Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 06251996 - C4
a TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 25, 1996 SUBJECT: Approve the Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, Alamo Area. Project No. 0662-6R4212-92, CDD-CP # 96-13 Specific Request(s) or Recommendation(s) & Background & Justification I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE Project, and FIND, on the basis of the initial study and all comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment, ADOPT the Negative Declaration in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (the custodian of which is the Public Works Director, located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez), and DIRECT the Director of Community Development to file a Notice of Determination and a Certificate of Fee Exemption: De Minimis Impact Finding with the County Clerk. DIRECT the Public Works Director to arrange for payment of the $25.00 handling fee to the County Clerk. DIRECT the Public Works Director to begin right-of-way acquisition and to prepare contract plans and specifications for construction. Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON JUN 2 5 19 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_OTHER_ V7OF SUPERVISORS ,/ UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: :jef c:\brdorderinegdec.frm Orig.Div: Public Works(Design Division) Contact: V.Germany,Design cc: J.Yee,Design County Administrator Attn: E.Kuevor Auditor-Controller PW Accounting Construction I hereby CVM that thls to a tare and ell 11 oopy d Community Development-G.Slusher an action taken and e� on the n►IntAas ai tl�a Board w Sll IDapu� e�l STONE VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT JUNE 25, 1996 PAGE 2 II. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The estimated project cost is $1,227,000, funded by Alamo Area of Benefit (94%) and SB 300 (6%). III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: The project includes widening the existing 24- to 26-ft. roadway to 34 ft. to accommodate two 12-ft. travel lanes, five-ft. shoulders, and a left-turn pocket and traffic signal at the Stone Valley Road/Miranda Avenue intersection. A retaining wall may be needed on the south side of the road, between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place, depending upon the amount of cut required. Drainage improvements, including the outfall in Stone Valley Creek on the north side of Stone Valley Road, are included as part of the project. It is needed to increase the width of an arterial roadway that is narrow and rural in character, and provide more room for drivers to manouver and make safer turns into driveways and side streets. The project has been determined to be in compliance with the General Plan. A Negative Declaration of environmental significance pertaining to this project was published April 12, 1996, and the Board has considered the negative declaration together with all comments received during the public review period and staffs responses to those comments. This project has been found to be de minimis in its effect on the environment and is exempt from the $1,250.00 Fish and Game filing fee. IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Delay in approving the project will result in a delay of design and construction and may jeopardize funding. CONTRA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT COSTA INITIAL STUDY COUNTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE r / V FILE a 0662-6R4212-92 CP#96-1?) PROJECT NAME: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project PREPARED BY:Maureen Tom DATE:January 31, 1996 REVIEWED BY. DATE: ` 2��qR�► RECOMMENDATIONS: [I Categorical Exemption (Class ) JV] Negative Declaration [] Environment Impact Report Required I] Conditional Negative Declaration The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The recommendation Is based on the following summary of the Environmental Evaluation: 1. The project will not create unstable earth conditions, changes in geologic substructures or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic or water related hazards. 2. The project will not encroach upon habitat of any unique,threatened or endangered species of animals. No new species of animals will be introduced into the area as a result of the project. In addition,there will be no removal of fish or wildlife habitat. Construction activities will create minor,short-term,temporary impacts. But no significant Impacts will occtr since the following best management practices are incorporated into the project and in project specifications: 3. No significant negative aesthetics will result from the project. The trees to be -removed shall be replaced with native species appropriate for the area and exposed areas will be hydroseeded. 4. There will be no significant change in the air quality in the project area. Construction machinery and vehicles will emit exhaust fumes and possibly objectionable odors during construction which may temporarily deteriorate air quality. To minimize the impact, contract specifications shall stipulate the use of properly tuned and mutfied equipment Air quality impacts will also be reduced by eliminating unnecessary idling of machines when not in use. Dust palliatives or water may be applied to minimize fugitive dust during construction, if warranted. 5. Construction of the outfall pipe into the concrete-lined reach of Stone Valley Creek shall occur during periods of low or no flow(e.g. April 15 to October 1)to avoid water quality impacts. If water is present,the co str>x tion area shall be de-watered by installing cofferdams and diverting water through a pipe, around the work site, to be discharged downstream in a neon-erosive manner. Furthermore, sediment traps and/or filters shall be installed on an as4eeded basis. 6. Caltrans Standard Specifications will apply regarding construction noise. Limiting the hours of work to 7:30 am.-5:00 p.m.,Monday through Friday, unless modified upon written approval,will also minimize noise impacts. 7. Standard construction safety practices shall be followed during construction to ensure no accidental release of hazardous substances or increase the potential for exposure to these substanoes. The project has the potential for interfering with an emergency response, but emergency response agencies in the area shall be INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE Stone Valley Road Improvement Project C Page 2 notified prior to the onset of construction. 