HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTIONS - 05072004 - 2004-354 EXHIBIT A
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Resolution on July 13, 2004 by the following vote: _
s , ."1
AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA, UILKEMA, GREENBERG, DESAULNIER grid i
NOES: GLOVER
NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
RESOLUTION NO. 2004/354
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF CONTRA COSTA'S }'
TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX AND RELATED ACTIONS }'
It is hereby RESOLVED by the Board that:
WHEREAS, as a result of voter approval of Measure C in November 1983,the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority ("Authority") has administered a one half of one percent sales tax for transportation purposes
since its inception on April 1, 1989, said tax to run for a period of twenty years;
WHEREAS, the Authority proposes that said tax be extended for an additional period of twenty five
years through March 31, 2034;
WHEREAS, the Authority conducted extensive consultations with local governments, including joint
workshops with the Board of Supervisors,and conducted outreach to a wide variety of interest groups and
the public in order to develop a mix of projects and programs to be funded by the proposed extension;
WHEREAS, on May 26, 2004 the Authority adopted a final Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan
("TEP") to guide the use of the proposed sales tax extension revenues;
WHEREAS, the final Draft TEP includes the final Draft Growth Management Program to help the
Authority achieve its goals to reduce future congestion, manage the impacts of growth, and
expand alternatives to commuting alone by car;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 180206{b} an Expenditure Plan may not be finally
adopted and placed before the voters until it has received the approval of the Board of Supervisors and
city councils which in aggregate represent both a majority of the cities in Contra Costa and a majority of
the population residing in the incorporated areas of Contra Costa;
WHEREAS, the Authority, as lead agency pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"} has
prepared and certified a Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the 2004 Update to the Contra
Costa Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension, and has
prepared an Addendum to the FEIR for the final Draft TEP(collectively,the"EIR");
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA, a FEIR prepared by a lead agency shall be conclusively
presumed to comply with CEQA for purposes of use by responsible agencies which were
consulted through the Notice of Preparation; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors is a responsible agency under CEQA, has responded to
consultation by the lead agency, and has considered the EIR.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVER that in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQK), the Board of Supervisors considers the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Proposed
Measure C Extension and the Addendum to the FEIR for the final Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan
("TEP"),collectively the"EIR", adequate for use by responsible agencies.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in accordance with CEQA, the EIR considers all reasonably feasible
alternatives and feasible mitigation measures within the powers of the Board of Supervisors that would
substantially lessen or avoid any significant effect the project would have on the environment;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in accordance with CEQA, the Board of Supervisors hereby adopts
the "Findings, Facts in Support of Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations" contained in
Attachment#1 to this Resolution and incorporated by this reference;
BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED that in accordance with CEQA, the Board of Supervisors hereby
adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring Report" contained in Attachment #2 to this Resolution and
incorporated by this reference, which describes environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and
mitigation monitoring for the final Draft TEP;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors approves the final Draft TEP which was
adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority("Authority")on May 26, 2004; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors urges the Authority, consistent with the
provisions of Public Utilities Code Section 180201, to approve the final TEP'.
Attachment#1: Findings, Facts in Support of Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Attachment#2: Mitigation Monitoring Report
RESOLUTION NO. 2004/354
o:\Trans\TW IC\BO\2004\messuree.7.exhibitA.resoiution.doo
ATTACHMENT#1
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION NO. 2004/354
Findings, Facts In 'support of Findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality blot ('IOEA")
for
Measure O Extension
1. Introduction
ROLE OF THE FINDINGS
These Findings and Facts in support of Findings relate to the approval of the Proposed Measure C
Extension(the Project).The proposed Measure C Extension includes a final Draft Transportation
Expenditure Plan(TEP)which also incorporates refinements to the Growth Management Program
(GMP).The Contra Costa'Transportation Authority(Authority)is the Lead.Agency for the Project and
the Board of Supervisors("Board")is a Responsible Agency for the Project pursuant to CEQA.
The Findings state the Board's conclusions regarding the significance of the Project's potential
environmental impacts after all feasible mitigation measures have been adopted.The Findings are
based on information in the Environmental Impact Report(EIR)for the Project and on other relevant
information contained in the administrative record for the Project.
The Facts in Support of Findings state the Board's reasons for making each finding.They also set
forth the evidence that supports the Board's conclusions.Like the Findings,the Facts in Support of
Findings are based on the administrative record for the Project,including information contained in the
EIR. All records and materials,which constitute the record of'the proceedings,upon which these
findings are made,are located at the offices of the Authority,3478 Buskirk Avenue,Suite 100,
Pleasant Hill,California,94523.
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2004/354
...I.........................--............................. ....................—............................... .............. ...........
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The Statement of Overriding Considerations explains the Board's reasons for approving the final Draft
TEP,despite the fact that the final Draft TEP will have significant impacts on the environment.
These findings do not repeat the fall discussions of environmental impacts contained in the EIR. The
Board ratifies,adopts and incorporates the analysis,explanations,findings,responses to comments
and conclusions of the EIR. The Board recognizes that there is controversy among experts and lay
persons over the EIR's methodology,use of data,and conclusions. The Board adopts the reasoning of
the EIR. These findings include a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
STATE GUIDELINES
The EIR identifies significant effects on the environment,which may occur as a result of the projects
in the final Draft TEP.The State Guidelines adopted pursuant to CEQA provide as follows:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed
which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public
agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects,accompanied
by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.The findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in,or incorporated into,the project that avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
This finding shall be referred to as"Finding(1)."
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such
other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
This finding shall be referred to as"Finding(2)."
(3) Specific economic,legal,social,technological,or other considerations,including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
This finding shall be referred to as"Finding(3).11
State guidelines further require responsible agencies,(e.g.the Board),to mitigate or avoid only the direct or
indirect environmental effects of those parts of the project which it decides to carry out,finance or approve.
The Board's approval of the final draft tep requires adoption of the mitigation measures established in the
EIR,which is included in resolution 2004/354 scope of the environmental analysis.
The Authority,as Lead Agency,prepared and certified a Final Environmental Impact Report(FEIR)
for the 2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan and
Proposed Measure C Extension. Subsequent to certifying the FEIR,the Authority adopted a final
Draft TEP which refines and improves on the alternatives evaluated in the FEIR. As Lead Agency,
the Authority prepared an Addendum to the FEIR for the purpose of approving the final Draft TEP.
The FEIR and Addendum to the FEIR are collectively referred to as the"EIR".
Page 2 of 36
............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
.......................... ... .
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS '
This programmatic EIR prepared for the Project analyzes the potential significant effects of the
adoption and implementation of the proposed 2004 Update to Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan(2004 CTP Update)and Proposed Measure C Extension,which includes the final
Draft TEP.This assessment fulfills the requirements of CEQA to inform decision-makers,other
responsible agencies and the general public of the proposed action and the range of potential
environmental impacts of that action.CEQA provides that a program EIR should focus on the
secondary effects that can be expected to follow its adoption,but need not be as detailed as an EIR on
the specific construction projects that might follow. In accordance with CEQA,the EIR identifies
countywide effects of the implementation of projects which could follow adoption of the 2004 CTP
Update and Proposed Measure C Extension.
The 2004 CTP Update,prepared by the Authority,is a long-range transportation-planning document
with a time horizon until the year 2025.The proposed Measure C Extension includes a new
Expenditure Plan and an update to the 1988 Growth Management Program(collectively,the"final
Draft TEP"),which would extend the current one-half of one-percent sales tax for 25 years starting
when the current measure expires in 2009.
ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
Section 2 of this document identifies the significant environmental effects of the projects in the
proposed Measure C Extension,which cannot feasibly be mitigated to below a level of significance.
Section 3 identifies potential environmental effects of the projects in the proposed Measure C
Extension which are not significant because of the design of the Project or because they can feasibly
be mitigated to below a level of significance. Section 4 summarizes the alternatives discussed in the
EIR and makes findings with respect to their feasibility and whether the alternatives would lessen the
significant environmental effects of the Project.Section 5 consists of the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
Page 3 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
........................................................--........ ................... ...............................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
2, Findings Regarding Significant Effects Which Cannot
Feasibly Be Mitigated to below a Level of Significance
The Board has determined that the adoption of feasible mitigation measures, alternatives and
proposals incorporated into the Project will not reduce the following impacts to below a level of
significance.
