DOCSLIB.ORG

Contra Costa County, California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

VOLUME 12 OF 45 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND INCORPORATED AREAS Community Community Name Number ANTIOCH, CITY OF 060026 BRENTWOOD, CITY OF 060439 CLAYTON, CITY OF 060027 CONCORD, CITY OF 065022 DANVILLE, TOWN OF 060707 EL CERRITO, CITY OF 065027 HERCULES , CITY OF 060434 LAFAYETTE , CITY OF 065037 MARTINEZ , CITY OF 065044 MORAGA , TOWN OF 060637 OAKLEY , CITY OF 060766 ORINDA, CITY OF 060722 PINOLE, CITY OF 060032 PITTSBURG, CITY OF 060033 PLEASANT HILL, CITY OF 060034 RICHMOND, CITY OF 060035 SAN PABLO, CITY OF 060036 SAN RAMON, CITY OF 060710 WALNUT CREEK, CITY OF 065070 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) 060025 REVISED March 21, 2017 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 06013CV002C NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: June 16, 2009 Revised Countywide FIS Dates: September 30, 2015 March 21, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1 – March 21, 2017 Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of Study ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Authority and Acknowledgments ...................................................................................... 1 1.3 Coordination ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.0 AREA STUDIED ......................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Scope of Study ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2 Community Description .................................................................................................. 14 2.3 Principal Flood Problems ................................................................................................ 16 2.4 Flood Protection Measures .............................................................................................. 29 3.0 ENGINEERING METHODS ..................................................................................................... 38 3.1 Hydrologic Analyses ....................................................................................................... 38 TABLES Table 1: Initial and Final CCO Meetings ..................................................................................................... 9 Table 2: Flooding Sources Studied by Detailed Methods .......................................................................... 11 Table 3: Flooding Sources Studied by Approximate Methods .................................................................. 13 Table 4: Letters of Map Change ................................................................................................................ 14 Table 5: Historic Floods ............................................................................................................................. 31 Table 6: Summary of Discharges ............................................................................................................... 56 Table 7: Summary of Elevations ................................................................................................................ 67 i TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued VOLUME 2 – March 21, 2017 Page 3.0 ENGINEERING METHODS, continued .................................................................................. 68 3.2 Hydraulic Analyses ......................................................................................................... 68 3.3 Vertical Datum .............................................................................................................. 105 4.0 FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS ............................................................. 108 4.1 Floodplain Boundaries .................................................................................................. 108 4.2 Floodways ..................................................................................................................... 116 FIGURES Figure 1. Floodway Schematic................................................................................................................. 124 TABLES, continued Table 8: Manning’s “n” Values ................................................................................................................. 97 Table 9: List of Structures Requiring Flood Hazard Revisions ............................................................... 101 Table 10: List of Certified and Accredited Levees .................................................................................. 103 Table 11: Vertical Datum Conversions .................................................................................................... 105 Table 12: Topographic Map Information ................................................................................................. 109 Table 13: Floodway Data ......................................................................................................................... 125 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued VOLUME 3 – March 21, 2017 Page 5.0 INSURANCE APPLICATIONS ............................................................................................... 169 6.0 FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP ........................................................................................ 170 7.0 OTHER STUDIES ..................................................................................................................... 173 8.0 LOCATION OF DATA ............................................................................................................. 173 9.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES................................................................................. 173 10.0 REVISIONS TO THIS FIS ....................................................................................................... 186 10.1 Coastal Analyses ........................................................................................................... 186 10.2 Coastal Floodplain Boundaries ..................................................................................... 189 10.3 Second Revision – Riverine Analyses .......................................................................... 196 FIGURES, continued Figure 2: Transect Location Maps ............................................................................................................ 190 TABLES, continued Table 14: Community Map History ......................................................................................................... 171 Table 15: Transect Data Table .................................................................................................................. 194 EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 – Flood Profiles Along Giant Road from Standard Oil Tank to Rheem Creek Panel 01P Appian Creek Panel 02P Arroyo Del Hambra Creek Panels 03P-04P Brookside Road Tributary Panel 05P Brushy Creek Panels 05P(a)-05P(i) Cascade Creek Panel 06P Clayton Valley Drain Panels 07P-09P Corliss Drive Tributary Panels 10P-11P Deer Creek Panel 12P Ditch No. 2 Panels 13P-14P iii TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued VOLUME 3, continued – March 21, 2017 Exhibit 1 – Flood Profiles (continued) Donner Creek Panel 15P East Antioch Creek Panels 16P-19P East Branch Green Valley Creek Panel 20P East Branch Homestead Creek Panel 21P East Branch Refugio Creek Panels 22P-23P East Fork Grayson Creek Panels 24P-25P Farm Bureau Road Drain Panel 26P Frisk Creek Reach 1 Panels 26P(a)-26P(b) Frisk Creek Reach 2 Panel 26P(c) Galindo Creek Panels 27P-32P Garrity Creek Panel 33P Grayson Creek Panels 34P-35P VOLUME 4 Exhibit 1 – Flood Profiles (continued) Green Valley Creek Panels 36P-40P Grizzly Creek Panels 41P-42P Happy Valley Creek Panels 43P-45P Hidden Valley Creek Panel 46P Hillcrest Branch East Antioch Creek Panels 47P-48P Homestead Creek Panel 49P Ivy Drive Tributary Panel 50P Jonas Hill Creek Panels 51P-52P Kellogg Creek Panels 52P(a)-52P(f) Kellogg Creek Split Flow Panel 52P(g) Kirker Creek Panels 53P-57P Lafayette Creek Panels 58P-60P Laguna Creek Panels 61P-64P Larch Creek Panels 65P-67P Las Trampas Creek Panels 68P-80P Lauterwasser Creek Panels 81P-83P Lawlor Creek Panels 84P-85P Line A, DA-40 Panel 86P Los Medanos Wasteway Panels 87P-89P Mangini Creek Panel 90P Markley Creek Panels 91P-93P Marsh Creek Panels 94P-100P Middle Branch West Antioch Creek Panels 101P-102P Miranda Creek Panels 103P-104P Mitchell Creek Panels 105P-106P Moraga Creek Panels 107P-109P Mt. Diablo Creek Panels 110P-119P(e) Mt. Diablo Creek-Split Flow Panel 120P iv TABLE OF CONTENTS, continued VOLUME 5 – March 21, 2017 Exhibit 1 – Flood Profiles (continued)
Recommended publications
  • US Format C V2.1