8. The project will have a temporary impact on the existing transportation system since it will be necessary to Gose lanes and shift traffic during construction.This impact will be minimized by installing sufficient signs warning about the construction. No work which could interfere with commute traffic on Stone Valley Road will be performed before 8:30 a.m., nor between 4:30 p.m.and 6:30 p.m. What Changes to the Project Would Mitigate the Identified Impacts(List mitigation ,measures for any Significant Impacts and Conditional Negative Declaration).N/A USGS Quad Sheet Las Trampas Ridge Base Map Sheet#R-15 Parcel#N/A GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS: 1. Location:The project is located on Stone Valley Road, between Stone Valley Way and St Paul Drive, in the Alamo area of central Contra Costa County(see Figures 1 and 2). Stone Valley Road is an existing arterial and the existing land uses within the project limits consists of single family residences, a fire station, and a parcel used for horse boarding. 2. Project Description: The project consists of widening the existing 24- to 26-ft. roadway to 34 ft.to accommodate two 12-ft.travel lanes,five-ft. shoulders, and a left-tum pocket and traffic signal at the Stone Valley Road/Miranda Avenue intersection(see Figures 3,4 and 5). A retaining wall may be needed on the south - side of the road,between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place, depending upon the amount of cut required. Drainage improvements, including the outfall in Stone Valley Creek on the north side of Stone Valley Road, are included part of the project. The proposed project also includes items # 3 - 8 from the summary of the Environmental Evaluation. 3. Does it appear that any feature of the project will generate significant public concern?[]yes [] no [d] maybe (Nature of concern): Noise, traffic delays& dust during construction and the removal of trees. 4. Will the project require approval or permits by other than a County agency? [d]yes [] no Agency Name(s): Department of Fish and Game 5. Is the project within the Sphere of Influence of any city?(Name)No W mat H:M ATWONEISMIS 00000 • a7 U4 -7 40 91 croo 0-0 FaGUR� 2 • �1�%13 Cj1���_-. \\j \. It `�.• %��`; Jt , - � % �, % (ems , � • lt), � �� � -r} �� � , \�,�•� .%,r zea , ,�� ,•; �'og"' � _ �/` _ •� ._. �, ,�> /��\ /;�F; •moi �� .r F\: ga11e9" / / ♦� `., a,.,<< " Fti,� , ,aOV, ., ' i ;�� \ c Ca / � \'• ;. \ '�, fl.�\moi/• .�1 -<C; Ml %`��.-._J• ��\\ � ,% � Sri 7 \ \%.\\��i,\ •'\ \1'P,��' r,1+'C/� � \ s �_ 1 f'a� ,'. �i , }� -„ %\ �-.\,. ,�; - ; r � ..SPR _� � • �' d W;Y • � ,3� PIO en Stone _ 1 S' pRGv b tree p,�a 00 tre - % < e v a\fey R d St•p a\j Coun Y Stogy eY�aY as Gontca costa v�G�N va o oentc area SGp,LE�24 apo 1d9e`CP lramp�$R ,SoUtce•uSG aUaa�an9��5 ON U W 1H[� DEN VALLEY ROAD Q z� W • r4Y a �W tq� W J L G] f u N i f oa � < 0 OF- W + z m 00 0 � oo < Q i 0 w w o ZZ it }ti Z W Ld 0 0 0 � ? + + tW1n1 �. cl V 4 N uiQ 0 ROBINS PLACIE, + S I I I s I � I Ia I IL©0 -� m • ' ` j 0_j z rasoE" t— Q LL) Z �f i I UFw W - 0aU Lu W Z W d i- -- J t13 0 LL, o (� > 0 +m I XI oLijz z - a 0 0 s I dtnW i i i Q o w CL 0 + I U� w Z ;o" I P I J co + Q Q �o W 1 w I } Q O — wu CL LU N ti Z Z `� C~I�{.D Z000 / � - w Q tnWtnW I I I Z >w< 3: o LLI o W d u WESTERN PROJECT LIMITui >'I( ONE VALLEY WAS' � o x 9 xo � rn 5 'T1 n C �m a X yVj ! � t t o ^� it 0 -A , ch � N ` rn ' 03 01 W rn W o i it J � ' t Zl- 1 a �ysb� m cora N� d �� Q Z f� dQ p o �tt Ln a o •r o r v� ..v N n n n n N C1% � y C-, -' d - � o O -� cc� o cv O N N d a f CD CD �- o ° O 0--- -O . CONTRA COSTA COUNTY C, CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. Background 1. Name of Proponent: Contra Costa County Public Works Department 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553-4897 (510) 313-2000 3. Date of Checklist Submitted: January 31, 1996 4. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all significant, (S), answers are required on attached sheets.) *S *I 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? _ ✓ b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _ ✓ C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ✓ d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ ✓ e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? _ ✓ f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? _ ✓ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? _ ✓ 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _ ✓ b. The creation of objectionable odors? _ ✓ *Please Note: "S" is for significant; "1" is for insignificant. 2 C. Alternation of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? — ✓ 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? ✓ b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ✓ C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ✓ d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? _ ✓ e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? ✓ f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ ✓ g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ✓ h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? _ ✓ i. Exposure of people or property to water rebated hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? _ ✓ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? _ ✓ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? _ ✓ C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ ✓ d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? _ ✓ *Please Note; "S" is for significant; "I" is for insignificant, 3 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? _ ✓ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? _ ✓ C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ ✓ d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ ✓ 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? _ ✓ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? _ ✓ 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? _ ✓ 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? _ ✓ 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? _ ✓ 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? _ ✓ b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? _ ✓ 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _ ✓ *Please Note: "S" is for significant; "I" is for insignificant. 4 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? — ✓ 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? ✓ b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? — ✓ C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? — ✓ d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? — ✓ e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? — ✓ f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? — ✓ 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? — ✓ b. Police protection? — ✓ C. Schools? ✓ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? ✓ e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ✓ f. Other governmental services? _ ✓ 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? — ✓ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources; of energy? — ✓ *Please Note: "S" is for significant; "I" is for insignificant. i. 5 16. Utilities/Service Systems. