DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Assessment Initial Study Maidu Bike Park Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study Maidu Bike Park Project Auburn, California U.S. Department of the Interior Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District June 2017 Bureau of Reclamation DRAFT Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment Prepared for: Auburn Area Recreation and Park District 471 Maidu Drive Suite 200 Auburn, California 95603-5427 Contact: Kahl Muscott Prepared by: 853 Lincoln Way, Suite 208 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Markus Lang JUNE 2017 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Draft Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................... III 1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 2 PURPOSE AND NEED AND ALTERNATIVES ...........................................................5 2.1 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Alternatives Considered and Rejected .................................................................... 5 2.3 Alternatives Including the Proposed Action ........................................................... 6 2.4 No Action ................................................................................................................ 6 3 PROPOSED ACTION/PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................7 3.1 Required Approvals .............................................................................................. 19 3.2 Conservation Measures and Environmental Commitments .................................. 20 4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES/EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ..............23 5 OTHER CONTENT REQUIRED UNDER NEPA .....................................................103 5.1 Indian Trust Assets ............................................................................................. 103 5.2 Indian Sacred Sites .............................................................................................. 103 5.3 Environmental Justice ......................................................................................... 103 5.4 Cumulative Effects.............................................................................................. 104 5.5 Consultation and Coordination ........................................................................... 104 6 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................109 APPENDICES A Preliminary Project Plans B Draft Mitigation Monitoring Plan C CalEEMod Modeling Results D Indian Trust Assets Request Form 8508 i June 2017 Draft Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Page No. FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................9 2 Study Area Map .................................................................................................................11 3 Project Location and Noise Measurement Locations ........................................................77 4 Predicted Noise Contours ..................................................................................................79 5 Proximity to Auburn Indian Trust Lands .........................................................................107 TABLES 1 Placer County APCD Thresholds (pounds per day) ..........................................................30 2 Air Pollutant Emissions During Construction (pounds per day) .......................................30 3 Air Pollutant Emissions During Operation (pounds per day) ............................................31 4 Project Emissions and Federal General Conformity Thresholds .......................................31 5 Vegetation Communities / Land Cover (On-site) ..............................................................37 6 Construction GHG Emissions ............................................................................................53 7 Typical Noise Levels .........................................................................................................73 8 Existing Roadway Conditions (TIRE and LOS) ................................................................90 9 Weekend Trip Generation Assumptions and Estimates .....................................................92 10 Weekday - Trip Generation Assumptions and Estimates ..................................................93 11 Weekend Trip Distribution ................................................................................................94 12 Regional Weekend Trip Distribution .................................................................................94 13 Cumulative Plus Project Daily Traffic Volume, TIRE Index, and LOS ...........................97 8508 ii June 2017 Draft Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ADA Americans with Disabilities Act AMSL above mean sea level APCD Air Pollution Control District APE Area of Potential Effect ARD Auburn Area Recreation and Park District ATCM Air Toxic Control Measure BMP best management practice CARB California Air Resources Board CCAO Central California Area Office CCR California Code of Regulations CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society CO carbon monoxide CO2 carbon dioxide CRHR California Register of Historic Resources CVCC Canyon View Community Center CVP Central Valley Project CVRWQCB Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board DOI Department of the Interior DPM diesel particulate matter DPW Department of Public Works DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control EA Environmental Assessment EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement ESA Environmental Site Assessment FHWA Federal Highway Administration FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact GHG greenhouse gases IMBA International Mountain Bicycling Association IS Initial Study ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers KDA K.D. Anderson & Associates, Inc LOS level of service MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MMP Mitigation Monitoring Plan 8508 iii June 2017 Draft Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment Acronym/Abbreviation Definition MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MPA Managing Partner Agreement MT metric tons NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NCIC North Central Information Center NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NOA naturally occurring asbestos NOx nitrogen oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places PCAPCD Placer County Air Pollution Control District PCEHD Placer County Environmental Health and Human Services Department Environmental Health Division PCTPA Placer County Transportation Planning Authority PCWA Placer County Water Agency PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter PRC Public Resources Code ROG reactive organic gases RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer SVAB Sacramento Valley Air Basin SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan TIRE Traffic Intrusion on Residential Environment USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey VEE Visible Emissions Evaluations WPWMA Western Placer Waste Management Authority WWTP waste water treatment plant 8508 iv June 2017 Draft Maidu Bike Park Project CEQA Initial Study NEPA Environmental Assessment 1 INTRODUCTION This document is prepared as a joint Environmental Assessment and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA/IS/MND) to meet the requirements of both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The decision to prepare a joint EA/IS/MND document, as opposed to separate documents, was made to present a cohesive project proposal and analysis for the public, realize efficiencies in preparation, and ensure consistent and integrated environmental analyses for both federal and state environmental review requirements. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is the lead agency for the NEPA process and the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District (ARD) is the lead agency for the CEQA process. The proposed project is located on federal land owned by Reclamation. ARD operates facilities on these lands under a management agreement with Reclamation that allows ARD to develop new recreational facilities. As the lead agency for NEPA, Reclamation is required to carry out environmental review in accordance with NEPA prior to taking action on a proposed project. In this case, Reclamation’s action would be to approve the project proposed by ARD on the Reclamation lands operated under the management agreement. As the lead agency under CEQA, ARD is charged with carrying out environmental review under CEQA so that ARD’s Board of Directors may evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed project prior
Recommended publications
  • Auburn-Folsom South Unit Central Valley Project

