appendices sir francis drake boulevard rehabilitation project environmental impact report

570 Pages·2010·53.22 MB·English

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
A P P E N D I C E S
S I R F R A N C I S D R A K E B O U L E V A R D
R E H A B I L I T A T I O N P R O J E C T
E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER
2008112004

May 2010
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
A P P E N D I C E S
S I R F R A N C I S D R A K E B O U L E V A R D
R E H A B I L I T A T I O N P R O J E C T
E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
S C H # 2 0 0 8 1 1 2 0 0 4
Submitted to:
Marin County Department of Public Works
3501 Civic Center Drive
San Rafael, California 94903
Contact: Mr. Dave Bernardi
[phone]
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, Inc.
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, California 94801
[phone]
LSA Project No. BKF0902

May 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX A: SUMMARY TABLE OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
APPENDIX B: NOTICE OF PREPARATION
APPENDIX C: COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF
PREPARATION
APPENDIX D: TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC SCOPING SESSION
APPENDIX E: BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX F: TREE INVENTORY
APPENDIX G: AIR QUALITY MODELING
APPENDIX H: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
APPENDIX I: SLOPE INSTABILITY PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL
MEMORANDUM
i
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Shanna-Work\SFDB\SCDEIR\Appendices\SFDB_AppendixTOC.doc (5/3/2010)
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. SIR FRANCIS DRAKE ROADWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT EIR
MAY 2010 APPENDICES

This page intentionally left blank.
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Shanna-Work\SFDB\SCDEIR\Appendices\SFDB_AppendicesDividers.doc (5/3/2010)
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. SIR FRANCIS DRAKE ROADWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT EIR
MAY 2010 APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY TABLE OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Shanna-Work\SFDB\SCDEIR\Appendices\SFDB_AppendicesDividers.doc (5/3/2010)
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. SIR FRANCIS DRAKE ROADWAY REHABILITATION PROJECT EIR
MAY 2010 APPENDICES

This page intentionally left blank.
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\My Documents\Shanna-Work\SFDB\SCDEIR\Appendices\SFDB_AppendicesDividers.doc (5/3/2010)
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation Project
November 2008
# of
Date Commenter’s
Letters Letter Date Company Title City Comments EIR Topic EIR Section
Received Name
Received
Federal Agencies, Other Nations
1 11/24/2008 11/26/2008 National Park Service Don L Neubacher Superintendent Pt. Reyes • Construction noise and vibration NOISE 3.4.2
Stn impacts to wildlife (fish) and trees. WATER QUALITY 4.3.1
• Construction season.
• Road safety during construction. FISH HABITAT 4.3.4
• Pullouts should not pond or RUNOFF 4.5.1
increase sediment to creek. TREES 4.5.4
• Evaluate impacts on wildlife GEO 4.6.4
species. /
• Number of culverts and 4.6.1, 4.6.4
overwintering habitat for fish.
• Lagunitas Creek already has
impacted water quality.
• Managing road runoff.
• Management of fallen trees.
• Slope instability.
2 11/23/2008 11/26/2008 Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria Nick Tipon Chairman Rohnert • Presence of sacred gathering sites CULTURAL 4.4.1
Park and cultural resources.
• Request meeting with lead agency.
State Agencies
3 11/24/2008 11/25/2008 California RWQCB Bruce Wolf Exec Officer Oakland • Preferred alternative not clear. PROJ DES 4.3.4
• Need link between road widening ALTERNATIVES 4.5.1
and safety.
• Alternatives should include WATER QUALITY 4.5.4
nonstructural methods. 4.6.4
• Water quality and habitat impacts CREEK
from paving, construction, SEDIMENT
widening, turnouts, culverts, tree