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities? a. Power or natural gas? ✓ b. Communications systems? — ✓ C. Water? ✓ d. Sewer or septic tanks? — ✓ e. Storm water drainage? — ✓ f. Solid waste and disposal? ✓ 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? _ ✓ b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? ✓ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? _ ✓ 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? — ✓ 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? _ ✓ b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? ✓ C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? _ ✓ d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? _ ✓ *Please Note: "S" is for significant; "I" is for insignificant. 6 l 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) _ ✓ C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ✓ III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation. (see attached supplement) IV. Determination On the basis of this Checklist and Environmental Evaluation: ® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (� 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in Exhibit "A" have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. [_J I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date i`gnature Reviewed By: VG:mat C:\WPWIN61\STONE\STONEV.CHK *Please Note: "S" is for significant; "I" is,for insignificant. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project The project consists of widening the existing 24- to 26-ft. wide roadway to 34 ft. wide to accommodate two 12-ft. travel lanes and five-ft. shoulders. A left-turn pocket and traffic signal is proposed at the Stone Valley Road/Miranda Avenue intersection. An approximately 50 ft. long, 3-ft. high retaining wall may be needed on the south side of the road, between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place, depending upon the amount of cut required. In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following references (which are available for review at the Public Works Department located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez, except where otherwise noted) were consulted: REFERENCES: 1 . Contra Costa Resource Mapping System (available at the Community Development Department; 651 Pine Street, 2nd Floor, North Vying, Martinez, CA 94553) 2. The County General Plan and EIR on the General Plan (January 1991) 3. RAREFIND - California Natural Diversity Data Base (August 8, 1995) 4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species List for Contra Costa County (April 10, 1995) 5. Field Reviews (June 6, 1995, and October 24, 1995) 6. Sonoma State University - Archaeological Survey (October 2, 1992) 7, Arborist's Review and Recommendations of Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, prepared by Living Art Environscapes (October 24, 1995) Earth (A - G) According to the County Resource Mapping System, Clear Lake Clay, Boteiia Clay Loam, and Cropley Clay are found in the project area. Runoff of these soils is slow and the hazard of erosion is slight where the soil has been exposed or tilled. The project will temporarily increase the exposure of the soil to wind erosion during the construction phase, but this impact is minor and temporary. Adherence to standard dust control and erosion control practices including, but not limited to general watering of exposed areas and/or use of chemical stabilizers will avoid this impact. These measures shall be incorporated into the construction contract. The County Resource Mapping System did not identify any unique geologic features within the project area. An earthquake fault is located west of the project area, however, activities associated with the project, such as minor grading of the surface, will not result in an increase of exposure to geologic hazards; nor will it result in unstable earth conditions or changes to geologic substructure. Drainage improvements, including the installation of an outfall in a concrete-lined reach of Stone Valley Creek, are not expected to cause modifications to Stone Valley Creek as a result of deposition or erosion. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Page 2 2. Air (A- B) Short-term emissions and objectionable odors are generated during construction activities, but they are minor and temporary. To minimize this impact, contract specifications shall stipulate the use of properly tuned and muffled equipment. Air quality impacts will also be reduced by eliminating unnecessary idling of machines when not in use. These measures could reduce construction period emissions by up to 50 percent. Implementation of dust control practices noted in #1 - Earth (A - G), will also minimize air quality impacts. (C) Widening the road and installing a traffic signal will not cause an alteration of climate, air movement, moisture, or temperature. 3. Water (A- 1) According to the Contra Costa Resource Mapping System, the project area is not in a flood hazard area. However, the area to the north of the roadway (outside of the project limits) is in the flood hazard area. i/Videning of an existing roadway will not increase the exposure of people or property to flooding. Drainage improvements, including the outfall in a concrete-lined reach of Stone Valley Creek on the north side of Stone Malley Road, are included part of the project. Construction of the outfall structure shall occur during periods of low or no flow (e.g., April to October) to avoid water quality impacts. If water is present, the construction area shall be dewatered by installing cofferdams and diverting water through a pipe, around the work site, to be discharged downstream in a non-erosive manner. During construction, sediment traps and/or filters shall be installed on an as needed basis, minimizing water quality impacts. Drainage improvements will not impair the flow of water in marine or fresh waters; nor will it alter the course or flow of flood waters. The rate and amount of runoff is not expected to substantially increase due to the project's impervious surface area. The project will not affect the quantity or quality of surface water, around water or public water supply. Standard construction safety practices (see #2 - Air and #13 - Transportation/Circulation) shall be followed in order to reduce the possibility of a spill of gasoline, oil, or other pollutants which could have a significant impact on water quality. 