Displays 4.3 Trailside Signs 5 Water Trails Signs 5.1 Roadway Directional Signing 5.2 On-Site Signage 6 Other Humboldt Bay Area Signs 7 Sign Material Specifications 8 Signing Placement Recommendations 9 Signing Program Implementation 1 Goals of a Water Trails Program 2 Existing Paddling Conditions 3 Scope
    [Show full text]
  • Final Document
    he following project concepts were identified as needs or inter- ests, but will need much more research or changes in existing physical or political parameters to become possibilities. These sites are illustrated in Figure II-1. This small cove and sandy beach is protected by rock jetties and man- aged by the BLM. It offers good bay access for novice paddlers. Park- ing space is limited and the Jetty Road gate is closed one hour after sunset. Better parking and appropriate signage could be provided. Jetty Road Cove is secluded from fast-moving currents and provides an easy beach launch for paddle-boaters. Park Street ends at a sandy beach near Fairhaven, with a view across the bay to Eureka. The area provides access to the deep waterchannel between Samoa Peninsula and Eureka. The site could be enhanced for water access by delineating parking and providing appropriate signage. The site also provides adequate fishing access and could potentially serve as a trailhead to allow continuous beach access south to the Samoa Boat Ramp County Park. Cole Street, off Bay Street in Fairheven, ends at a sandy beach (or mud flats at lower tides). Debris has been dumped between the road and the beach. There is a great deal of boat-building history and ac- tivity in this area, and though it is currently neglected, it is a valuable coastal access point and should be reestablished. If road shoulders were improved for bike access, this road could provide a better link between bay communities and coastal recre- ation opportunities on the peninsula.
    [Show full text]
  • Coryphaena Hippurus (Linnaeus, 1758) in Maltese Waters, Central Mediterranean M
    Research Article Mediterranean Marine Science Indexed in WoS (Web of Science, ISI Thomson) and SCOPUS The journal is available on line at http://www.medit-mar-sc.net DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12681/mms.706 Age, Growth and Reproduction of Coryphaena hippurus (Linnaeus, 1758) in Maltese Waters, Central Mediterranean M. GATT1, M. DIMECH1 and P.J. SCHEMBRI1 1 Department of Biology, University of Malta, Msida MSD 2080, Malta Corresponding author: [email protected] Handling Editor: Kostas Stergiou Received: 24 November 2014; Accepted: 22 January 2015; Published on line: 27 April 2015. Abstract Age, growth and reproduction of the dolphinfishCoryphaena hippurus Linnaeus, 1758 collected from the Central Mediterranean in the period 2004-2010 by the traditional Maltese fish aggregating devices (FAD) and surface longline fisheries were studied. The a and b parameters of the length-weight relationship for fish 11-142 cm fork length (FL) (n = 4042) were determined as a = 0.018 and 0.022 with b = 2.85 and 2.79, for males and females respectively. The counting of annual increments from dorsal spines of >65 cm FL dolphinfish at X25 magnification (n = 47) permitting an age reading resolution in years, and the counting of daily increments from sagittal otoliths of <65 cm FL dolphinfish at X400 magnification (n = 583) permitting an age reading resolution in days, were estimated; the von Bertalanffy growth model applied to these fish gave the following parameters:L∞ = 107.8 cm FL and 120.2 cm FL, and K = 1.9 yr-1 and 1.56 yr-1, for males and females respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Salmon & Steelhead 2015-2020
    Pacific Salmon & Steelhead 2015-2020 Bibliography Trevor Riley, Head of Public Services, NOAA Central Library Katie Rowley, Research Librarian, NOAA Central Library Hope Shinn, Research Librarian, NOAA Central Library Jamie Roberts, Research Librarian, NOAA Central Library Erin Cheever, Research Librarian, NOAA Central Library NCRL subject guide 2020-15 https://doi.org/10.25923/7f5f-pz64 September 2020 U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research NOAA Central Library – Silver Spring, Maryland Table of Contents Background & Scope ................................................................................................................................. 3 Sources Reviewed ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Section I: California Central Valley ............................................................................................................ 6 Section II: South-Central & Southern California Coast ........................................................................... 38 Section III: North-Central California Coast .............................................................................................. 47 Section IV: Southern Oregon & Northern California Coast ..................................................................... 76 Section V: Oregon Coast ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Carson Mansion in Eureka, California
