Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05121992 - WC.1 WCA _ Contra. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - Costa FROM: WATER COMMITTEE County" SUPERVISOR TOM TORLAKSON, CHAIR SUPERVISOR SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK DATE: MAY 12, 1992 SUBJECT: CALIFORNIA—OREGON TRANSMISSION PROJECT MITIGATION, SB-34/1065 LEVEE MITIGATION, LOS VAQUEROS PROJECT STAGE 2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Authorize Chair to sign a letter to the Department of Fish and Game expressing support of their in-county efforts for mitigation of the California-Oregon Transmission Project, and requesting further consideration of Jersey Island and Palm Tract east of the power line with appropriate buffer zone. 2 . Authorize Chair to sign a letter to the Governor and the Resources Secretary requesting speedy resolution of legal and payment issues associated with levee rehabilitation- projects and habitat mitigation of these projects; and petition the Resources Secretary for County involvement (.2 seats) , on the SB-34 Habitat Advisory. Committee. 3 . Authorize Chair to sign a letter providing. _recommended comments on the Los Vaqueros Project Stage 2 Draft EIR/EIS: FISCAL IMPACT . None. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : Supervisor Tom Torlakson, Chair Supervisor Sunne Wright MCPeak ACTION OF BOARD ON 9f APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _A OTHER The Board APPROVED the above recommendations, with the following additions to Recommendation No. 3: Include access to recreational opportunities for Contra Costans; consider economic impact of the project, local hire, prevailing wage and employing those in the project economic area; identification of haul roads and hours of the day when they can be utilized; and County representation on the citizen advisory commitee to consider recreational options and access questions. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Orig Community Development Dept. (CDD) ATTESTED cc: County Counsel PHIL B CHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY Ut , DEPUTY RG: \ walAWCAL-OR.etc i ICAL-OR Transmission Project Mitigation, SB-34/1065 Levee Mitigation, Los Vaqueros Project Stage 2 DEIR Continued - Page Two BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 1. . The California-Oregon Transmission Project provides for the addition of a 500 kv transmission line along the existing corridor, including an additional transmission corridor in the south-east portion of the County. An Environmental Impact Statement was completed for this project in 1988. Construction has begun within the County, and the issue of mitigation of impacts from this project came to the attention of the Water Committee in March of this year. Subsequent Board action consisted of a letter to the Western Area Power Administration strongly encouraging mitigation in this County rather than elsewhere, as suggested by the Department of Fish and Game. Suggested sites for mitigation were also included. Subsequent meetings with the Department of Fish and Game have indicated their willingness for in-County mitigation activities, considering Holland Tract, Bradford Island and Webb Tract. The Water Committee, after lengthy discussion on this issue, recommends a clustering of potential project mitigations in this area, and requests Department of Fish and Game consideration of Jersey Island and Palm Tract east of the power line, with appropriate buffer zone, to be determined by the Department of Fish and Game. 2 . Legislation (SB-34) , was passed in 1988, providing 12 million dollars for levee rehabilitation projects, with no-net loss of habitat. Perceived continued habitat loss prompted Senator Boatwright to go forward with SB-1065, which revises funding provisions contained in SB-34 to allow funding for past habitat impacts. In addition, the bill provided for the inclusion of mitigation plans with levee rehabilitation plans to be submitted by reclamation districts. Additional oversight by the Department of Fish and Game was also provided in this legislation. With the advent of SB-1065, revisions to plans and programs have measurably slowed the permit process for levee projects and resultant mitigation activities, and problems related to legal and payment issues remain to be resolved. 