4. Plant Life (A- D) The County Resource Mapping System, field reviews and RAREFIND showed no unique, threatened, or endangered species of plants in the project area. Plant life in the project area includes that which is typically associated with single-family residences. In addition, many large oaks front Stone Valley Road in the western portion of the project. The improvements to Stone Valley Road have been designed to avoid impacts to the largest of the oaks. However, six valley oaks ranging in size from eight to 20-inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) will be removed. As part of the project, the oaks will be replaced at a 31 ratio (three trees planted for each one removed) with 1-gallon valley 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Page 3 oaks. Since there is not enough space to replant oaks in the area where they will be removed, the trees will be planted within the project limits and existing right-of-way, east of Miranda Avenue. Seven additional trees, including orchard walnuts and pines will be removed as a result of the project. Since these trees are not native to the area, they will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio with native species appropriate to the area, within the existing right-of-way (see Figure 4). 5. Animal Life (A - D) The project will not encroach upon a habitat of any unique, threatened or endangered species of animals according to the County Resource Mapping System, field reviews and RAREFIND. No new species of animals will be introduced into the area as a result of the project. Trees to be removed as a result of construction shall be replaced with native species appropriate for the area, which will provide habitat for animal life. Since the outfall structure will be installed in a concrete-lined reach of Stone Valley Creek, the project will not result in the deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat. 6. Noise (A - B) The dominant source of noise in the project area is traffic on Stone Valley Road and Interstate 680. The project will widen the travel lanes from the existing width of 11 ft. to the proposed width of 12 ft. and add five ft. shoulders on each side of the road (see Figure 5). The majority of the widening will result in the travel lanes being moved only one ft. closer to residences. However, in some sections of the roadway, widening will be done only on one side on the road, resulting in the travel lane being moved up to 12 ft. closer to residences. The County Resource Mapping System for the project area indicate a noise level 60-65 dBA for 1990, and a noise level of 65-70 dBA for the year 2005. The 2005 noise level is based on a four-lane Stone Valley Road. Since the project involves only minor widening, not two additional lanes, the noise level will not increase to the 2005 noise level, therefore, any increases in noise are not significant. In general, construction activities produce noise levels of 86 dBA at 50 feet which is well below the threshold of pain of 120-140 dBA. Best management practices noted in #2 -Air (A - B), and limiting work hours to 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, unless modified upon written approval, reduce construction noise levels and shall be incorporated as part of the construction contract. 7. Light and Glare Widening Stone Valley Road and installing a traffic signal will produce a minor, insignificant amount of new light or glare in a suburban area. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Page 4 8. Land Use The existing land uses within the project limits consist of single-family residences, a fire station, and a parcel used for horse boarding. Although most of the right-of-way for a four- lane road has already been acquired, minor amounts of right-of-way are still needed for the two-lane project (see Figures 3 and 4). Minor amounts of additional right-of-way for drainage improvements are also needed, thus the project will not result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area. 9. Natural Resources Implementation of the project will involve the use of paving materials (i.e., asphalt) which will not significantly impact this resource. The use of oil and gasoline to operate the machinery for construction purposes is negligible and of a short-term, temporary nature. The temporary expenditure of resources will end with the completion of the project. Best management practices, e.g., using properly tuned equipment and eliminating unnecessary idling of machines as previously noted in #2 - Air (A - .) will also minimize the consumption of natural resources. 10. Risks of Unset (A) The project has the potential to release hazardous substances, such as accidental petroleum spills; during construction. Per specifications, standard construction safety practices (see #2 - Air and #13 - Transportation/Circulation) shall be followed during construction to ensure no accidental release of hazardous substances or increase the potential for exposure to these substances. The County Resource Mapping System for the project area did not identify any petroleum pipelines or electric transmission lines. (B) The project has the potential of interfering with an emergency response, but emergency response agencies in the area shall be notified prior to the onset of construction and any road closures. 11. & 12. population & Housing The project will not result in a change in the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of human population in the area. The project will not affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional houses (see #8 - Land Use). 13. Transportation/Circulation (A - D) According to the County General Plan, Stone Valley Road is an existing arterial and designated as a future four-lane roadway between Interstate 880 and Miranda Avenue. Widening of Stone Valley Road will not generate additional traffic except during construction when vehicles associated with those activities will utilize the local street system. The project will not create a demand for new parking since the project does not ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Page 5 change any land use as noted in #8 - Land Use. Since it will be necessary to close lanes and shift traffic during construction, the project may have a temporary impact on the existing transportation system and an increase in the potential for traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians, ending upon completion of the project. These temporary impacts will be minimized by installing sufficient signs warning about the construction. The purpose of the project is to minimize hazards along Stone Valley Road. No work which could interfere with commute traffic on Stone Valley Road will be performed before 8:30 a.m., nor between 4:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. The staging area for construction equipment will be within the existing right-of-way, on the south side of the roadway near the Miranda Avenue intersection. There are no residences in this area. Thus, impacts are minimal. (E & F) No water, rail or air transportation and facilities are located in the immediate vicinity of the project area, thus the project will not alter waterborne, rail or air traffic. 