    Carson Mansion in Eureka, California Mount San Jacinto in California Call it Gothic, call it a fairy tale, the Carson Mansion is one of the few pieces of architecture in the world that manages to baffle its viewers about its style. With French, Italian and Gothic elements, this mansion located in Eureka, California showcases a peculiar American style of architecture. In fact, its curious style has managed to influence the architecture of its neighborhood buildings as well. Lumber tycoon William Carson is believed to have said, “If I build it poorly, they would say that I was a damned miser; if I build it expensively, they will say I'm a show off; guess I'll just build it to suit myself.” A three-storey structure with 18 rooms, the Carson Mansion, constructed between 1884 and 1885 by a hundred men, also contains a tower and a basement. Well-known Californian architects, the Newsom brothers of San Francisco constructed this beautiful masterpiece. Today, the Mansion has become a local landmark; you cannot miss it, if you are in Eureka. In fact, it is located to the south of Carson’s lumber mill. William Carson, the owner of this mansion came to California during the Gold Rush and was disappointed not to find any. But he worked hard in the lumber industry, which was a booming venture then, and made millions. The Carson Mansion was his tribute to American architecture. Much has been written about the Stick-Eastlake features of this mansion and experts have marveled over its Queen Anne properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 1 Agenda Item Summary
    Attachment 1 Agenda Item Summary BACKGROUND Current permanent regulations do not allow for harvest of bait fish (also known as forage fish) in Oregon inland waters for commercial purposes, with the exception of the Columbia River and a small herring fishery in Yaquina Bay. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) prohibit commercial fishing in select inland waters such as Nestucca Bay (ORS 511.606) and waters of Curry County (ORS 511.206 and ORS 511.306). This exhibit discusses allowing commercial harvest of baitfish in select inland waters and provides an approach to rulemaking by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission (Commission). There are two issues: allowing harvesting of anchovies to be used as live bait in the commercial albacore fishery, and accommodating a long-term small volume shorebased bait business operating in Winchester Bay. Forage Fish Management Bait fish, also known as forage fish or Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS), are managed jointly through federal and state processes. The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) adopted the CPS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) in June of 1978. At that time, it was titled the Northern Anchovy Fishery Management Plan. The FMP was specific to management of the northern anchovy fishery until 1998, when an amendment was accepted that expanded the FMP to the entire CPS fishery. Stocks managed under the CPS FMP include Pacific sardine, Pacific (chub) mackerel, northern anchovy, market squid and jack mackerel. The Commission has the authority to implement regulations governing CPS fisheries that are consistent with or more restrictive than those implemented federally. Most notably, the Commission is responsible for management of the Oregon Pacific sardine fishery, in which participation is limited through state rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuna Fishing in Indonesia
    J. MARCZILLE T. BOELY M. UNAR G.S. MERTA B. SABHOTOMO J.C.B. UKTOLSEJA Éditions de i’0 RSTO Dl INSTITUT FRANÇAIS DE RECHEliCHE SCIENTIFIQUE POUR LE L¶ÉVELBPPEMENT EN COOPÉRATION TUNA FISHING IN INDONESIA (( La loi du II mars 1957 n’autorisant, aux termes des alinéas 2 et 3 de l’article 41, d’une part, (( que les ((copies ou reproductions strictement réservées à l’usage privé du copiste et non destinées (( à une utilisation collective» et, d’autre part, que les analyses et les courtes citations dans un but (( d’exemple et d’illustration, ((toute représentation ou reproduction intégrale, ou partielle, faite sans le G consentement de l’auteur ou de ses ayants droit ou ayant cause, est illicite)) (alinéa Ier de l’article 40). (( Cette représentation ou reproduction, par quelque procédé que ce soit, constituerait donc une (( contrefaçon sanctionnée par les articles 425 et suivants du Code Pénal)). ;: . I.S.B.N. : 2-7099-0739-9 @ O.R.S.T.O.M. 1984 Balai Peneletian Perikanan Laut Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le Dbveloppemnt en Coopération (O.R.S.T.O.M.) TUNA FISHING IN INDONESIA by f. "w?&LLE " Il: UNAR: G.S. MERTA- 8. SAOHOTOMG- J.C.B. UKTOLSEJA- * Institut Français de Recherche Scientifique pour le Développement en Coopération (O.R.S.T.O.M.). +W Central Research Institute for Fisheries - Jakarta. +HI+ Research Institute for Marine Fisheries - Jakarta. SUIUMARY - Abstract . ..*.......*...*......*................... 2 _.'- <. .. 3, A R&U~&.......;...:..: . ..~.......................'.................... <,).' . ..B 4 - ,-Pendahuluan .-...............a......... .l. - Catch-statistics of tuna and tuna-like fishes in Indonesia.....;.................;5 : : Industrial longline fishing in .