removal, and bank stabilization.
• Impacts to Lagunitas Creek for SLOPE
water quality, endangered species, STABILITY
riparian zone functions, stream
productivity, macroinvertebrates,
DRAINAGE
stream geomorphology, sediment
discharge. RUNOFF
• Impacts to tree roots. WATER QUALITY
• Bank instability and upslope
stability.
• Bioswales.
• Road drainage.
• Ability for creek to meander.
• Road pullouts and pollutant
discharges.
• Construction water quality
impacts.
4 11/13/2008 11/17/2008 Caltrans Lisa Carboni Dist. Branch Chief Oakland • Impacts to traffic on State Route TRAFFIC 4.8
1.
• Need encroachment permit in
State ROW.
5 11/20/2008 11/24/2008 Calif Dept of Toxic Substance Control Homayune Atiqee Project Manager Berkeley • Aerially deposited lead due to HAZARDOUS 4.7.1, 4.7.2,
proximity to highway. MATERIALS 4.7.4
• Contaminated soils should be
4.7.4
adequately sampled.
• Ability to assist with Voluntary
Cleanup Program.
04/08/10 (P:\BKF0902\EIR\Screencheck DEIR\Appendices\Appendix A Comments Recvd by Topic Table.doc) 1
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation Project
November 2008
# of
Date Commenter’s
Letters Letter Date Company Title City Comments EIR Topic EIR Section
Received Name
Received
6 11/13/2008 11/17/2008 Calif Native American Heritage Comm. Kay Sanchez Program Analyst Sacramento • Contact appropriate regional CULTURAL 4.4.1
archaeological Information Center
for a record search.
• If archaeological inventory
required then prepare a
professional report detailing
findings and recommendations.
• Contact Native American Heritage
Commission for a sacred lands file
check and a list of Native American
contacts.

Regional Agencies
11/20/2008 Marin Transit Amy Van Doren Transit Planning • Significant impact to West Marin TRAFFIC 4.8
Manager Stagecoach transit service. TRANSIT
• Need to consider transit service.
• Eastbound and westbound stops DELAYS
located in Camp Taylor.
• Project blocks pullouts used by
transit as “flag-stops”.
• Pullouts should accommodate
3.4.2
transit vehicles.
• Marin Transit needs info on
construction delays to plan route
changes.
Local Agencies
5/8/2008 11/15/2008 Fairfax Town Council Mary Ann Mayor Fairfax Fairfax • No cutting of old growth redwoods. TREES 4.3.4
7 Maggiore • Protect stream from construction WATER QUALITY 4.6.4
and runoff.
• Preserve water quality for WILDLIFE
vegetation and wildlife. SAFETY
• Protect owl habitat.
• Bicycle safety.
Local Interest Groups
8 11/5/2008 11/5/2008 Marin Horse Council Sandy Greenblat San Rafael • Widen shoulders and pullouts to PAVEMENT
greatest extent possible with no SURFACE
variation in level of pavement to
3.4.1
prevent “dropping off”.
• Signage necessary to prevent PARKING
parking.
9 11/21/2008 11/24/2008 Marin Conservation League Nona Dennis President Mill Valley • No additional sedimentation in SEDIMENTATION 4.3.4
Lagunitas Creek. WATER QUALITY 4.6.4
• Risk of pollutants entering creek
ROAD 4.8
from construction.
• Need ongoing maintenance plan MAINTENANCE 4.10
for roadway to protect creek.
• Cumulative impacts to Lagunitas EROSION
Creek from project over time.
• 43 pullouts to be paved with TREES
permeable asphalt: impacts vs.
leaving in natural state and
erosion at edge of pullouts.
• Tree removal could cause
TRAFFIC
sedimentation and erosion, and
reduce shading of creek. ACCIDENTS
• Location of replacement trees and
disposal of trees to be removed.
• Use actual traffic counts; traffic

protections should extend 30 years
04/08/10 (P:\BKF0902\EIR\Screencheck DEIR\Appendices\Appendix A Comments Recvd by Topic Table.doc) 2
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation Project
November 2008
# of
Date Commenter’s
Letters Letter Date Company Title City Comments EIR Topic EIR Section
Received Name
Received
• Inform on current accidents and
collisions and project with project TRAFFIC 4.8.4
including Option A.
• Widening could affect traffic
behavior, e.g. speed
• Include alternative that directs
bikes away from roadway and then
evaluate potential impacts to old

railroad right of way.
• Noise during construction. NOISE 4.10.4
• Need project performance
monitoring during construction.
10 11/20/2008 11/25/2008 Marin County Bicycle Coalition Andy Peri Outreach Coord Fairfax • Evaluate safety issues related to ROAD SAFETY 4.8.4
variable shoulder width. TREES
• Evaluate shoulder widths ranging