14. Public Servicer (A - ®, F) The road widening will not increase the need for fire or police protection, schools, parks or other governmental services (see # 11 & 12 - Population & Housing). (E) Stone Valley Road is currently maintained by the County. Periodic maintenance of road improvements will continue to be performed by the County. 15. Energy (A - 6) Minor amounts of non-renewable fuel resources will be consumed during construction, but this is a short-term, temporary impact. This impact will be reduced to an insignificant level by eliminating unnecessary idling of machines when not in use and by using properly tuned equipment as mentioned in #2 - Air (A - C) and #9 - Natural Resources. 16. Utilities The project will result in the relocation of some utilities and all relocation activities shall be coordinated with the appropriate utility agencies. 17. Human Health The project has the potential to release hazardous substances during construction. Potential health hazards due to accidental petroleum spills shall be minimized by following best management practices noted in #10 - Risk of Upset (A). Air quality impacts, which could affect human health, can be minimized by the measures noted in # 2 - Air (A - S). Widening the road and installing a traffic signal will not create any known health hazard or result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Page 6 18. Aesthetics Since there is not enough space to replant oaks in the areas where they will be removed, trees removed as a result of the project will be replaced within the project limits and existing right-of-way, east of Miranda Avenue. Although the oaks will not be replaced in the same areas from where they will be removed, there are several other trees in the same areas that will not be removed, thus no negative long-term aesthetics will result from the project. An approximately 50 ft. long, three-ft. high retaining wall may be needed on the south side of Stone Valley Road, between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place. Since the retaining wall is small and does not involve a large area, the retaining wall will not result in a negative aesthetic impact. The sight of construction equipment may be visually unattractive, but this is a minor and short term impact, ending upon completion of the project. 19. Recreation The County Resource Mapping System did not identify any recreational opportunities in the project area. The bike/pedestrian path on the north side of Stone Valley Road will not be impacted by the road widening project. 20. Cultural Resources (A- D) The County Resource Mapping System and the California Archaeological Inventory at Sonoma State University's records check for Cultural Resources identified three prehistoric historical archaeological sites within a one-half mile radius of the proposed project area. The proposed project will not impact these resources. The contract specifications shall include measures related to diiscovery of cultural resources. 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance (A - C) Due to construction equipment, air quality may be temporarily degraded at the project site. However, no permanent long-term impacts will result (see #2 - Air). The proposed project will not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, nor will it cause fish and wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels. In addition, the project will not threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal (see#4 - Plant Life and #5 - Animal Life). The project does not have the potential of eliminating examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory (see 4:20 - Cultural Resources). The minor individual impacts identified are not cumulatively considerable (see#2 -Air, #4 - Plant Life, #5 - Animal Life, and #13 - Transportation/Circulation). In addition, there will be no adverse environmental effects on human beings (see #17 - Human Health). :mat HAMATISTONEISVR.SUM ALAMO IMPROVEMENT AeMOCIATION For rw co�UA% P.O.bOX 271 • ALAMO.CALITOQNIA 94507 • (510)866-3606 May 10, 1996 RECEIVED Ms. Vickie Germany rRY 1 3 1996 Public Works, Design Division DESIGN! 255 Glacier Drive I PUBLIC WOBkS DEPT, Martinez, California 94553 Re: Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Dear Ms. Germany: The Alamo Improvement Association has received and reviewed the subject draft mitigated negative declaration and has the following comments: 1. The project description does not contain one item of work which was included in the County's proposal to the community of Alamo to settle the dispute that had arisen over this project. Specifically, the grade of Stone Valley Road is to be leveled and lowered in the vicinity of Angela Avenue, in order to improve sight distance and reduce the excessive slope of Angela Avenue as it meets Stone Valley Road. 2. The County's proposal to the community was to replace all removed trees with box-sized trees at a ratio of three new trees for each tree removed. The subsequent suggestion by County staff members was that the replacement ratio could be increased in proportion to the decrease in the per tree cost, if smaller sized trees (such as 15 gallon) were used. Based upon current landscape prices, this would allow for an approximate ten to one replacement ratio if 15 gallon trees were used. The currently proposed mitigation is to replace only oak trees at three- to-one (and other trees at one-to-one) with one gallon trees. Because of the community's reliance upon the County's former proposal in agreeing to the project, because one gallon trees are so small as to be non-existent, and because of the high mortality rate of trees at the immature one gallon state, the new proposal is inappropriate and fails to mitigate the loss of mature trees. We would recommend the ten to one replacement ratio with 15 gallon trees, rather than the three-to-one replacement with box-sized trees formerly proposed by the County. Ten 15 gallon trees have a value of about $10,000. The value of one mature oak tree would be appraised at several times this amount. • to