    US Format C V2.1

    APPENDIX G-7 Listed, Proposed Species, and Critical Habitat Potentially Occurring or Known to Occur in the Project Region Listed, Proposed Species, and Critical Habitat Potentially Occurring or Known to Occur in the Project Region. Scientific Name/ Common Federal/State/ General Habitat Description Habitat Rationale Name CNPS/other Present/ Status Absent Invertebrates Adela oplerella --/--/G2G3, S2S3 Opler's longhorn moth is recorded from 18 sites A Suitable habitat for this species is not Opler’s longhorn moth extending along the west side of the San present within the project site. Francisco Bay from 5 miles southeast of Nicasio in Marin County south to the Gilroy area of Santa Clara County and from the Oakland area on the inner Coast Ranges. Habitat for Opler's longhorn moth consists of serpentine grassland (Federal Register 50CFR17). Andrena blennospermatis --/--/G2, S2 Known occurrences in Contra Costa, Lake, A Yellow carpet is absent from the Blennosperma vernal pool Sonoma, Solano, Yolo, Tehamea, Sacramento, project site. Upland habitat adjacent andrenid bee San Joaquin, El Dorado, and Placer Counties. to vernal pools in the area is Habitat consists of upland areas near vernal pools composed of substrate, such as containing yellow carpet (Blennosperma sp.). gravel, compacted soil, or heavily Forages exclusively on flowering yellow carpet. disturbed soil, which does not This species excavates nests in soil in adjacent provide suitable nesting habitat for upland areas (Thorp 2008). this species. Branchinecta conservatio FE/--/-- Conservancy fairy shrimp inhabit rather large, cool- A Suitable habitat for this species does conservancy fairy shrimp water vernal pools with moderately turbid water. It not occur on site.
  • San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