AIR QUALITY
Impact 2.2-2
Implementation ofprojects under the 2004 CTP Update would result in an increase in
emissions of regional air pollutants such as ROG, CO, and PM-10, and a greater than five
per cent increase in emissions ofNOX, compared to the No Project Alternative.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1),(2)and(3).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The following mitigation measure will reduce impacts on air quality: The Authority should
work with local,regional and State agencies to implement Transportation Control Measures
(TCMs)effectively as a way to reduce the number and length of trips made in Contra.Costa
County and the region.These measures could include:
(1) Support or require the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as part of the
widening and extension of arterials where feasible,and consistent or countywide or local
bicycle,pedestrian and facilities plan.
(2) Seek funding priority for TCM projects in the 2004 CTP Update for State and regional
agencies.
(3) Follow requirements of regionally adopted particulate attainment plans when such a plan
is prepared and adopted.
(4) Continue to support or expand Transportation Demand Management(TDM)activities to
encourage drivers to reduce motor vehicle use.
(5) Support local jurisdiction efforts to modify land use patterns and implement development
projects that reduce VMT,consistent with Measure C Growth Management Program.
(6) Use cleaner fuels such as electricity,instead of diesel for the eBART project.
(b) The project incorporates all feasible measures to reduce air quality impacts that are consistent
with project objectives.These measures include advancing the construction of the Caldecott
Tunnel to reduce delay and improve air quality;funding for high occupancy vehicle (HOV)
facilities and express bus service to increase the attractiveness of carpooling and transit for
Page 4 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2004/354
................................................................
FINDINGS, FAC'T'S AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
commuting;funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities to help the region meet the region's
adopted TCMs,and support for programs to encourage more walkable communities and
districts so that people need not rely as much on use of single-occupant vehicles.
(c) Compared to existing conditions,countywide transportation emissions of reactive organic
gases,carbon monoxide,and NOx would be reduced.This is because emission factors are
expected to drop considerably by 2025 due to better fuel mixtures and emissions control
technology and the attrition of older,more polluting vehicles.The comparison to the No
Project alternative provides a more appropriate baseline for assessing this impact because it
compares future impacts,thereby allowing a comparison of impacts based on like
assumptions about technology, fuels,and vehicles.
(d) Even with these mitigation measures and project elements,this impact could remain
significant for NOx under Alternatives B and C.This is primarily because neither the Board
nor the sponsors of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update would have
authority to take actions to reduce the number of vehicle trips and subsequently the VMT
generated.The 2004 CTP Update and its projects primarily respond to demand generated by
forecast land use changes in Contra Costa and the Bay Area,irrespective of the
implementation of the 2004 CTP Update or its alternatives.
(e) Alternative A could result in reduced air quality impacts compared to the project,but is less
consistent with the project objective of expanding travel choices beyond the single-occupant
vehicle.The Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Section 5 of this document
contains additional information explaining the reasons for the Board's decision to approve the
Project in spite of its environmental effects,and is hereby incorporated by reference.
POPULATION AND LAND USE
Impact 2.11-1
The construction of new or expanded transportation facilities proposed by the 2004 CTP
Update could result in the conversion of agricultural lands to transportation uses.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1),(2)and(3).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The following mitigation measure will reduce impacts on agricultural land conversion: The
Authority will work with State and local agencies to minimize any adverse impacts on
agricultural lands in the county resulting from the construction of new or expanded
transportation facilities.While the potential for any impacts,and required mitigation,would
be addressed at the project-specific EIR stage,the following measures should be considered
for mitigation of such impacts:
(1) Corridor realignment,where feasible,to avoid agricultural land areas.
(2) Buffer zones and setbacks to protect the functional aspects of agricultural land areas.
Page 5 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
................... ....... ...... ........... ............I.................. ..................I ..................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(3) Berms and fencing to reduce conflicts between transportation uses and agricultural land
uses.
(b) The project incorporates all feasible measures to reduce impacts on agricultural land that are
consistent with project objectives.These measures include reducing funding for the East
County Corridor projects(compared to Alternative A),which would reduce land use impacts
(c) The conversion of agricultural lands to transportation uses would remain a significant impact
despite the limitations on the extent of conversion provided by measures incorporated into the
project and the proposed mitigation measures.
(d) Alternative C would result in greater reductions in the significance of this impact,but has
more significant environmental impacts in other areas. It is also less consistent with the
project objective of reducing future congestion on highways and arterial roads.The Statement
of Overriding Considerations set forth in Section 5 of this document contains additional
information explaining the reasons for the Board's decision to approve the Project in spite of
its environmental effects,and is hereby incorporated by reference.
Page 6 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
..........................................I................... .
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS'
3. Findings Regarding Potential Environmental Effects Which
can Feasibly he Mitigated to Below a Level of
Significance
The Board has determined that the adoption of feasible mitigation measures, alternatives and
proposals incorporated into the Project will reduce the following potential environmental effects of the
project to below a level of significance.
AIR QUALITY
Impact 2.2-1
The construction of proposed projects in the draft 2004 CTP Update could result in
significant short-term direct impacts on air quality near construction sites.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The following mitigation measures will reduce the significance of this impact:
(1) Appropriate dust abatement programs,patterned after the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District(BAAQMD)approach,shall be implemented by the sponsor for
individual projects under the final Draft TEP.The BAAQMD approach calls for"basic"
control measures that should be implemented at all construction sites,"enhanced"control
measures that should be implemented at construction sites greater than four acres in area,
and"optional"control measures that should be implemented on a case-by-case basis at
construction sites that are large in area,located near sensitive receptors or which, for any
other reason,may warrant additional emissions reductions(BAAQMD, 1999).
(2) Mitigation measures included in the Caltrans' Highway Design Manual that are designed
to limit air quality impacts from construction should be used by the project sponsor, as
appropriate,during the design phase of projects and written into construction documents.
Caltrans has several policies for dust abatement during construction that may serve as a
model for dust control at construction sites.There are far-reaching measures such as the
use of special contract provisions to require that burrow pits and temporary haul roads be
restored to a condition such that their potential as sources of blowing dust or other
pollution is no greater than that of their original condition.The checklist of on-site
measures includes provisions for temporary erosion protection with mulches, fiber mats,
dust palliatives,etc,and for timely planting of slopes to permanently abate wind erosion,
etc.
(3) If a specific project under the final Draft TEP would entail the demolition of a building
containing asbestos materials,the Authority shall require that the project sponsor consult
Page 7 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
.........................-..... .........................................I.....-.1.........................................I........................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
with BAAQMD staff concerning the specific requirements of Regulation 11,Rule 2
(Asbestos Demolition,Renovation and Manufacturing)of BAAQMD's regulations.
(b) With implementation of these mitigation measures,the temporary local impacts of
construction dust would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.2-2
Implementation of projects under the 2004 CTP Update would result in less than five percent
increase in emissions of regional air pollutants such as ROC, CO, and PM-10 compared to
the No Project Alternative.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The following mitigation measure will reduce the significance of this impact: The Authority
should work with local,regional and State agencies to implement TCMs effectively as a way
to reduce the number and length of trips made in Contra Costa County and the region.These
measures could include:
(1) Support or require the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as part of the
widening and extension of arterials where feasible,and consistent with countywide or
local bicycle and pedestrian facility plans.
(2) Seek funding priority for TCM projects in the 2004 CTP Update for State and regional
agencies.
(3) Follow requirements of regionally adopted particulate attainment plans when such a plan
is prepared and adopted.
(4) Continue to support or expand TDM to encourage drivers to reduce motor vehicle use.
(5) Support local jurisdiction efforts to modify land use patterns and implement development
projects that reduce VMT,consistent with Measure C Growth Management Program.
(b) Use cleaner fuels such as electricity,instead of diesel for the eBART project.The increased
use of electricity,however,depending on the method of production,could have secondary
and potentially significant impacts where the electricity is produced.The cost of substituting
electricity for diesel could make its use infeasible.
(c) Implementation of these mitigation measures would further reduce the less-than-significant
impacts projected.
(d) The Project incorporates all feasible measures to reduce air quality impacts that are consistent
with project objectives.These measures include advancing the construction of the Caldecott
Tunnel to reduce delay and improve air quality;funding for HOV facilities and express bus
service to increase the attractiveness of carpooling and transit for commuting;funding for
Page 8 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
-.......I ........................—..............................--....... ................................. ....... ...... ............. .......
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
bicycle and pedestrian facilities to help the region meet the region's adopted TCMs,and
support for programs to encourage more walkable communities and districts so that people
need not rely as much on use of private automobiles.