Ms. Vickie Germany C�� May 10, 1996 1 1 Page 2 3. The negative declaration suggests that there is no room to plant trees at the west end of the project. Even once the road is displaced to the north, there would seem to be ample room for tree planting along the north side of the road at the west end. We appreciate the opportunity to comment upon this negative declaration and believe that the County's Stone Valley Road Project, as proposed after the period of community debate, was.a good one. However, we consider it imperative that all of the components of the agreed upon proposal be maintained. Yours very truly, Joe on Chairman, Planning Committee cc: Supervisor Gayle Bishop Debbie Chamberlain, CCC Community Development Heather Ballanger, CCC Public Works AIA President AIA Secretary Contra Public Works Department J' Michael Walford 1J u Costa 255 Glacier Drive Public Works Director (] Martinez, California 94553-4897 Milton F. Kubicek C®lur)ltT Deputy- Engineering FAX: (510) 313-2333 , Telephone: (510) 313-2000 Patricia R. McNamee Deputy- Operations June 11, 1996 Maurice M. Shiu Deputy-Transportation S. Clifford Hansen Deputy-Administration Our File: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Project No.: 0662-6R4212-92 Mr. John Henderson Alamo Improvement Association P.O. Box 271 Alamo, CA 94507 Dear Mr. Henderson: Thank you for your response to the April 12, 1996, "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration" for the proposed Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, CP# 96-13. Following are responses to comments made in your May 10, 1996, letter. 1. The profile of Stone Valley Road in the area of Angela Avenue currently meets the sight distance standards. However, as part of the project, Stone Valley Road will be overlaid and the vertical alignment will be adjusted to further improve sight distance by raising the elevation of the westerly approach to Angela Avenue. The sight distance for drivers on Angela Avenue attempting to turn onto Stone Valley Road is currently hampered because trees and utility poles obscure the sight distance. The utility poles will be removed upon completion of the utility under grounding project and since wider shoulders will be built on Stone Valley Road, drivers waiting on Angela Avenue will be able to stop farther south which will also help improve sight distance for drivers on Angela Avenue. 2. The project description in the Initial Study included the replacement of native oaks at a 3:1 ratio and other trees a 1:1 ratio with one-gallon trees. One-gallon trees are.recommended since they adapt much better to local conditions and being replanted than larger trees. However, since County staff previously agreed to a 3:1 ratio replacement using the larger, 15-gallon size replacement trees, the project description is hereby amended to include the replacement of all trees removed at a 3:1 ratio, using 15-gallon size native species, appropriate for the area (i.e., oaks). 3. There is currently adequate room to plant trees on the north side of the street at the western end of the project limits. However, since the County General Plan has designated Stone Valley Road as a future four-lane road, it would not be prudent to plant trees in an area where they may need to be removed in the future. Response to Comments - Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Alamo Improvement Association June 11, 1996 Page 2 The areas proposed for replanting are areas where it can be seen with certainty that will not be impacted by future improvements to Stone Valley Road. The landscape plan to be prepared for the project area will identify opportunities for planting within the project area. No substantial evidence has been submitted to counter our determination. The project is scheduled to go before the Board of Supervisors onJune 25, 1996. If you have any questions, please contact me at (510) 313-2296. Sincerely, Vickie Germany Environmental Planner Design Division VG:mat cc: G. Bishop, Supervisor-District 3 M. Hollingsworth, Design H. Ballanger,Transportation Engineering D. Chamberlain, Community Development Department H:\MAT\STONE\RESPONSE.AIA `ft f-7L b o q r J�ot-tck of rtQ7'(-t,)T TO O o fit' RECEIVED MAY 23 lYY' N c UA B RprzV, Qk9aT coun�y � �'p 9��13 M;MfMENMBANNER I 0u,Q P �c-�r � ,s JA-CC-,,jr- -1-b So LTR :5� vPC_ A-N D D/ 126-i--7-1-� os S to t +�b A- .T� R6 ) WLLP)& C—fscb ON sk�ka 151DC . Ol V cot►cC- 9-4 ►S MA-t N&y, NV4 r q4 -F T?- jc 21"Ar" 'rd $rc- .,.J�j57'A�(-t-C D , -V*y lo,)►L.L. 3C h-*D5PSCC-Nl— --'D O9 V 6&V IZODOM W I N boLj , kiL 4*VF- Ttke RP—PLACED lff6 - C-xrS-77N6- QUI NDO�d Aj Wr k- as.( a F- T ,a ° 14o i N G-- "fit K lz"�j UC TRA�a1 Z C--11 CSL.-. 7116- -TIWl�— A- W I•}-pa:'1 ( v2 C h LJ '� +c 2. Ti W 06- 8 r-74r— wrt-q .1-ng T►�A� =tC�� �tit}C-U c � fiN� B p F►2s C�d.0 t rD f3EL-A F wC- 40�vr,,- Z s7b2A4 IN tlt- NU--a t, -xJ—ju tEt �C N i�v N . lk► LL. 7 �e t/ F- c►t t tJ � �a,f3 po s s ► c y acue , ,� vTY u s e- costs Lk K(D Prt� N G= , sP-,v tJC.--C c�S-,A- j y OF- ttf-E -ccsr t the ` T-oOc V k��r 1. 1 , ✓ f nC sc� sev6.o�-4— Qtc1-u,kFs 0t-� a-urz pzvpe-z 7X1 � rtr� �f d car 1 Esc s 6N kk,% R1w-DO, (� 5-tot.*4y - 1d3a .CPQ ttld013A-10 ZINC Tt HW-Y2 Ly 5P4k,U rz L I { 1 r i � F "' mss. �..-.. �,.• � .� 45 ,• i � I o` Contra Public Works Department J. Michael Walford Public Works Director Costa 255 Glacier Drive CountCount Martinez, California 94553-4897 Milton F. Kubicek y FAX: (510) 313-2333 Deputy - Engineering Telephone: (510) 313-2000 Patricia R. McNamee Deputy-Operations Maurice M. Shin Deputy- Transportation June 11, 1996 S. Clifford Hansen Deputy-Administration Our File: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Project No.: 0662-6R4212-92 Donald W. and Beverly A. Samuel 235 Pebble Court Alamo, CA 94507 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Samuel: Thank you for your response to the April 12, 1996, "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration" for the proposed Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, CP# 96-13. Following are responses to comments made in your May 13, 1996, letter. (1) There is no State standard for audible warning devices (beepers) for the visually impaired, therefore, beepers will not be incorporated into the traffic signal standard. (2) Drainage improvements, such as the modification or relocation of storm drain inlets as needed to conform to the widened roadway, are included in the project. (3) Widening of the road in the vicinity of your home will result in the edge of pavement being moved approximately eight feet closer to your property line. Since the edge of the existing roadway is more than 40 feet from your property line and