    Auburn-Folsom South Unit Central Valley Project

    Auburn-Folsom South Unit Central Valley Project Technical Memorandum Project Description Review March 2006 U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conducted by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region Division of Planning Technical Memorandum prepared by: March 2006 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND The Auburn-Folsom South Unit was authorized in September 1965 by Public Law 89-161 as an operationally and financially integrated part of the Central Valley Project (CVP). Authorized features of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit include in the following: • Auburn Dam, Reservoir, and Powerplant on the North Fork of the American River • Folsom South Canal • Sugar Pine Dam, Reservoir, and conveyance • County Line Dam, Reservoir, and conveyance Construction on the Auburn-Folsom South Unit was initiated in 1967. Sugar Pine Dam, Reservoir, and conveyance have been completed. Construction of the first two reaches of the Folsom South Canal, about 27 miles, was completed in 1973 but further construction has been suspended. Construction has not been initiated on the County Line Dam and associated features. Construction of the Auburn Dam portion of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit was deferred following an earthquake in 1975 near Oroville. In Section 209 of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2005, the Secretary of the Interior was directed to complete a Special Report to update the costs and associated benefits of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The primary purpose of this Technical Memorandum (TM) is to identify those project features included in the authorized Auburn-Folsom South Unit that would be applicable today if it were decided to continue with implementation of the project.
  • North Fork American River Trail Project

    North Fork American River Trail Project

    Administrative Draft Initial Study / Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Assessment North Fork American River Trail Project Prepared for: SCH Placer#0000000000 County Department of Facility Services and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation May 5, 2004 Printed on Recycled Paper Administrative Draft Initial Study / Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Assessment North Fork American River Trail Project Prepared for: Placer County DepartmentSCH of #2001112092Facility Services 11476 C Avenue Auburn, CA 95603 Contact: Andy Fisher 530/889-6819 and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 7794 Folsom Dam Road Folsom, CA 95630 Contact: Rob Schroeder 916/989-7274 Prepared by: EDAW 2022 J Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Debra Bishop 916/414-5800 May 5, 2004 Printed on Recycled Paper P 3T128.01 Table of Contents Chapter Page 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Document and Regulatory Guidance........................................ 1-1 1.2 Lead Agencies and Other Agency Involvement ................................................. 1-1 1.3 Reference Materials Used in Preparation of this Document ............................. 1-2 1.4 Document Organization...................................................................................... 1-2 1.5 Public Scoping and Review Process .................................................................... 1-3 2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION...................................................
  • Lake Clementine Trail (#18 on the ASRA Topo Trail Map)

    Lake Clementine Trail (#18 on the ASRA Topo Trail Map)