    San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

    San Francisco Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan October 2019 Table of Contents List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures.............................................................................................................................. ii Chapter 1: Governance ............................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Governance Team and Structure ...................................................... 1-1 1.2.1 Coordinating Committee ......................................................... 1-2 1.2.2 Stakeholders .......................................................................... 1-3 1.2.2.1 Identification of Stakeholder Types ....................... 1-4 1.2.3 Letter of Mutual Understandings Signatories .......................... 1-6 1.2.3.1 Alameda County Water District ............................. 1-6 1.2.3.2 Association of Bay Area Governments ................. 1-6 1.2.3.3 Bay Area Clean Water Agencies .......................... 1-6 1.2.3.4 Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency ................................................................. 1-8 1.2.3.5 Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District .................................. 1-8 1.2.3.6 Contra Costa Water District .................................. 1-9 1.2.3.7
  • Weekly Projects Bidding 8/13/2021

    Weekly Projects Bidding 8/13/2021

    Weekly Projects Bidding 8/13/2021 Reasonable care is given in gathering, compiling and furnishing the information contained herein which is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but the Planroom is not responsible or liable for errors, omissions or inaccuracies. Plan# Name Bid Date & Time OPR# Location Estimate Project Type Monday, August 16, 2021 OUTREACH MEETING (VIRTUAL) EVERGREEN VALLEY COLLEGE (EVC) STUDENT SERVICES Addenda: 0 COMPLEX (REQUEST FOR SUB BIDS) SC 8/16/21 10:00 AM 21-02526 San Jose School ONLINE Plan Issuer: XL Construction 408-240-6000 408-240-6001 THIS IS A VIRTUAL OUTREACH MEETING. REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED. SEE FLYER FOR DETAILS. The 74,000 sf Student Services Complex at Evergreen Valley College is part of the San Jose Evergreen Community College District's Measure X Bond Program. This is a new ground-up two -story complex including collaboration spaces, offices, storage, restrooms and supporting facilities. All subcontractors must be prequalified with XL Construction to bid the project. Please email [email protected] for a prequalification application link, and [email protected] if you are an Under Utilized Business Enterprise (SBE, WBE, MBE, VBE...). REFINISHING GYM AND STAGE FLOORS AT CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND Addenda: 0 8/16/21 12:00 PM 21-02463 Fremont State-Federal Plan Issuer: California Department of Education - Personnel Service Division 916-319-0800 000-000-0000 Contract #: BF210152 The Contractor shall provide all labor, equipment and materials necessary for preparing and refinishing the stage and gym floors, twice a year, at the California School for the Blind (CSB), located at 500 Walnut Avenue, Fremont.
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018

    AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018

    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
  • Contra Costa County

    Contra Costa County

    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Marsh Creek Watershed Marsh Creek flows approximately 30 miles from the eastern slopes of Mt. Diablo to Suisun Bay in the northern San Francisco Estuary. Its watershed consists of about 100 square miles. The headwaters of Marsh Creek consist of numerous small, intermittent and perennial tributaries within the Black Hills. The creek drains to the northwest before abruptly turning east near Marsh Creek Springs. From Marsh Creek Springs, Marsh Creek flows in an easterly direction entering Marsh Creek Reservoir, constructed in the 1960s. The creek is largely channelized in the lower watershed, and includes a drop structure near the city of Brentwood that appears to be a complete passage barrier. Marsh Creek enters the Big Break area of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta northeast of the city of Oakley. Marsh Creek No salmonids were observed by DFG during an April 1942 visual survey of Marsh Creek at two locations: 0.25 miles upstream from the mouth in a tidal reach, and in close proximity to a bridge four miles east of Byron (Curtis 1942).
  • Wildcat Creek Restoration Action Plan Version 1.3 April 26, 2010 Prepared by the URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