your house is even further away, any noise increase would be minor and insignificant. In addition, the County Resource Mapping System for the project area indicate a noise level 60-65 dBA for 1990, and a noise level of 65-70 dBA for the year 2005. The 2005 noise level is based on a four-lane Stone Valley Road. Since the project involves only minor widening, not two additional lanes, the noise level will not increase to the 2005 noise level, therefore, any increases in noise are not significant. No substantial evidence has been submitted to counter our determination. The project r� Response to Comments - Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Donanld W. and Beverly A. Samuel June 11, 1996 Page 2 is scheduled to go before the Board of Supervisors on June 25, 1996. If you have any questions, please contact me at (510) 313-2296. Sincerely, Vickie Germany Environmental Planner Design Division VG:mat cc: G. Bishop, Supervisor-District 3 M. Hollingsworth, Design H. Ballanger,Transportation Engineering D. Chamberlain,Community Development Department H:\MAT\STONE\RESPONSE.SAM MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT EAST AY RECEIVED May 9, 1996 ,i,r IS96 DESIGN DEPT. Ms. Vickie Germany PUBLIC WOKS. Public Works Department Design Division 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553 SUBJECT: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, Alamo Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Germany: Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject environmental document. The District has the following comments regarding existing District facilities located within the project area. The site for the proposed Stone Valley Road Improvement Project contains an existing 6-inch, fl- inch, 12-inch, 16-inch, 24-inch, and 42-inch water main in Stone Valley Road (see attached project area map). These pipelines are critical to the operation of the District's water distribution system serving customers within the District's service area. Mitigation measures to prevent any impacts to these pipelines are necessary in the design and construction of the proposed project. These measures may include relocation of water mains and the provision of adequate pipeline cover for construction wheel loads. To accommodate future pipeline maintenance, the District requires a"minimum"vertical and horizontal clearance of one foot and three feet, respectively, from other underground utilities/improvements and a pipeline cover between 3-1/2 and 6 feet. If these requirements cannot be met in the design of the proposed Stone Valley Road Improvements, relocation of water mains will be necessary. In order to determine the extent of the relocation work of the water mains, design plans for the proposed improvements should be submitted to the District. Three hydrants and several water services that serve District customers in the project area may need to be relocated by the District. New locations for the hydrants are to be determined and approved by the local fire agency. The project sponsor should contact the District's New Business Office and request a water service estimate to determine costs and conditions of this relocation work. Engineering and relocation of water mains, hydrants, and water services often requires substantial lead time which should be provided for in the project sponsor's development schedule. 375 ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. CA 94607-4240. (510) 635-3000 BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOHN A.COLEMAN. KATY FOULKES . JOHN M.GIOIA FRANK MELLON. NANCY J.NADEL. MARY SELKIRK. KENNETH H.SIMMONS C4 Ms. Vickie Germany May 9, 1996 Page 2 If you have any questions, or if the District can be of further assistance,please contact Prab M. Jog, Senior Civil Engineer, Water Service Planning at (510) 287-1026. Very truly yours, William R. Kirkpatrick Manager of Water Distribution Planning WRK:DJR:dd 9619.dr Attachment ' C T Contra Public Works Department J.Michael Walford 1 Public Works Director Costa 255 Glacier Drive Milton F. Kubicek Martinez, California 94553-4897 County FAX: (510) 313-2333 Deputy-Engineering Telephone: (510) 313-2000 Patricia R. McNamee Deputy-Operations Maurice M. Shiu ,lune 11, 1996 Deputy-Transportation S. Clifford Hansen Deputy-Administration Our File: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Project No.: 0662-6R4212-92 William R. Kirkpatrick East Bay Municipal Utility District 375 Eleventh Street Oakland, CA 94607-4220 Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick: Thank you for your response to the April 12, 1996, "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration" for the proposed Stone Valley Road Improvement Project, CP# 96-13. The Design Engineer will work with the District to avoid impacts to the local water supply. The project is scheduled to go before the Board of Supervisors on June 25, 1996. If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Mr. Joe Yee, Design Engineer at (510) 313-2323. Sincerely, Vickie Germany Environmental Planner Design Division VG:mat cc: M. Hollingsworth, Design H. Ballanger,Transportation Engineering H:WIAT\STONE\RESPONSE.EBM Community Contra Harvey E. Bragdon Director of Community Development Development Costa Department C County Administration Building County 651 Pine Street 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-0095 Phone: 335-1277 April 3, 1996 County File #CP 96-13 Attention: Public Works Department Janet Frattini - Design Division Dear Applicant: The Contra Costa County Community Development Department has completed an initial study of the environmental significance of the project represented by your pending application bearing County File Number C_12-9.6-1.3-(S.toneLalley-RaadJmprovemen -P__mject, Alamn area►. In conformance with Contra Costa County Guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), it has been determined that your project will-not have a significant effect on the environment. Your project falls within the following category: (✓) AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) IS NOT REQUIRED. ( ) The project is categorically exempt (Class ). ( ► The CEQA requirements are accommodated by the EIR previously prepared for (�) A statement that an EIR is not required (Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance has been filed by the Community Development Department [unless appealed]). I 1 Other: General Rule of Applicability (Section 15061(b)(3)) ( ) AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) IS REQUIRED. ( ) The complexity of your project requires your submission of additional special reports or information (as outlined on the attached sheet) (which will