(e) Compared to existing conditions,countywide transportation emissions of reactive organic
gases,carbon monoxide,and NOx would be reduced.This is because emission factors are
expected to drop considerably by 2025 due to better fuel mixtures and emissions control
technology and the attrition of older,more polluting vehicles.The comparison to the No
Project alternative provides a more appropriate baseline for assessing this impact because it
compares future impacts,thereby allowing a comparison of impacts based on like
assumptions about technology,fuels,and vehicles.
GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
Impact 2.4-1
Seismic events could damage proposed transportation infrastructure through surface rupture,
ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides and tsunamis. Potential impacts on property and
public safety from seismic activity would be considered significant.
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Potential seismic hazards associated with projects located within tsunami inundation areas
shall be minimized through designs to diminish wave inundation and associated damage.For
example,precautionary measures such as specifying final foundation or roadbed elevations
greater than the expected height of a tsunami with a given return frequency would be
effective.
(b) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for ensuring adherence to
above mitigation measure for proposed new transportation improvements prior to
construction.Implementation of above mitigation measure would reduce exposure of people
and structures to seismic hazards from new transportation facilities.Although most new
structures would be constructed to survive a strong earthquake without collapse,it is likely
that some segments of roads and transit facilities would be damaged.However,compliance
with above mitigation measure would reduce potential adverse impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
Impact 2.4-2
Highway and rail construction could require significant earthwork and road cuts. Such
projects could increase short-term and long-term soil erosion and the potential for slope
failure.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Page 9 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
........................I................—................... ..................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The following measures shall be used to mitigate the impacts of projects funded through the
proposed Measure C Extension:
(1) Sponsors of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update shall be required to
comply with Mitigation Measure 2.7-1a,as discussed in Water Resources Section 2.7,to
reduce potential erosion during construction activities.
(2) The project proponent shall ensure that all construction activities and design criteria
comply with applicable codes and requirements of the 1997 Uniform Building Code with
California additions(Title 22),and applicable Caltrans,construction and grading
specifications. In addition,the project proponent shall ensure that project designs provide
adequate slope drainage and appropriate landscaping to minimize potential future
occurrences of slope instability and erosion.
(b) Implementing agencies shall ensure that project designs provide adequate slope drainage and
appropriate landscaping to minimize the occurrence of slope instability and erosion.Design
features shall include measures to reduce erosion from storm water.Road cuts shall be
designed to maximize the potential for revegetation. Implementation of these mitigation
measures will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.4-3
Projects built on highly compressible or expansive soils could become damaged and
weakened over time.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The project proponent shall require that a site-specific geotechnical investigation be
conducted by qualified professionals(registered civil and geotechnical engineers,registered
engineering geologists)to identify potential geologic hazards associated with surficial soils
and subsurface sediments. Recommended corrective measures,such as structural
reinforcement,soil treatment,or replacing existing soil with engineered fill shall be
incorporated into project designs.
(b) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for incorporating this
procedure in project-level analysis and ensuring adherence to the above mitigation measure
for proposed new transportation improvements prior to construction.Implementation of this
mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
Page 10of35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
...'.....I...I.............I................I.................................... ..................... ................... .....................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 2.5-1
Projects included in the 2004 CTP Update could adversely affect rare, threatened or
endangered, or other special-status species of plants and animals and their habitats,
including potential interference with the movement of wildlife species.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The project proponents,as a condition of project approval shall implement the following
mitigation to reduce impacts on special-status species:
(1) Select alignments to avoid areas of resource sensitivity and to minimize the need for large
areas of cut and fill that would remove vegetation and habitat. Stabilize cut and fill slopes
and revegetate immediately following construction.To the extent possible,use native
vegetation to landscape project sites to provide some wildlife habitat and minimize the
need for fertilizers and pesticides.Avoid introducing invasive species and monitor and
control pampas grass,broom and other weedy plants,
(2) Avoid construction in wetland areas.Wherever possible,place above ground structures
along an alignment to avoid shading of wetland or riparian vegetation.Control discharges
from facilities so that pollutants in runoff do not affect wetland habitats.
(3) Where wetland disturbance is necessary,require restoration.The new vegetation should
consist of plants that are of similar species to those that were removed,such as cattail,
rush,and willows.Restoration requirements would be determined on a project by project
basis depending upon the value of the habitat.At a minimum there should be no net loss
of wetlands.
(4) Preserve existing and mature trees and snags as nesting and roosting habitat to the extent
feasible,except when trees are diseased,over-aged,or otherwise constitute a hazard to
persons or property.Remove topsoil,stockpile and respread to preserve natural
vegetation.
(5) Keep disruption of soils within streambeds to a minimum and implement stabilization
efforts around support pillars.
(6) Conduct field surveys for rare and endangered plants,as well as candidate species as part
of the environmental review process for proposed projects,where suitable habitat exists.
Such surveys are not mitigation in themselves,but provide critical information for
assessing impacts and determining if effective mitigation is possible.
(7) Protect rare and endangered animal species through controlling or eliminating
development in primary habitat areas.Where wildlife habitat is disturbed,undertake
relocation efforts where feasible.
Page 11 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
............... ......................... ........11......................... ............................... .............. .......................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(8) Avoid known animal movement corridors where possible when designing new road and
rail alignments,pedestrian/bike paths,and other transportation facilities;design lighting
to be responsive to wildlife sensitivities.Place pass through-culverts under highways to
allow wildlife movement. Fencing should be used to prevent wildlife from entering
highways.
(9) Schedule construction activities to avoid disturbance to wildlife;require appropriate
erosion control measures in conjunction with new development to minimize wildlife
habitat destruction.
(b) Specific mitigation measures will need to be recommended for impacts identified during the
environmental evaluation of individual projects.On a case-by-case basis,these measures can
reduce project-specific impacts to a level that is less-than-significant.
(c) In addition to the mitigation measures listed above,the project proponent will implement the
following mitigation measure to reduce overall impacts of the Project to a less-than-
significant level.
(1) The project proponents,as a condition of project approval shall work with agencies
involved in the development of the East Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP and
determine whether this plan could incorporate the Project into its list of covered
activities,The January 2003 draft list of activities covered in the HCP/NCCP includes
road and highway construction and maintenance.Because projects and program
included in the Project involve these types of activities,it is likely that the final list of
activities covered by the HCP/NCCP could cover potential impacts of the Project.If the
Authority and other agencies determine the HCP approach would provide such benefits
for Project activities,the Authority will work to support the development of theHCP
NCCP.Authority also may need to develop an HCP to address impacts of Project
activities on biological resources located in western and central Contra Costa outside the
East County HCP/NCCP coverage area.
Upon completion of CEQA/NEPA documentation and finalization,the East Contra
Costa County HCP/NCCP will provide an effective way to achieve local goals for
preserving habitat and maintaining environmental quality within eastern Contra Costa
while balancing other development goals.This HCP/NCCP would have the effect of
preserving key habitat in a systematic fashion,and would allow for a"taking"of listed
plants and animals in a way that would still ensure no net loss of the region's ability to
maintain populations of listed species.
Impact 2.5.2
Projects included in the 2004 CTP Update could adversely affect wetlands and other aquatic
resources.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Page 12 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
............ ................................................. ............. .............................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) Prior to project implementation,project proponents shall obtain applicable permits from the
appropriate agencies(Corps,Regional Water Quality Control Board[RWQCB],Bay
Conservation and Development Commission[BCDC],and CDFG)and agree to comply with
permit conditions to protect jurisdictional waters and other sensitive habitat.This requirement
obligates project proponents to implement measures that avoid,minimize,and compensate for
significant impacts on jurisdictional wetlands and other aquatic resources within or adjacent
to the project area.In accordance with guidelines of the Corps,RWQCB,BCDC,and CDFG,
a goal of"no net loss"of wetland acreage and value will be implemented,wherever possible,
through avoidance of the resource.Mitigation for wetlands impacts due to proposed
transportation projects would be based on project-specific wetland mitigation plans,subject to
approval by the Corps and commenting agencies.Mitigation for placing fill in wetlands
would be partially achieved by avoiding wetlands and by minimizing fill where avoidance is
not feasible.
Avoidance,compensatory restoration,or creation of new wetland communities to
offset the conversion of wetlands for proposed transportation improvements would achieve
"no net loss"of wetland acreage and value.
(b) Implementing the above mitigation measure on a site-by-site basis,where necessary,would
reduce Project effects to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.5-3
Projects included in the 2004 CTP Update could result in the removal of trees protected by
local ordinances.