    Wildcat Creek Restoration Action Plan Version 1.3 April 26, 2010 Prepared by the URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

    wildcat creek restoration action plan version 1.3 April 26, 2010 prepared by THE URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL Adopted by the City of San Pablo on August 3, 2010 wildcat creek restoration action plan table of contents 1. INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 plan obJectives 5 1.2 scope 6 Urban Urban 1.5 Methods 8 1.5 Metadata c 10 reeks 2. WATERSHED OVERVIEW 12 c 2.1 introdUction o 12 U 2.2 watershed land Use ncil 13 2.3 iMpacts of Urbanized watersheds 17 april 2.4 hydrology 19 2.5 sediMent transport 22 2010 2.6 water qUality 24 2.7 habitat 26 2.8 flood ManageMent on lower wildcat creek 29 2.9 coMMUnity 32 3. PROJECT AREA ANALYSIS 37 3.1 overview 37 3.2 flooding 37 3.4 in-streaM conditions 51 3.5 sUMMer fish habitat 53 3.6 bioassessMent 57 4. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 58 4.1 obJectives, findings and strategies 58 4.2 recoMMended actions according to strategy 61 4.3 streaM restoration recoMMendations by reach 69 4.4 recoMMended actions for phase one reaches 73 t 4.5 phase one flood daMage redUction reach 73 able of 4.6 recoMMended actions for watershed coUncil 74 c ontents version 1.3 april 26, 2010 2 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban creeks coUncil april 2010 table of contents 3 figUre 1-1: wildcat watershed overview to Point Pinole Regional Shoreline wildcat watershed existing trail wildcat creek highway railroad city of san pablo planned trail other creek arterial road bart Parkway SAN PABLO Richmond BAY Avenue San Pablo Point UP RR San Pablo WEST COUNTY BNSF RR CITY OF LANDFILL NORTH SAN PABLO RICHMOND San Pablo
  • (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California

    Historical Distribution and Current Status of Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California Robert A. Leidy, Environmental Protection Agency, San Francisco, CA Gordon S. Becker, Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA Brett N. Harvey, John Muir Institute of the Environment, University of California, Davis, CA This report should be cited as: Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS Forward p. 3 Introduction p. 5 Methods p. 7 Determining Historical Distribution and Current Status; Information Presented in the Report; Table Headings and Terms Defined; Mapping Methods Contra Costa County p. 13 Marsh Creek Watershed; Mt. Diablo Creek Watershed; Walnut Creek Watershed; Rodeo Creek Watershed; Refugio Creek Watershed; Pinole Creek Watershed; Garrity Creek Watershed; San Pablo Creek Watershed; Wildcat Creek Watershed; Cerrito Creek Watershed Contra Costa County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 39 Alameda County p. 45 Codornices Creek Watershed; Strawberry Creek Watershed; Temescal Creek Watershed; Glen Echo Creek Watershed; Sausal Creek Watershed; Peralta Creek Watershed; Lion Creek Watershed; Arroyo Viejo Watershed; San Leandro Creek Watershed; San Lorenzo Creek Watershed; Alameda Creek Watershed; Laguna Creek (Arroyo de la Laguna) Watershed Alameda County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p. 91 Santa Clara County p. 97 Coyote Creek Watershed; Guadalupe River Watershed; San Tomas Aquino Creek/Saratoga Creek Watershed; Calabazas Creek Watershed; Stevens Creek Watershed; Permanente Creek Watershed; Adobe Creek Watershed; Matadero Creek/Barron Creek Watershed Santa Clara County Maps: Historical Status, Current Status p.
  • 2004 Rapid Bioassessment Project Report Contra