    Lake Clementine Trail (#18 on the ASRA Topo Trail Map) Distance: 1.9 miles; 1 hr each way (hiking) Lake Clementine Trail begins at the conflu- ence area on the far side of the curved Old Difficulty: Easy, except for short stretch where Foresthill Bridge (built in 1955). It parallels the trail narrows due to wash out NF American River upstream, river left. At ¼ mile, concrete abutments for what was known Slope: 3½% avg; 11% max. (see below) as the Steel Bridge (1911-1955) may be seen on the opposite riverbank. At ½ mile, the trail Trailhead / Parking: (N38-54-941; W121-02-144) goes under the Foresthill Bridge (see sidebar). Trailhead is at confluence area, 1¾ miles south At ¾ mile, Clarks Hole can be seen on the left. of ASRA Park Headquarters. Take Hwy 49 from It is a deep and clear rock-lined swimming hole Auburn south to Old Foresthill Road at the bottom that has been popular with locals for over one of the canyon. Continue straight for ¼ mile, cross hundred years. A short side trail, on the left, the curved Old Foresthill Bridge, and park on the leads down to the pool and a sandy beach. The right. Trailhead is on the left across from the summer water temperature of the river below parking area behind the green gate. Lake Clementine is surprisingly warm since it is fed from sun-warmed water from the surface of Description the lake flowing over the North Fork Dam. By contrast, the Middle Fork American River is fed This easy trail is ideal for a panoramic hike along from the bottom of Oxbow Reservoir and is the North Fork (NF) American River, much of it in considerably colder.
  • 11.0 Soils, Geology, and Seismicity

    11.0 Soils, Geology, and Seismicity

    11.0 SOILS, GEOLOGY, AND SEISMICITY This chapter summarizes existing geologic conditions in the project area, describes applicable regulations, and evaluates project-related impacts associated with on-site geology, soils, seismic hazards, and slope stability. Mitigation measures are recommended as necessary to reduce significant geologic impacts. As described in Chapter 1.0, “Introduction,” the proposed project would not result in the loss of any known mineral resources, nor would it impede or interfere with mineral extraction operations, and the project area is not delineated as a locally important recovery site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have no effect with regard to mineral resources, and this topic will not be discussed further in this chapter. 11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 11.1.1 PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING The project area is located along the western slope of the Sierra Nevada Geomorphic Province. The Sierra Nevada Geomorphic Province is a tilted fault block nearly 400 miles long. Its east face is a high, rugged multiple scarp, in contrast with the gentle western slope, which disappears under sediments of the Great Valley. Deep river canyons are cut into the western slope. Their upper courses, especially in massive granites of the higher Sierra Nevada, are modified by glacial sculpturing, forming such scenic features as the Yosemite Valley. The high crest culminates in Mount Whitney, with an elevation of 14,495 feet above sea level near the eastern scarp. The metamorphic bedrock contains gold-bearing veins in the northwest trending Mother Lode. The northern Sierra Nevada boundary is marked where bedrock disappears under the Cenozoic volcanic cover of the Cascade Range (California Geological Survey 2002).
  • Final LAND 3 – Technical Study Report

    Final LAND 3 – Technical Study Report

    Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project (FERC No. 2079) FINAL LAND 3 – EMERGENCY ACTION AND PUBLIC SAFETY TECHNICAL STUDY REPORT Placer County Water Agency P.O. Box 6570 Auburn, CA 95604 March 2010 FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Study Objectives................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Study Implementation........................................................................................... 1 3.1. Study Elements Completed ....................................................................... 1 3.2. Variances from the LAND 3 – TSP ............................................................ 2 3.3. Outstanding Study Elements ..................................................................... 2 3.4. Proposed Modifications to the LAND 3 – TSP ........................................... 2 4.0 Extent of Study Area............................................................................................. 2 5.0 Study Approach.................................................................................................... 2 5.1. PCWA’s EAP ............................................................................................. 3 5.2. Project Emergencies not Covered under the EAP ..................................... 3 5.3. Inter-Agency Notification and Coordination in the Event of a Non-Project Emergency................................................................................................