from 18 inches to 4 feet to
minimize removal of trees.
• Evaluate installing minimal width
travel lanes (10.5 or less) to SPEED 5.3
reduce tree impacts.
• Evaluate increases in auto speed
with widening of shoulders.
• Evaluate how to create consistent ROAD SURFACE 3.4.1
riding surface in areas where
permeable pavement may be used
(turnouts).
• Evaluate options for improvements
to surface of roadway.
11 11/23/2008 11/26/2008 Sierra Club – Marin Branch Gordon Bennett Conservation Chair Inverness • Study new preferred alternative ALTERNATIVES 4.3.1
with 10 foot travel lanes, 1-foot ROAD SAFETY 4.3.4
paved shoulder and no tree
4.5.1
removal.
• Study whether paved shoulders 4.5.4
increase safety. ACCIDENTS 4.6.4
• Study whether 10 foot lanes, 4.8
consistent with existing bridges,
5.3
would be safer than 11 foot lanes.
• Study claim that 11 foot lanes TRAFFIC
would reduce vehicle accidents 4.7.4
compared to narrower lanes.
• Analyze justification of reduced
ROAD WIDTH
accidents given that existing
accident rates is .00053% in past
5 years.
• Calculate capacity of both 10 foot PULLOUTS
and 11 foot lanes on communities
TREES
at both ends of project area.
• Study impact of moving roadway
further away from creek with 10 MAINTENANCE
foot lanes rather than 11 foot
lanes.
• Clarify road configuration data; TREES
clearly define both existing and
proposed linear lengths of road
width, lane width and shoulder
width.
• Analyze impacts of eliminating
unofficial pullouts on bicycle safety SHOULDERS
04/08/10 (P:\BKF0902\EIR\Screencheck DEIR\Appendices\Appendix A Comments Recvd by Topic Table.doc) 3
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS
Sir Francis Drake Rehabilitation Project
November 2008
# of
Date Commenter’s
Letters Letter Date Company Title City Comments EIR Topic EIR Section
Received Name
Received
or environmental education. TREES
• Analyze data on tree by tree basis
to remove significantly fewer

trees.
• Identify dedicated source of funds TREE COUNT
to keep road shoulders clear of
debris.
• Address immediate, long term and
CREEK
cumulative impact from proposed
tree removals and develop metrics SETBACKS
to rank each tree by its
contribution to riparian function.
• Consider whether Sudden Oak
TREES
Death may change baseline of
riparian function.
• Round shoulder widths to half feet FISH HABITAT
not whole feet for comparison.
• Clarify impact of each tree
RUNOFF
proposed for removal on shoulder
width.
• Study whether adjacent roadway
during its 30 year life may yet
impact trees left standing through
WILDLIFE
the construction phase.
• Clarify methodology for counting
trees acknowledging that HAZARDOUS
redwoods often grow multiple MATERIALS
trunks.
• Areas further than 100 feet from
creekbank should have wider
shoulders, while areas closer to SEDIMENT
the creek should have a maximum
of 1 foot to increase riparian

functions.
• Clarify inconsistencies between
Table 2 (no trees removed), Table WETLANDS
3 (24 trees removed) and Table 4
list of trees proposed for removal.
• Study providing habitat and/or fish ROADWAY
friendly culverts on all tributaries
to Lagunitas Creek. SLOPE REPAIR
• Compare the estimated
contribution to peak flows from the

current road with cracks, and the
estimated peak flow from the RETAINING
proposed project. WALLS
• Study methods to make the
discharge from ditch relief culverts
RIGHT OF WAY
as close to the sheet flow that
would have occurred without the
presence of the road.
• Analyze how the project during
construction and lifespan will
reduce or prevent impacts to the
watershed’s habitats and wildlife.
• Indicate the construction staging
area and if it contains hazardous
materials, the study which safety
measures should be taken to
protect wildlife and habitats.
04/08/10 (P:\BKF0902\EIR\Screencheck DEIR\Appendices\Appendix A Comments Recvd by Topic Table.doc) 4