Findings: The Board hereby makes firidings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Project-level analysis will determine whether the Project will result in the removal of trees
protected by Contra Costa County or city ordinance.The project proponents will avoid work
activities within the drip-line of protected or heritage trees. In the event that it is infeasible to
avoid the drip-line of protected or heritage trees,the project proponents would apply for any
applicable permits and comply with local city or County replacement mitigation guidelines
for impacts to protected trees specified in the permits,
(b) This measure would reduce impacts on protected trees to a less-than-significant level.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 2.6-1
Hazardous materials used on-site during construction activities(e.g.,fuels, oils and solvents)
could be released to the environment through improper handing or storage.
Page 13 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004#354
I.......... .......................................... .........--......................................... ...... ......—......—.—........
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) Sponsors of individual projects under the 2004 CTP Update shall be required to comply with
CEQA and NEPA.The following mitigation measures should be included in project-level
analysis as appropriate for proposed new transportation improvements.
(1) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for ensuring utilization of
construction best management practices that are typically implemented as part of
construction.The use of construction best management practices would minimize the
potential negative effects on groundwater and soils.Best management practices could
include the following:
i. Follow manufacturer's recommendations on use,storage and disposal of chemical
products used in construction;
ii. Avoid overtopping construction equipment fuel gas tanks;
iii. During routine maintenance of construction equipment,properly contain and remove
grease and oils;and
iv. Properly dispose of discarded containers of fuels and other chemicals.
(b) Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce hazardous materials exposure
during construction.With implementation of such construction best management practices,
this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.6-2
Disturbance of impacted soils or groundwater during project construction and excavation
work could expose construction workers, the public, or the environment to hazardous
conditions.
Findings.The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) Sponsors of individual transportation projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update should
be required to implement the following mitigation measures.Any additional mitigation
needed for specific projects shall be identified and implemented following project-specific
CEQA and/or NEPA analysis.
(1) A soil sampling plan shall be prepared and implemented along construction corridors to
determine the presence or absence of soil contamination.If soil contamination is found,
the contaminated soil shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with all applicable
regulatory requirements.
Page 14 of 35
.................
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
................................................................... .
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS'
(2) In the event that soil contamination is encountered,project sponsors shall insure that one
competent professional is onsite at all times during construction phases to perform soil
analyses.All construction shall cease until the contaminated soil is reused or removed
and disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.A competent
professional shall collect verification soil samples to ensure complete removal of
contaminated soil.
(3) If any underground storage tanks(UST)are discovered during construction,all
construction in the immediate area shall stop until the UST is removed under the
guidance of the Contra Costa Environmental Health(CCEH)or other regulatory agency.
If required by the regulatory agency,removal may include the over-excavation and
disposal of any impacted soil that may be associated with such tanks to a degree
considered sufficient by the CCEH.
(b) With implementation of the above mitigation measures,the impact would be reduced to a
less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.6-3
.Disturbance o,f structural and building components (i.e., asbestos, lead, PCBs, and PAHs)
could expose construction workers, the public, or the environment to hazardous conditions.
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) In addition to the following measures,any mitigation needed for specific projects shall be
identified and implemented following project-specific CEQA and/or NEPA analysis.
(1) Prior to the demolition of any building,a pre-demolition asbestos containing material
(ACM)and lead-based paint(LBP)survey shall be performed by the project proponent.
Abatement of known or suspected ACMs and loose or peeling LBP shall occur prior to
demolition or construction activities that would disturb those materials.
(2) In the event that PCB-containing materials are identified prior to demolition activities
they shall be removed,and shall be disposed of by a licensed transportation and disposal
facility in Class I hazardous waste landfill cells.
(b) With implementation of the above mitigation measures,this impact would be reduced to a
less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.6-4
Exposure to hazardous materials, such as petroleum products,fuels, spent oil, and solvents
used during project construction and operation, could expose humans and the environment to
potentially hazardous conditions.
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Page 15 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
...........I......... ...............................................................................................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) Sponsors of individual transportation projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update should
be required to implement the following mitigation measures,as a condition of project
approval,Any additional mitigation needed for specific projects shall be identified and
implemented following project-specific CEQA and/or NEPA analysis.
(1) In the event of an inadvertent release of hazardous materials during project operations,
cleanup shall occur in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
(2) Spent oil and other solvents used during maintenance of transportation facilities and
equipment shall be recycled or disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulatory
requirements.All hazardous materials shall be transported,handled,and disposed of in
accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
(b) With implementation of the above mitigation measures,the impact would be reduced to a
less-than-significant level.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOUCRES
Impact 2.7-1
Construction activities could result in erosion and cause subsequent sedimentation of storm
water runoff, or introduce pollutants to runoff from the use of automotive fluids and
hazardous materials.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Construction-related grading and other activities shall be required to comply with the
Association of Bay Area Government's(ABAG's)Manual of Standards for Erosion and
Sediment Control Measures(ABAG, 1995)and with the California Stormwater Quality
Association(CASQA),Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook for Construction
(CASQA,2003a).The project proponent shall also apply for coverage under the State Water
Resources Control Board(SWRCB)National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES)General Construction Permit for construction projects that incorporate over one
acre,as required by the SWRCB.Under NPDES permit regulations,the project proponent
would be required to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP).The SWPPP shall be consistent with the State Construction Storm Water General
Permit,the Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sedimentation Control byABAG,policies
and recommendations of the local urban runoff program(city and/or county),and the
recommendations of the applicable RWQCB.Implementation of the SWPPP shall be
enforced by inspecting agencies during the construction period.Typical elements of a SWPPP
include:
Page 16 of 35
.........
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
........................................I.........I............-..... .............. .............................— ......
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(1) Excavation and grading activities will be scheduled for the dry season only(April 15 to
October 15),to the extent possible.This will reduce the chance of severe erosion from
intense rainfall and surface runoff,as well as the potential for soil saturation in swale
areas.
(2) If excavation occurs during the rainy season,storm runoff from the construction area will
be regulated through a storm water management/erosion control plan that may include
temporary onsite silt traps and/or basins with multiple discharge points to-natural
drainages and energy dissipaters. Stockpiles of loose material will be covered and runoff
diverted away from exposed soil material.If work is stopped due to rain,a positive
grading away from slopes will be provided to carry the surface runoff to areas where flow
can be controlled,such as the temporary silt basins.Sediment basin/traps will be located
and operated to minimize the amount of offsite sediment transport.Any trapped sediment
will be removed from the basin or trap and placed at a suitable location onsite,away from
concentrated flows,or removed to an approved disposal site.
(3) Temporary erosion control measures will be provided until perennial revegetation or
landscaping is established and can minimize discharge of sediment into nearby
waterways.For construction within 500 feet of a water body,straw bales will be placed
upstream adjacent to the water body.
(4) After completion of grading,erosion protection will be provided on all cut-and-fill
slopes.Revegetation will be facilitated by mulching,hydroseeding,or other methods and
should be initiated as soon as possible after completion of grading and prior to the onset
of the rainy season(by October 15).
(5) Permanent revegetation/landscaping will emphasize drought-tolerant perennial ground
coverings,shrubs,and trees to improve the probability of slope and soil stabilization
without adverse impacts to slope stability due to irrigation infiltration and long-term root
development.
(6) Best Management Practices selected and implemented for the project will be in place and
operational prior to the onset of major earthwork on the site.The construction phase
facilities will be maintained regularly and cleared of accumulated sediment as necessary.
(7) Hazardous materials such as fuels and solvents used on the construction sites will be
stored in covered containers and protected from rainfall,runoff,and vandalism.A
stockpile of spill cleanup materials will be readily available at all construction sites.
Employees will be trained in spill prevention and cleanup,and individuals will be
designated as responsible for prevention and cleanup activities.
(b) Proponents of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update or the local
jurisdiction shall be responsible for incorporating in project-level analysis as appropriate and
ensuring adherence to the above mitigation measure for proposed new transportation
improvements prior to construction.Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce
potentially significant impacts on water quality associated with construction-related activities
to a less-than-significant level.
Page 17 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
...................................... ............... ......................................................................................... ......
FINDINGSj FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Impact 2.7-2
Construction activities may discharge groundwater impacted with hazardous materials
during dewatering
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Individual project proponents under the 2004 CTP Update shall obtain a discharge permit
from the appropriate regulatory agency prior to discharge of groundwater generated by
excavation dewatering activities to storm drains or sewer systems.For projects located in
areas where dewatering activities would require the discharge of groundwater generated by
construction directly to a local water body,the project proponent shall obtain a permit from
the appropriate RWQCB.