    2004 Rapid Bioassessment Project Report Contra

    CONTRA COSTA MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT PLAN (CCMAP) 2004 RAPID BIOASSESSMENT PROJECT REPORT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: Contra Costa Clean Water Program 600 Main St. Martinez, CA 94553 Prepared by: Scott Cressey Cressey & Associates 147 Ashbury Avenue El Cerrito, CA 94530 & Chris Sommers EOA, Inc. 1410 Jackson Street Oakland, CA 94612 August 18, 2005 1 Preface The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (Program) initiated a water quality monitoring and assessment plan (Contra Costa Monitoring and Assessment Plan) within Alhambra Creek, the Program's pilot watershed in 2001. The Program contracted Scott Cressey of Cressey & Associates in 2002, 2003 and 2004 to assist in preparing the work plan for, and ultimately the implementation of, a study to conduct rapid bioassessments on Las Trampas Creek, Refugio Creek, Rodeo Creek, Edwards Creek and Lower Marsh Creek. The California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP) protocols for Non-point Source Design were followed during all years. This project was overseen and managed by Chris Sommers (EOA Inc.), Monitoring Program Project Manager for the Program. Mr. Sommers worked closely with Cressey & Associates to apply his expertise bioassessment to study design and data analysis, and was also responsible for the critical review and edits to the draft reports. iii D:\2004 Bio Report Final.doc Executive Summary In April 2001, the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (Program) initiated a water quality monitoring and assessment plan within Alhambra Creek, the Program's pilot watershed. The Contra Costa Monitoring and Assessment Plan (CCMAP) is a long-term strategy designed to assess the conditions of watersheds, water bodies, and water quality within Contra Costa County (County).
  • El Cerrito Agenda

    El Cerrito Agenda

    THE CITY OF EL CERRITO AGENDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, March 6, 2012-6:40 p.m. Hillside Conference Room REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, March 6, 2012-7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING- CLOSED SESSION Tuesday, March 6, 2012- Immediately Following the Municipal Services Corporation Meeting Hillside Conference Room Meeting Location El Cerrito City Hall 10890 San Pablo A venue, El Cerrito Bill Jones - Mayor Mayor Pro Tern Greg Lyman Councilmember Ann Cheng Councilmember Rebecca Benassini Councilmember Janet Abelson 6:40p.m. ROLLCALL CONVENE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Comments are limited to 3 minutes per person and to this special agenda only. COMMISSION INTERVIEWS, STATUS AND APPOINTMENTS Conduct interviews of candidates for city boards and commissions. Interviews may result in an announcement of appointment at the meeting. The City Council may also discuss scheduling of future interviews. ADJOURN SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROLLCALL 7:00p.m. CONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING Page 2 of 4 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG - led by Mayor Pro Tern Lyman. 2. COUNCIL I STAFF COMMUNICATIONS (Reports ofClosed Session, commission appointments and informational reports on matters ofgeneral interest which are announced by the City Council & City Staff) 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC All persons wishing to speak should sign up with the City Clerk. Remarks are limited to 3 minutes per person. Please state your name and city of residence for the record. Comments regarding non-agenda, presentation and consent calendar items will be heardfirst. Comments related to items appearing on the Public Hearing or Policy Matter portions ofthe Agenda are taken up at the time the City Council deliberates each action item.
  • Update to the Safety Element of the General Plan