3 . The Los Vaqueros Project's preferred alternative would allow for a 100, 000 acre foot reservoir to be built by Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) . An Environmental Impact Report/ Statement has been released, with comments due by May 12, 1992 . The Water Committee has some concerns, and some comments to be provided. Among other items, although the County supports this project, the Water Committee is concerned that the EIR/EIS does not address a reservoir larger than 100, 000 acre feet, thereby precluding any possibility of a partnership arrangement at this juncture. In addition, a suggestion would also be put forth requesting CCWD consideration of participation in East County ecological and biological programs currently being formulated for the east County area as partial mitigation for wetlands impacts. RG: \ wa1:\bo\CAL0R.etc b .. Sacramento ♦, County ,.,•--� �� CI � �,i�.i U ♦ i1 l� Bradford e#jr♦tti 1 Island Webb Tract '''flet � �j© ! \.�'♦' Sherman j Mandeville Island J Island O© 4 O Jersey 00%r e� /�-"�. '�♦, Bethel t\ moi' U ♦,+ Island - �J *Antioch �'�, 16 �* Bacon Oakley .�+s t island �~�.► 4 0 Knightssn o \` � t t � O . J 013irentwood j Woodward Orwood i Island Tract s 0 Discovery Bay I Victoria / Island i ��• Existing WAPA 2"30kV line / M" � J !••;�•��� PG&E two 500 kV lines 00+ o COTP alignment = + °—— Coney ---- Contra Costa County Line �� rsland Clifton f onion Court / Island 4 Foreboy r • r r MILES SCALE —"— O I 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 i • i TRACY oun,y SUBSTATION I • l:. w^t f CONTRA COSTA COUNTY :u COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT . TO: WATER COMMITTEE , Supervisor Sunne McPeak Supervisor Tom Torlakson FROM: Roberta Goulart, Staff DATE: May 1, 1992 SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON LOS VAQUEROS DRAFT STAGE 2 EIR/EIS Attached is a draft copy of ,comments that Jim Cutler and I have +rr prepared regarding the Los Vaqueros Project draft EIR/EIS. The text -'i on water supply, wetlands and fisheries might be modified slightly -:A prior to submittal to CCWD, but the intent will remain the same. The Los Vaqueros Project is not, listed as an agenda item for the J=' May 4 Water Committee as it was addressed on April 27, unless you would like to discuss it further. Any other comments? Supervisor r- Torlakson' s comment regarding the possibility of an educational center for partial mitigation of wetlands impacts was added to the :,4�_ end of the letter. r 1 DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . .DRAFT. . . May 12, 1992 Mr.Gary Darling Contra Costa Water District P.O. Box 4121 Concord., CA- 94524 Dear Mr. Darling: Thank you for the opportunity_ to review the- Draft Stage 2 Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the Los Vaqueros Project. Many of .the County environmental concerns with the Los Vaqueros Reservoir project were adequately discussed and -resolved during the Phase I EIR and on the Vasco Road and Utility Line Relocation EIR; issues of County jurisdiction relative to this project are limited and consequently ,the County comments will. also be limited. On Page 1-7 and Figure 13 the areas being considered to receive to Los Vaqueros Reservoir are listed. and . shown. The map does not appear to be consistent with planning boundaries or spheres of influence for the Oakley or Antioch areas and needs revision. What are the implications for land areas which are outside these boundaries which developers wish to_ develop? What are the implications for water service to Brentwood in terms of use of the Los Vaqueros water supply? On Figure 2-2 the Old River Pipelines #5 and #6 are shown located south of Discovery Bay. Their location appears to provide room for improvements which may be required in the future to State Route 4 as discussed in the CALTRANS concept report on this subject. The FEIR needs to clarify-this proposed pipeline route as it may relate to State Route 4. Is fee simple acquisition anticipated for this pipeline and could a trail to the Delta be constructed on CCWD right-of-way from the reservoir? Consideration of that potential should be included in the Final EIR. The Recreation Plan for Los Vaqueros Reservoir provides for substantial recreational potential for residents with access from Alameda County - yet funding for improvements is by CCWD residents. Will user fees be required to offset this imbalance for access to the site from the south? In addition, some separation is suggested for the multiple-use roadway described in the Recreation Plan, so that walkers/joggers will not be competing with the tram and/or other vehicles along the roadway. Figure 2-13 deals with the Old River Pipelines #5 pipeline and electric transmission line. Will the transmission line be above or below ground? If above ground, the electro-magnetic force issues need to be discussed as they relate to the Discovery Bay area. The County urges new above-ground transmission lines to parallel existing lines wherever possible. The visual impacts of this facility need to be described. Pages 4-24 and 7-.36 