Alternatively,the project applicant shall arrange for temporary storage of
groundwater generated by dewatering on-site,and arrange for future transport of groundwater
to an appropriate disposal facility.
(b) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for incorporating in project-
level analysis as appropriate and ensuring adherence to the above mitigation measure for
proposed new transportation improvements prior to construction.This mitigation measure
would reduce potentially significant impacts associated with discharge of contaminated
groundwater during construction to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.7-3
Transportation facilities and programs constructed or operating in floodproneareas may
subject people or structures to flood hazards, or could serve to redirect flood flows.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Proponents of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update shall comply with
Caltrans and local regulatory agency design standards for projects within a Federal
Emergency Management Agency-designated 100-year flood zone.
(b) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for assessing the effects of the
project on flood flows,as appropriate,and ensuring adherence to the above mitigation
measure for proposed new transportation improvements prior to construction.This mitigation
measure would reduce potentially significant impacts associated with flooding to a less-than-
significant level.
Page 18 of 35
. ..... ....
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
............. .................................................................I..........I................... ........................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Impact 2.7-4
Construction of transportation improvements would increase impervious surface areas
causing an increase in storm water runoff volume and rate, and nonpoint-source pollutant
levels and decreased rates ofgroundwater recharge.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The following measures shall be applied to mitigate the impacts of projects funded through
the 2004 CTP Update and proposed Measure C Extension:
(1) Proponents of individual projects under the 2004 CTP Update shall be required to meet
the provisions of the federal Clean Water Act by submitting plans to eliminate and
control potential pollutants in storm water discharge through incorporation of structural
and treatment best management practices,in addition to minimizing increases in storm
water runoff volumes and rates,in accordance with Contra Costa's Municipal NP`DES
permit,Caltrans NPDES permit,or,if applicable a NPDES permit specific to the project
site. In order to minimize water quality impacts associated with proposed projects,
existing pervious surfaces shall be preserved to minimize the amount of storm runoff to
the greatest extent possible,in accordance the recommendations provided in the Bay
Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association's(BASMAA)Start at the Source
Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection(BASMA, 1999). The
project shall also incorporate appropriate water pollution and storm water runoff control
measures recommended in the California Storm Water Best Management Practice Hand-
book for New Development and Redevelopment.
(2) Projects shall be designed to allow lateral transmission of storm water flows across
transportation corridors with no increased risk of upstream flooding.Culverts and bridges
shall be designed to adequately carry drainage waters through project sites,in accordance
with Caltrans design requirements.
(b) The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for incorporating in project-
level analysis as appropriate and ensuring adherence to the above mitigation measures for
proposed new transportation improvements prior to construction.Compliance with these
mitigation measures would minimize newly created impervious surface areas associated with
individual proposed projects,in addition to minimizing potential adverse water quality
impacts associated with storm water runoff from newly created roadways.Overall,mitigation
would reduce potential impacts associated with increased storm water runoff and decreased
groundwater recharge to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.7-5
Population growth in the San Francisco Bay Area would result in additional vehicle usage in
Contra Costa County, increasing automobile-related pollutant levels in storm water runoff
generatedfrom county roads.
Page 19 of 35
............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2004/354
..............................I....... ...... ......... ............................ ........ ........................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The facts in support of findings related to impact 2.7-4 are hereby incorporated by reference.
(b) The proposed Measure C Extension would not result in vehicle usage greater than that
expected with the No Project alternative.
Impact 2.8-2
Construction or expansion of certain transportation projects included in the 2004 CTP
Update could adversely alter views in the county over the long-term by adding incongruous
elements to the existing landscape, thereby blocking view or altering the scale,character, and
quality of rural or open space areas, important vistas along roadways, and urban
communities.
Findings:The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) The Authority shall require project proponents to comply with CEQA(and NEPA,if
appropriate)prior to project approval.Project proponents shall commit to mitigation measures
as project conditions prior to project approval.These commitments obligate project
proponents to implement measures that would minimize or eliminate any significant visual
impacts.Visual impacts from new or expanded transportation facilities may be minimized to
preserve sensitive scenic views through the careful design,siting(by avoiding major
ridgelines,etc.),and landscaping of structures,roads,power lines,and storage tanks. Typical
mitigation measures that could be considered by project proponents to minimize significant
visual impacts include:
(1) Design projects to minimize contrast in scale and massing between the project and
surrounding natural forms and urban development.Site or design projects to minimize
their intrusion into important view sheds.
(2) Use natural landscaping to minimize contrasts between the projects and existing natural
and human-made features.Where possible,develop interchanges and transit lines at the
grade of the surrounding land to limit view blockage.Contour the edges of major cut and
fill slopes to provide a more natural looking finished profile,
(3) Design landscaping along highway corridors to add significant natural elements and
visual interest to soften the hard edged,linear travel experience that would otherwise
occur.
(4) Complete design studies for projects in designated or eligible Scenic Highway corridors.
Consider the"complete"highway system and develop mitigation measures to minimize
impacts on the quality of the views or visual experience that originally qualified the
highway for Scenic Highway designation.
Page 20 of 35
............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
................................... ............... ............... ........ ........... ............................I.....................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(b) Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts to visual resources
caused by the addition of incongruous elements to a less-than-significant level.
NOISE
Impact 2.9-1
Construction of the projects proposed in the 2004 CTP Update would have short-term noise
impacts on surrounding areas.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The Authority should continue to advise project sponsors as to appropriate construction-
related noise mitigation measures to include in their projects,such as requiring mufflers on
heavy construction equipment and specifying time restrictions consistent with local noise
ordinances and with the activities of sensitive land uses in the vicinity(limitations on
allowable hours for construction,however,could have significant adverse impacts on traffic
movement if construction is limited to the daylight hours and prohibited during nighttime
hours).Further project level analysis conducted for individual projects shall determine the
level of mitigation required.Mitigation measure could include,but not be limited to:
(1) Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall utilize the best available noise
control techniques(e.g.,improved mufflers,equipment redesign,use of intake silencers,
ducts,engine enclosures and acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds,wherever
feasible);
(2) Impact tools(e.g.,jack hammers,pavement breakers,and rock drills)used for project
construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid
noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools.
However,where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable,an exhaust muffler on the
compressed air exhaust shall be used;this muffler can lower noise levels from the
exhaust by up to about 10 dBA.External jackets on the tools themselves shall be used
where feasible,and this could achieve a reduction of 5.0 dBA.Quieter procedures shall
be used,such as drills rather than impact equipment,whenever feasible;
(3) Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible,and
they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds,incorporate insulation
barriers,or other measures to the extent feasible;
(4) To reduce the potential for noise impacts from pile driving,alternate methods of driving
shall be used,if feasible.Alternate measures may include pre-drilling of piles,the use of
more than one pile driver to lessen the total time required for driving piles,and other
measures;
Page 21 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2004/354
........................................................................................................................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(5) Erect temporary plywood noise barriers around the entire construction site,if necessary
to buffer noise from sensitive land uses;
(6) Utilize noise control blankets on the building structure as the building is erected to reduce
noise emission from the site;
(7) Evaluate the feasibility of noise control at the receivers by temporarily improving the
noise reduction capability of adjacent buildings;
(8) Monitor the effectiveness of noise attenuation measures with noise measurements;and
(9) Establish a process for responding to and tracking complaints pertaining to construction
noise with the following components:
i. A procedure for notifying city and county police departments and building division
staff throughout Contra Costa County;
ii. A pian for posting signs on-site pertaining to permitted construction days and
hours and complaint procedures and who to notify in the event of a problem;
iii. A listing of telephone numbers(during regular construction hours and off hours);
iv. The designation of a construction complaint manger for the project;and
v. Notify neighbors within 300 feet of the project construction area at least 30 days in
advance of pile-driving activities about the estimated duration of the activity.
(b) This mitigation would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.9-2
Transportation improvements proposed as part of the 2004 GTP Update could result in noise
levels that approach or exceed the Federal Highway Adminstration (SHWA) and Federal
Transit Administration (FTA)Noise Abatement Criteria.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts In Support of Findings:
(a) Noise mitigation measures should respond to the land use compatibility criteria included in
the General Plans of the applicable jurisdictions. If federal funding is used for the project,
mitigation measures should also conform to applicable FHWA and FTA noise abatement
criteria.These commitments obligate project sponsors to implement measures that would
minimize or eliminate any significant impacts.Depending on the type of project,typical
mitigation measures that should be considered by project sponsors shall include but not be
limited to:
Page 22 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
......................... .......---.....I...I...I........ ..................... ....................... ..............--............