    [Show full text]
  • LOLETA Iv Eel River Wildlife Area Wildlife E 199 “North Coast 101” Is Distributed to Subscribers of the Times-Standard
    North Coast 2019-2020 | www.times-standard.com North Coast HUMBOLDT COUNTY GETTING HERE Long before Humboldt was a county, it was a bay inhab- Taking U.S. Highway 101 North will guide you right into ited by Yurok, Karuk, Wiyot, Chilula, Whilkut and Hupa Humboldt County. Once you’re north of San Francisco and tribes, among others. In May of 1853, the area we live and Mendocino County on U.S. Highway 101 north, you’ll enter work in today was declared a county almost 50 years after Humboldt County. sea otter hunters claimed it and named it after their hero. Continuing up U.S. Highway 101 north you’ll enter Del In 1850, hunters Douglas Ottinger and Hans Buhne Norte county and Crescent City. This is one of the last entered the bay and decided that a man they respected, main stops before you drive into Oregon. naturalist and explorer Baron Alexander von Humboldt, Humboldt is also the westernmost tip of smaller deserved a bay in his name. Thus, Humboldt Bay and highways like U.S. Highway 299 from Redding, and U.S. County were born. Highway 36 from Red Blu . PHOTO BY SHAUN WALKER Air Service to Redwood Coast California Redwood DEL NORTE COUNTY Climate Coast — Humboldt N e P Avg. Avg. Prairie Creek w a K r t Month Temp (°F) Rainfall County Airport (ACV) k o Redwoods l w n a a B Jan. .............. 56 ............3.8” 96 State Park m y . United Express D a Feb. .............. 55 .............3.6” r t Service to and from Fern Canyon u h r March .........
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Studies on the Fishing Efficiency of Purse Seine
    Fundamental Studies on the Fishing Efficiency of Purse Seine 著者 "KATIANDAGHO Elof Machten, IMAI Takehiko" journal or 南海研紀要 publication title volume 6 number 2 page range 229-247 URL http://hdl.handle.net/10232/15672 Mem. Kagoshima Univ. Res. Center S. Pac, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1985 229 Fundamental Studies on the Fishing Efficiency of Purse Seine Elof Machten Katiandagho* and Takehiko Imai** Abstract Studies on the efficiency of purse seines were carried out in a water circulating experimental tank in a static water condition using five simplified seine models of different hang-in ratios. The results indicate that the seine with hang-in ratio of 34 % sank the fastest and seines with 25 % and 30 % of hang-in ratios had sinking speeds nearly equal to each other. The final depth of the former seine wall was 91 % of the designed seine depth, while that for the later was 97 % and 100 %. From this data it is thought that a net with about a 30 % hang-in ratio is the most efficient for both fishing and also in terms of construction. Model experiments on the two net designs of mackerel purse seines operating in Indonesian waters revealed high sinking speed those are 53 % and 40 % of set ting time, after that time both model nets decreased the sinking speed. So it is recommended to commence pursing because at this moment, the stretched seine wall of model net A showed 72 % and model net B showed 86 % of seine depth. The effects of various pursing speeds and pursing times on the purseline tension of two model nets A and B showed a quadratic function.
    [Show full text]
  • Eureka Police Chief
    Police Chief City of Eureka, California The Community with a stunning array of Victorian fishing, sailing, rafting, and camping architecture. Eureka is home to opportunities. Arts and cultural Situated in Humboldt County along hundreds of historic Victorian homes activities are prevalent throughout the spectacular Northern California and buildings and boasts the highest the year, highlighted by Arts Alive! coast, the historic seaside community level of Victorian homes per capita in on the first Saturday of the month of Eureka is one of California’s California. In fact, the entire city is in Old Town. Major attractions best-kept secrets. Founded during a state historic landmark. It is filled include Fort Humboldt State Historic the California Gold Rush, the city with Victorian, Colonial Revival and Park, Morris Graves Museum of Art, is bordered on the west by beautiful Greek Revival neighborhoods, along Carson Mansion, Sequoia Park & Humboldt Bay, and on the north, east with 13 distinct districts that meet Zoo, Blue Ox Millworks and Samoa and south by rugged mountains lush the criteria for the National Register Cookhouse. Eureka offers numerous with giant redwoods. Eureka thrived of Historic Places. Its original 19th other amenities including excellent for many years on the area’s rich century commercial core, the Old medical care, shopping, and restaurants. abundance of redwood timber and Town Historic District, has been Students are served by the Eureka City fishing and quickly established itself meticulously preserved and restored Schools District, the largest school as the commercial hub of the North and features shops, galleries, theaters, district in the region.
    [Show full text]