be outlined in a forthcoming letter). ( ) A consultant will be hired to prepare the environmental impact report. This procedure is explained on the attached sheet. Preparation of the EIR cannot be started until the fee and additional information requested is received by the Community Development Department. If you have questions concerning this determination or desire additional information relative to environmental impact report regulations, please call (510) 335-1213 and ask for Debbie Chamberlain. Sincerely yours Harvey E. Bragdon r c or of Community Development By: :gms c.:\cega\t CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT `>1 DATE: TO: Development Engineer/Architect FROM: James W. Cutler, Assistant Director of Comprehegsive Plannit'g A- By: Catherine Osterman Kutsuris, Senior Planner SUBJECT: MANDATORY REFERRAL FOR GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE Community Development staff has reviewed the .attached project, CP 45- to determine if mandatory referral for General Plan Conformance, as required by Section 65402 of the Government Code, is necessary. The project needs no further mandatory referral clearance from County staff subject to the following actions: (;) This project has been determined to be exempt from 65402 review. ( ) This project has been determined to be exempt from 65402 review in accordance with the Board of Supervisors Resolution 81/522 because the project involves a road alignment project of a minor nature. ( ) This project should be referred to the City of for 65402 review. ( ) Community Development staff makes the following attached recommendation which should be incorporated into the staff report on this matter. The project needs mandatory referral and County staff will process this project in the following manner: ( ) 65402 review is required. Community Development staff will carry this matter before the appropriate Planning Commission. ( ) 65402 review must be withheld until completion of an Environmental Impact Report on this project. ( ) Other procedures. JWC:gms c:shl\MR48pc CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT NOTICE OF DETERMINATION CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 651 PINE STREET 4TH FLOOR NORTH WING MARTINEZ,CALIFORNIA 94553-0095 Telephone: 510 313-2296 Contact Person:Vickie Germany,Public Works Dept. Project Description, Common Name (if any) and Location: STONE VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROTECT, County File#/CP 96-13: The project consists of widening the existing 24- to 26-ft. roadway to 34 ft. to accommodate two 12- ft. travel lanes, five-ft. shoulders, and a left-turn pocket and traffic signal at the Stone Valley Road/Miranda Avenue intersection(see Figures 3, 4 and 5). A retaining wall may be needed on the south side of the road, between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place, depending upon the amount of cut required. Drainage improvements, including the outfall in Stone Valley Creek on the north side of Stone Valley Road, are included part of the project. The project also includes Item numbers 3 through 8 from the Summary of the Environmental Evaluation, listed below. Project Location: The project is located on Stone Valley Road, between Stone Valley Way and St. Paul Drive, in the Alamo area of central Contra Costa County (see Figures 1 and 2). Stone Valley Road is an existing arterial and the existing land uses within the project limits consists of single family residences, a fire station, and a parcel used for horse boarding. The project was approved on Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act: ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified. ❑ The Project was encompassed by an Environmental Impact Report prepared for A Negative Declaration was issued indicating that preparation of an Environmental ImpactReport was not required. Copies of the record of project approval and the Negative Declaration or the final EIR may be examined at the office of the Contra Costa County Community Development Department. The Project will not have a significant environmental effect. ❑ The Project will have a significant environmental effect. ❑ Mitigation measures were made a condition of approval of the project. ❑ A statement of overriding considerations was adopted. ❑ Findings were adopted pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Date: By: Community Development Department Representative AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date. Signature Title Applicant: De artment of Fish&Game Fees Due: County Public Works Department EIR - $850 Total Due: $ 255 Glacier Drive Neg. Dec. -$1,250 Total Paid: $ Martinez, CA 94553 DeMinimis Findings -$0 Attn: Tann ET aini County Clerk-$25 Receipt # CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME G° I CERTIFICATE OF FETE EXEMPTION De Mininlis Impact Finding Project Proponent: Contra Costa County Public Works Department 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, CA 94553-4897 (510) 313-2000 Project Name: Stone Valley Road Improvement Project Project Location: The project is located on Stone Valley Road, between Stone Valley Way and St. Paul Drive, in the Alamo area of central Contra Costa County. Stone Valley Road is an existing arterial and the existing land uses within the project limits consists of single family residences, a fire station, and a parcel used for horse boarding. !project Description: The project consists of widening the existing 24- to 26-ft. roadway to 34 ft. to accommodate two 12-ft. travel lanes, five-ft. shoulders, and a left-turn pocket and traffic signal at the Stone Valley Road/Miranda Avenue intersection. A retaining wall may be needed on the south side of the road, between Miranda Avenue and Robbins Place, depending upon the amount of cut required. Drainage improvements, including the outfall in Stone Valley Creek on the north side of Stone Valley Road, are included part of the project. Findings of Exemption: An Initial Study was conducted to evaluate the potential for adverse impacts and considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have a potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based on substantial evidence, the County of Contra Costa rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as listed at subsection (d) of Section 753.5 of the Fish and Game Code. Certification: I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and that based upon the Initial Study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. environmental Planner (Chief Planning Official) Public Works Department Title: L'(_7 ;;'JL Lead Agency(: County of Contra Costa Date: b VG:mat H:MAT\sTONEDEMINIMs Rey,8/11/33