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(1) Construction of sound walls adjacent to new or modified roads or transit lines,especially
when projects are located in the vicinity of sensitive receptors.Noise level increases
could,in most cases,be mitigated to levels at or below existing levels if soundwalls were
constructed along the rights-of-way.A determination of the specific heights,lengths and
feasibility of soundwalls must be part of the project-level environmental assessment.
(2) Adjustments to proposed roadway or transit alignment to reduce noise levels in noise
sensitive areas.Depressed roadway alignments are effective at mitigating roadside noise
levels.
(3) Insulation of buildings or construction of noise barriers around sensitive receptors.
(4) Vibration isolation of track segments.
(5) The Authority will encourage local jurisdictions to establish development standards and
land use policies that limit the exposure of sensitive receptors to noise generated by new
or expanded transportation facilities. Such policies could include guiding commercial,
industrial,and other similar uses to sites adjacent to major roadways or nail lines and
requiring noise mitigation measures when residential,educational and other similar uses
are to be developed near major transportation facilities.
(b) This mitigation would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact 2.10-1
Construction of new transportation projects supported by the Project has the potential to
adversely affect historic architectural resources through demolition or significant changes to
the historical setting.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) To reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level,proponents of individual projects under
the 2004 CTP Update would be required to implement,as a condition of project approval,
mitigation measures(1)(identification)and(2)(avoidance). If it is not feasible to avoid direct
and indirect impacts on historically significant buildings,implementation of mitigation
measure(3)would lessen impacts,but not to a less-than-significant level,
(b) It shall be the responsibility of individual project proponents to ensure that adequate measures
to identify and mitigate impacts on cultural resources are implemented.Such mitigation
measures shall include,but not be limited to the following:
(1) Inventory and Evaluate Cultural Resources. A complete cultural resources inventory
designed to identify potentially significant resources shall be conducted for all projects
Page 23 of 35
.............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
................ ......-........ ....................................................-.....—...............................---...............
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
that have the potential to impact cultural resources.Minimally,a cultural resources
inventory shall consist of a cultural resources records search to be conducted at the
Northwest Information of the California Historical Resources Information System located
at Sonoma State University;consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission
(NARC)and with interested Native Americans identified by the NAHC; a field survey(if
one has not previously been conducted);recordation of all identified archaeological sites
and historic buildings and structures on California Department of Parks and Recreation
523 Site Record forms;and preparation of a cultural resources inventory report
describing the project setting,methods used in the investigation,results of the
investigation,and recommendations for management of identified resources.Certain
agencies,such as the FHWA and Caltrans,have specific requirements for inventory areas
and documentation format. Avoid Impacts on Cultural Resources. If feasible,impacts
on identified cultural resources including prehistoric and historic archaeological sites,
human remains,and historical buildings and structures should be avoided. Methods of
avoidance may include,but not be limited to,project re-route or re-design,project
cancellation,or identification of protection measures such as capping or fencing.
(2) Follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards far the Treatment offfistoric Properties.
In the event that impact avoidance is not feasible,any alterations,including relocation,to
historic buildings or structures shall conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines for Preserving,Rehabilitating,
Restoring,and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.This mitigation measure will reduce
impacts on significant historic buildings and structures,but would not reduce it to a less-
than-significant level, Impacts on significant historic buildings are considered significant
and unavoidable.
Where such treatment is not feasible,a qualified cultural resource specialist shall be
retained to document the impacted historical architectural resource to Historic American
Buildings Survey(NABS)and Historic American Engineering Record(HAER)
standards.NABS and HAER documentation packages shall be entered into the Library of
Congress as well as the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical
Resources Information System.
(c) implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts on historic
architectural resources to a less-than-significant level.
Impact 2.10-2
Construction of new transportation projects supported by the Project has the potential to
adversely affect archaeological remains or buried human remains through damage or
destruction of those remains.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) To reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level,sponsors of individual projects under
the 2004 CTP Update shall be required to implement mitigation measures(b)(1)
(identification)and(b)(2) (avoidance)from the Facts in Support of Findings for Impact 2.10-
Page 24 of 35
.....................
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
....I....................................... .....................I........................I................. .......... ...... ..........
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1,as a condition of project approval. Some locations may be designated as archaeological
sensitive locations even though specific archaeological sites have not been identified. In these
areas,project sponsors shall be required to implement mitigation measure(b)(3)(conduct
monitoring)from the Facts in Support of Findings for Impact 2.10.If archaeological remains
are inadvertently discovered during ground-disturbing activities,mitigation measure(a)(2),
from this section,below)(Stop Work)shall be implemented.
If significant archaeological remains cannot be avoided through project design
specifications,project sponsors shall implement mitigation measure(a)(3),from this section,
below)(Conduct Archaeological Data Recovery).To further reduce impacts on
archaeological remains,project sponsors shall implement the following mitigation measures,
as appropriate:
(1) Conduct Archaeological Monitoring. If ground-disturbing activities that have the
potential to impact archaeological remains will occur in an area that has been determined
by a qualified archaeologist to be an area that is sensitive for the presence of buried
archaeological remains,a qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor those
activities.Archaeological monitoring shall be conducted in areas where there is a
likelihood that archaeological remains may be discovered but where those remains are
not visible on the surface.Monitoring shall not be considered a substitute for efforts to
identify and evaluate cultural resources prior to the project initiation.
(2) Stop Work if Archaeological Remains are Discovered During Project Construction. If
potentially significant cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing
activities associated with project preparation,construction,or completion,work shall halt
in that area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find,and,if
necessary,develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with appropriate
agencies and interested parties.
(3) Conduct Archaeological Data Recovery. If it is infeasible to avoid impacts on
archaeological sites that have been determined to be eligible for listing on the CRHR or
the NRHP(significant resources),additional research including,but not necessarily
limited to,archaeological excavation shall be conducted.This work shall be conducted by
a qualified archaeologist and shall include preparation of a research design,additional
archival and historical research,archaeological excavation,analysis of artifacts,features,
and other attributes of the resource,and preparation of a technical report documenting the
methods and results of the investigation.The purpose of this work is to recover a
sufficient quantity of data to compensate for damage to or destruction of the resource.
The procedures to be employed in this data recovery program will be determined in
consultation with responsible agencies and interested parties,as appropriate,
(b) Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce impacts on archaeological
resources to a less-d=-significant level.
Page 25 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
.........................................................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
POPULATION AND LAND USE
Impact 2.11-2
Construction-related activities associated with projects comprising the 2004 CTP Update are
likely to significantly disrupt adjoining land uses in the short-term.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) The Authority will require project sponsors to commit to the following mitigation measure to
reduce construction-related traffic disruption impacts:
(1) Construction operations on existing facilities will be regulated to minimize traffic
disruptions and detours,and to maintain safe traffic operations.
(b) This mitigation measure is expected to reduce the potentially significant adverse impact of
individual projects to a less-than-significant level countywide.
Impact 2.11-3
The construction of new or expanded transportation facilities proposed by the 2004 CTP
Update could result in the displacement or division of existing housing, businesses, and
neighborhoods.
Findings: The Board hereby makes findings(1)and(2).
Facts in Support of Findings:
(a) Require project sponsors of eBART,SR 4 East(Loveridge Road to SR 160),Martinez
Intermodal Facility,Vasco Road Widening,Byron Highway Widening,Brentwood
Boulevard Corridor Improvements,SR 4 Bypass(Lone Tree Way to Vasco Road),SR
242/Clayton Road,South 1-680 HOV Direct Access,and various local arterial projects to
commit to preparation and execution of relocation assistance plans as a mitigation measure
for displacement impacts as a condition of Measure C Extension funding.As a minimum,
relocation assistance plans will include:
(1) Criteria for replacement housing;
(2) Reimbursement levels for moving costs and differential housing costs to those eligible for
displacement;
(3) Construction schedules that allow adequate time for all commercial and industrial
businesses to find and relocate to adequate substitute sites;and
Page 26 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2004/354
............................................................................ . .
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONSI
(4) Reimbursement levels for the costs associated with relocating a business to an acceptable
facility,including search costs and criteria for payment in lieu of relocation if a business
cannot be relocated without a substantial loss of existing patronage.
(b) These mitigation measures are expected to reduce this potentially significant adverse impact
to a less-than-significant level.
(c)
(a)
Page 27 of 35
...........
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
............................................................................................... ......................I.........I..........