    Update to the Safety Element of the General Plan

    CITY OF HERCULES SAFETY ELEMENT Administrative Draft November 2020 Draft 2020 | HERCULES SAFETY ELEMENT VI-1 VI-2 Table of Contents 1.INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW ............................................................................ 9 PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC OUTREACH .......................................................................................................... 9 COMMUNITY PROFILE ............................................................................................................................................11 SENATE BILL 535 – DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES .......................................................................................................... 12 SENATE BILL 1000 – ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE................................................................................................................... 12 GENERAL PLAN POLICIES ........................................................................................................................................15 RELATIONSHIP TO GENERAL PLAN ..........................................................................................................................15 LAND USE ELEMENT (ADOPTED 1998) ................................................................................................................................ 15 OPEN SPACE & CONSERVATION ELEMENT (ADOPTED 1998) ............................................................................................... 16 HOUSING ELEMENT (ADOPTED 2015) ................................................................................................................................
  • California Clapper Rail ( Rallus Longirostris Obsoletus ) TE-807078-10

    California Clapper Rail ( Rallus Longirostris Obsoletus ) TE-807078-10

    2009 Annual Report: California Clapper Rail ( Rallus longirostris obsoletus ) TE-807078-10 Submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento December 16, 2009 Submitted by PRBO Conservation Science Leonard Liu 1, Julian Wood 1, and Mark Herzog 1 1PRBO Conservation Science, 3820 Cypress Drive #11, Petaluma, CA 94954 Contact: [email protected] Introduction The California Clapper Rail ( Rallus longirostris obsoletus ) is one of the most endangered species in California. The species is dependent on tidal wetlands, which have decreased over 75% from the historical extent in San Francisco Bay. A complete survey of its population and distribution within the San Francisco Bay Estuary was begun in 2005. In 2009, PRBO Conservation Science (PRBO) completed the fifth year of field work designed to provide an Estuary-wide abundance estimate and examine the temporal and spatial patterns in California Clapper Rail populations. Field work was performed in collaboration with partners conducting call-count surveys at complementary wetlands (Avocet Research Associates [ARA], California Department of Fish and Game, California Coastal Conservancy’s Invasive Spartina Project [ISP], and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). This report details PRBO’s California Clapper Rail surveys in 2009 under U.S. Fish and Wildlife service permit TE-807078-10. A more detailed report synthesizing 2009 and 2010 survey results from PRBO and its partners is forthcoming. Methods Call-count surveys were initiated January 15 and continued until May 6. All sites (Table 1) were surveyed 3 times by experienced permitted biologists using a point transect method, with 10 minutes per listening station. Listening stations primarily were located at marsh edges, levees bordering and within marshes, boardwalks, boat-accessible channels within the marsh, and in the case of 6 marshes in the North Bay, foot access within the marsh.
  • A Cultural and Natural History of the San Pablo Creek Watershed

    A Cultural and Natural History of the San Pablo Creek Watershed

    A Cultural and Natural History of the San Pablo Creek Watershed by Lisa Owens-Viani Prepared by The Watershed Project (previously known as the Aquatic Outreach Institute) Note: This booklet focuses on the watershed from the San Pablo Dam and reservoir westward (downstream). For a history of the Orinda area, see Muir Sorrick's The History of Orinda, published by the Orinda Library Board in 1970. Orinda also has an active creek stewardship group, the Friends of Orinda Creeks, which has conducted several watershed outreach efforts in local schools (see www.ci.orinda.ca.us/orindaway.htm). This booklet was written as part of the Aquatic Outreach Institute's efforts to develop stewardship of the mid- to lower watershed. The San Pablo Creek watershed is a wealthy one-rich in history, culture, and natural resources. The early native American inhabitants of the watershed drank from this deep and powerful creek and caught the steelhead that swam in its waters. They ate the tubers and roots of the plants that grew in the fertile soils deposited by the creek, and buried their artifacts, the shells and bones of the creatures they ate, and even their own dead along its banks. Later, European settlers grew fruit, grain, and vegetables in the same rich soils and watered cattle in the creek. Even today, residents of the San Pablo Creek watershed rely on the creek, perhaps unknowingly: its waters quench the thirst and meet the household needs of about 10 percent of the East Bay Municipal Utility District's customers. Some residents rely on the creek in another way, though-as a reminder that something wild and self-sufficient flows through their midst, offering respite from the surrounding urbanized landscape.