discuss impacts to levee habitat and site disturbance due to construction. Mitigation for these impacts should take. place in a timely manner to offset the loss of habitat over time, as well as the lag time between habitat loss and full value of replacement habitat mentioned in the report. . Impacts of the project to fish are found on page 4-54 of this report, generally indicating that mitigation would take place via contribution to fishery mitigation programs developed through the Two-Agency Fish Agreement. Does this Agreement depend on fish hatchery production as mitigation, rather than efforts to boost survival rates of naturally existing fish? As hatchery. f ish do not. have the same survival rate as naturally occurring' indigenous species, every effort should be made to protect existing fish. Mitigation for impacts to wetlands .is discussed , on page 7-37, describing mitigation of jurisdictional wetland areas at a rate generally exceeding 1.1. Contra Costa County. General Plan policy supports mitigation of up to 3:1 in some cases to insure no loss of habitat values. In addition to mitigation specified in the report, the . County encourages incorporation of wetlands creation and enhancement activities to the greatest degree possible as part of CCWD reservoir activities. Mitigation Measure 7-16 on Page 7-46 states that the County should limit subdivisions of,adjacent parcels to prevent secondary impacts to Vasco Road relocation. The measure is loosely written and it is not clear what' the dEIR preparers are recommending the County to undertake and the area where this measure is being encouraged to be applied. The discussion on requirements for offsetting the impacts to the San Joaquin Kit Fox are confusing as written and appear to be inconsistent with the requirements the County has recently experienced with the East Contra Costa County Airport; the County was required to provide a 3 to 1 acreage mitigation for impacted areas. The consistency of project mitigation standards by regulatory agencies for differing public and private proposals is confusing. California Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife requirements need to be reviewed for consistency with the proposed mitigation measures and the requirements on other nearby projects. The proposed mitigation measure 8-42 does not appear to be consistent with their stated rules. This decision could be precedent-setting. Is the Vasco Caves acquisition, discussed on Page 11-11 , presumed to now be a project requirement? y i The ,discussion on fire , protection needs to be updated to reflect the merger of Byron Fire Protection District with the East Diablo Fire Protection District. On Page 20-6, Table 20-1 incorrectly indicates that Building Permits are issued by the Community Development Department; they are issued by the Building Inspection Department: The DEIR does not clearly identify the proposed haul roads for bringing rock and other construction materials and equipment to the project site; it should. Many of the roads in the area are rural in character and structural integrity may be threatened by the weight associated with heavy construction equipment. A mitigation , measure should be added which will require CCWD to work with the Contra Costa County Public Works Department in determining which haul roads will be utilized and the hours of the day when they can be utilized. The District watershed lands historically had more oak trees than presently - exist. Extensive cattle grazing has limited the regeneration of new oak trees. The District should commit to an oak tree regeneration project to offset any impacts to the species as an ongoing function of watershed management. In addition, the species locations and mitigation measures associated with oak woodland replacement areas need to be more clearly outlined. Where will the oak woodland replacement areas be located? How will the impacts of woodland loss be mitigated, particularly until the trees reach maturity? Page 7-21 addresses project impacts to wetland areas and other significant natural communities. Contra Costa County is requesting - CCWD consideration of participation in East County ecological and biological programs. This program generally would provide interpretive educational programs for students, and would be focused on wetlands and water issues. Some agencies are currently involved in this program, which is being formulated, at least in part, for mitigation of impacts to wetlands from specific projects. Given the complexity of this project, the dEIR is very thorough and with minor amendments should allow for informed decisions on the project approvals which are required. Sincerely, Sunne Wright McPeak Chair