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
4. Findings Regarding Alternatives
INTRODUCTION
CEQA requires an EIR to consider a reasonable range of alternatives to a proposed project or to the
location of the proposed project. These alternatives must"feasibly attain the basic objectives of the
project(CEQA Guidelines, §15126(a))." "Feasible"means that the alternatives "are capable of being
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account
economic,environmental,legal,social,and technological factors(CEQA Guidelines, §15364)."
In the EIR for the 2004 CTP Update and Proposed Measure C Extension,the Authority considered the
No Project alternative and three alternative projects,rather than alternatives to the project. This
approach to project and alternatives definition allowed the Authority to consider the environmental
impacts of alternative approaches as an integral part of developing the final project,rather than as a
subsequent step.The alternatives included three different proposed expenditure plans. In response to
the many comments received on the alternatives analyzed in the EIR,the Authority developed a final
Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan(TEP)to include in the proposed Measure C Extension(the
project analyzed in these findings)that refines and improves on the alternatives analyzed in the EIR.
The alternatives are described in greater detail below.
The EIR also analyzes three growth management options that would affect the process of growth
management efforts within Contra Costa presently required under Measure C. In response to the
many comments received on the options analyzed in the EIR,the Authority prepared a final Draft
Growth Management Program to include in the final Draft TEP as part of the project analyzed in these
findings.These requirements would not result in specific changes to land use or development within
the county.
GOALS OF THE PROJECT
The Board hereby finds that the Authority has established following goals for the 2004 CTP Update:
1. Reduce future congestion on highways and arterial roads.
1.1 Increase the operational capacity of the existing highway and arterial roads systems
through capital and operating enhancements.
1.2 Define and close gaps in the existing highway and arterial system.
1.3 Improve the highway and arterial system consistent with a countywide plan to influence
the location and nature of anticipated growth.
2. Manage the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy and preserve its
environment.
2.1 Require cooperative transportation and land use planning among Contra Costa County,
cities,towns,and transportation agencies.
2.2 Work to maintain and expand partnerships to achieve the Authority's goals.
2.3 Participate in a regional cooperative land use planning process with agencies both within
and outside of Contra Costa.
2.4 Support land use patterns within Contra Costa that make more efficient use of the
transportation system,consistent with the General Plans of local jurisdictions.
Page 28 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2044/354
............................................................................I............................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS'
2.5 Require local jurisdictions to(i)establish standards for necessary public capital
improvements,(ii)have new growth pay its fair share of the cost of such improvements,
and(iii)link land use decisions to the level of transportation capacity that can reasonably
be provided.
2.6 Link transportation investments to(i)support of an urban limit line jointly endorsed by
the County,cities and towns,once it is established,(ii)new developments which enhance
transportation efficiency and economic vitality,and(iii)infill and redevelopment in
existing urban and brownfields areas.
2.7 Respect community character and the environment when considering proposed new
transportation projects.
3. Provide and expand safe,convenient and affordable alternatives to the single-occupant
automobile.
3.1 Help fund the expansion of existing transit services,and maintenance of existing
operations,including BART,bus transit,school buses,and paratransit.
3.2 Link transit investments to increased coordination and integration of public transit
services,and improved connections between travel modes.
3.3 Require local jurisdictions to incorporate policies and standards that support transit,
bicycle and pedestrian access in new developments.
3.4 Support transit-oriented and pedestrian-friendly developments.
3.5 Invest in trails,walkways,and pedestrian-oriented improvements.
3.6 Promote formation of more carpools and vanpools,and greater use of transit,bicycling,
and walking.
3.7 Support the expansion of a coordinated system of transit and paratransit service to
address the mobility needs of low-income,elderly,young and disabled travelers.
3.8 Encourage local jurisdictions to develop bicycle facilities and to connect those facilities
into a coordinated network.
4. Maintain the transportation system.
4.1 Advocate for stable sources of funds for transit operations.
4.2 Require programs for effective preventive maintenance and rehabilitation of the
transportation system.
4.3 Provide funding to reduce the backlog of transportation rehabilitation and maintenance
needs.
4.4 Once the backlog has been addressed,promote stable funding and preventative
maintenance programs that will maintain the long-term health of the transportation
system.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED BY THE EIR
The EIR analyzes three alternative Expenditure Plans.While all three include the same$1.6 billion
revenue from the proposed Measure C Extension,each proposes to distribute the money differently,
one alternative emphasizes projects,another balances projects and programs,and a third emphasizes
programs over projects.
Page 29 of 35
.............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
......................................... ............................................................................................ ..............
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Alternative A — "Project Focus"
Alternative A represents a continuation of the current Measure C funding approach.Alternative A
emphasizes major regional projects and will facilitate the delivery of major capital projects in the
Fiscal Year(FY)2010 to FY 2015 period. Since this alternative is proposed to reflect how current
Measure C funds are distributed,all programs would be distributed using formulas currently in use.
Alternative B — "Local Focus"
Alternative B divides expected revenues evenly between programs and projects.Of the three
Expenditure Plan Alternatives,it reflects most closely the requests for projects and program funding
made by the RTPCs. Since this alternative is proposed to reflect RTPCs needs,all programs except for
Local Transportation Maintenance and Improvements("Return to Source")and TDM are distributed
proportional to the amounts requested by the RTPCs.The Local Transportation Maintenance and
Improvements("Return to Source")and TDM funds would be distributed using formulas currently in
use.
Alternative C — "Program Focus"
Alternative C emphasizes programs over major regional projects.The majority of program funding
would be for transit operating subsidies and local grants,which have traditionally been difficult to
obtain from other sources. The Local Transportation Maintenance and Improvements("Return to
Source"),TDM,and Transportation Services for the Elderly and Persons with Disabilities programs
would be distributed using formulas currently in use.CC-TLC Incentive Program and Ped/Bike
programs are distributed proportional to 2020 population.Bus Operations,Ferries,and Transportation
for Children are distributed proportional to the amounts requested by the RTPCs because the amounts
varied dramatically(e.g.,no ferries in SWAT or TRANSPLAN sub-areas).The Express Bus Service
funds would be distributed proportional to what the Authority's Expenditure Plan Advisory
Committee suggested for various corridors.
No Project Alternative
CEQA guidelines advise that when the project is the revision of a plan,policy or ongoing operation,
the"No Project"Alternative would continue the existing plan,policy or operation into the future
(CEQA Guidelines§15126.6(e)(3)(A)).Under the No Project Alternative for this EIR,the Authority
would not adopt the proposed 2004 CTP Update,leaving in place the adopted 2000 CTP.The No
Project Alternative includes projects either identified in MTC's 2001 RTP Track I or programmed in
the State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP),thereby incorporating regional-and state-level
policy directives that have taken effect since the 2000 CTP was adopted.
FINDINGS OF ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
As shown in Table 3.1-15 of the EIR,there are tradeoffs among the various issue areas.In several
cases,the overall difference between the alternatives is very minor.Because the No Project and the
Expenditure Plan Alternatives share many of the same improvements,their impacts are also similar
Page 30 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
...........................................I.............._.............. ........ ..........................................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
for many of the issue areas.Nonetheless,because the No Project Alternative has fewer improvements
(roadway and rail),it would have the least direct physical impacts.However,it would also result in
less favorable transportation(and increased energy)impacts than Alternatives A and B.Conversely,
Alternative A would result in the greatest transportation benefits,but given that it includes several
regional improvements—such as eBART and Vasco Road and Byron Highway widenings—it would
also have greater direct physical impacts.In the areas of cultural resources,geology/seismicity,
hazardous materials,noise,and visual impacts,many of the impacts include short-term construction
effects that are localized and temporary.Also,construction of several major projects will still occur
under the No Project scenario.
Focusing on long-term effects,it appears that Alternative A offers the most environmental advantages,
as it perforins the best in key issue areas of transportation,air quality,and energy.
The impacts of Alternative B are comparable to those of Alternative A,except in areas of
transportation,air quality,and energy,where it performs slightly inferior in comparison.However,it
results in slightly greater transit ridership(primarily due to bus ridership;BART ridership will
actually be lower)than Alternative A.Alternative C performs better in visual quality,and population
and land use because of reduced emphasis on regional improvements than Alternatives A and B,but it
has worse or similar impacts in all of the remaining issue areas(except for Geology and Seismicity
and Socioeconomic Environment,where the No Project Alternative has greater adverse impacts)
compared to the No Project and other Expenditure Plan alternatives.Most impacts on visual resources
can be mitigated by proper site design,screening,and revegetation.
For these reasons,Alternative A is considered the environmentally superior alternative overall,with
Alternative B a very close second.This finding is based on that alternative's superior performance in the
areas of transportation,energy and air quality,despite significant impacts on population and land use.
The other two alternatives performed better than Alternative A in some areas,and the Authority has
incorporated components from those alternatives into the Proposed Project to minimize environmental
impacts. The Authority now refers to the Proposed Project as the final Draft TEP, Overall,the final
Draft TEP is closest to Alternative B('Local Focus'),which balanced the emphasis on regional
projects in Alternative A and the emphasis on transportation programs in Alternative C,and added
funding for more local transportation improvements.The final Draft TEP,however,also draws from
the other two alternatives to enhance the environmental benefits of the project while creating the
balanced transportation approach called for in the Authority's vision and goals.
EVALUATION OF PROPOSED 2004 CTP UPDATE AND FINAL DRAFT TEP
The Authority,as Lead Agency,prepared and certified a FEIR for the 2004 CTP Update/Proposed
Measure C Extension,and prepared an Addendum to the FEIR for the final Draft TEP(collectively,
the EIR). Based on the evaluation of the proposed 2004 CT?Update/Proposed Measure C Extension
and final Draft TEP in the Addendum to the Final EIR,the Board finds that:
1. While Alternative A was identified in the EIR as the environmentally superior alternative,the final
Draft TEP better meets the Authority's vision,goals and strategies.The final Draft TEP outlines a
more balanced approach to achieving the goals of reducing firture congestion, expanding
alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle,and maintaining the transportation system by:
Page 31 of 35
........... .......... ..........I I'll, -
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
...........I.... ..........I............................ ........ ....-.......... ............ ...............I...... ......
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
a. Expanding express bus service and HOV facilities to encourage transit use and
carpooling and thereby reduce future congestion
b. Increasing funding for the Contra Costa Transportation for Livable Communities
program, safe transportation for children, and bicycle pedestrian facilities to
encourage alternatives to driving alone in a single-occupant vehicle
c. Boosting funding for paratransit to serve forecast increases in demand
d. Refining the TEP to emphasize regional differences such as increased system
capacity in East County and increased operational improvements in West and Central
County
2. The mix of project and programs in the final Draft TEP most closely resembles that in
Alternative B "Local Focus" and, thus, the impacts of the proposed 2004 CTP Update and
final Draft TEP would most closely resemble those of Alternative B, and the mitigation
measures recommended for Alternative B should be included as mitigation measures for the
proposed 2004 CTP Update and final Draft TEP.
3. While the proposed 2004 CTP Update and final Draft TEP most closely resemble Alternative
B,the final Draft TEP would change the mix of projects and programs in Alternative B.
These changes would further reduce VMT and vehicle hours traveled at congested levels,and
further increase transit boardings and transit ridership and thus improve on the environmental
performance of Alternative B.These changes include:
a. Advancing the construction of the Caldecott Tunnel to reduce delay and improve air
quality
b. Reducing funding for the East County Corridor projects(compared to Alternative A)
which would reduce land use impacts
c. Significantly increasing funding for HOV facilities and express bus service to
increase the attractiveness of carpooling and transit for commuting
d. Increasing the amount of funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities,projects that
help the region meet the region's adopted TCMs,and projects that encourage
alternative modes of travel
e. Expanding support for programs to encourage more walkable communities and
districts so that people need not rely as much on use of private automobiles
4. As summarized in the following table(based on Table 3.1-15 in the EIR),the final Draft TEP
incorporates measures that would reduce impacts on transportation, air quality, and energy to
an extent comparable to Alternative A, the alternative identified as the environmentally
superior alternative in the EIR, and would result in reduced impacts on land use compared to
Alternative A. The mix of projects and programs in the final Draft TEP are expected to
increase transit ridership compared to Alternative A. Combined with improvements to the
HOV system and increased funding for express service, the final Draft TEP is also expected
to result in VHT and VMT at congested levels close to those in Alternative A.Together,these
changes would result in transportation, air quality and energy impacts comparable to the
impacts of Alternative A. By allocating fewer funds to East County Corridor projects, the
final Draft TEP would likely have fewer impacts than Alternative A on the conversion of
agricultural land. By focusing more funding on transit, carpools and other alternatives to the
Page 32 of 35
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
.......................................................................................I......................................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
single-occupant vehicle, the final Draft TEP would have fewer impacts on land use patterns
and would better serve lower-income communities.
Comparison of Alternatives to Proposed Project
Alternative Proposed
A Alternative S Alternative C Project
Air Quality + +
MISSION ii IIIIIaggi Is
I 'M g1l
Geology 1 Seismicity ++ ++ + ++
Hazardous Materials '" +
Visual Resources
Cultural Resources
Socioeconomic Environment + + + +
++More favorable +Favorable Comparable —Unfavorable ——More Unfavorable
The record thus establishes that the project has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives in order to reduce environmental effects while meeting project objectives..
Page 33 of 35
................... ...............I... I..'' I'll,
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
.................................I.................... ....................................................................I..........................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
S. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING C014SIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the Board to balance the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable environmental
risks in determining whether to approve the Project.Because the EIR identifies significant impacts of
the Project that cannot feasibly be mitigated to below a level of significance,the Board must state in
writing its specific reasons for approving the Project Q 15093,CEQA Guidelines)This Statement of
Overriding Considerations sets forth the specific reasons supporting the Board's action in approving
the Project,based on this EIR and other information in the record.
The 2004 CTP Update and Proposed Measure C Extension is intended to address the transportation
impacts of existing and projected growth in Contra Costa and meet the goals of the Authority:
• Reduce future congestion on highways and arterial roads.
• Manage the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy and preserve its
environment.
• Provide and expand safe,convenient and affordable alternatives to the single-occupant
automobile.
• Maintain the transportation system.
This EIR examined the environmental impacts of the 2004 CTP Update in the areas of transportation
and circulation, air quality, energy, geology and seismicity,biological resources,hazardous materials,
hydrology and water resources, visual resources, noise, cultural resources, population and land use,
and socioeconomic environment. The Board has identified significant environmental impacts that
cannot be mitigated if the Project is adopted.
While Alternative A(project-focus)may have significant impacts to agricultural resources,it was
found to have the least environmental impact overall of any Expenditure Plan Alternative,This
determination was in part due to the fact that Alternatives B and C were found to potentially have
significant impacts to air quality,as well.In addition,Alternative A performed better than Alternatives
B and C and the No Project Alternative in the key issue areas of transportation,air quality,and energy.
The Board's decision to formulate a final preferred project that incorporates components from each of
the proposed alternatives was based on a balancing of Project objectives and environmental effects,
both of the Project and of the various alternatives considered. Specifically,the Board considered the
following in making its decision:
1. The proposed 2004 CTP Update and final Draft TEP best helps further the achievement of the
Authority's adopted vision,goals and strategies:
a. By improving accessibility throughout Contra Costa through focused improvements
in capacity and projects and programs to encourage alternatives to commuting alone
in the single-occupant vehicle,the final Draft TEP would help"preserve and enhance
the quality of life and promote a healthy,strong economy"consistent with the
Authority's vision.
Page 34 of 35
.............
Exhibit A to Board of Supervisors Resolution No.2004/354
..................................... ................................... ..................... ........................I..........................
FINDINGS, FACTS AND OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
b. The final Draft TEP helps reduce future congestion,one of the Authority's adopted
goals,by reducing VHT and VMT at congested levels,and by increasing transit
ridership.
c. The proposed refinements of the GMP would help further the Authority's goal of
managing the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy and preserving
its environment.
d. The final Draft TEP supports the Authority's goal of expanding safe,convenient and
affordable alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle by expanding funding for
transit and programs that would help create more walkable communities within
Contra Costa.
e. The final Draft TEP would continue providing funding for the maintenance and
improvement of local roadways,consistent with the Authority's goal of maintaining
the transportation system,
2. The final Draft TEP would reduce the overall level of energy used for transportation in
Contra Costa and improve air quality,
3. The 2004 CTP Update and final Draft TEP would support the m1plementation of the TCMs in
adopted State and federal air quality plans,as well as the goals of the Regional Trmsportation Plan.
4. The proposed 2004 CTP Update and final Draft TEP reflect and balances the
recommendations and concerns of communities,groups and citizens throughout Contra Costa.
5. The final Draft TEP builds on the cooperative,local planning recommendations of the Action
Plans for Routes of Regional Significance.These subarea Action Plans are a key element of
the cooperative,multi;jurisdictional planning process called for by the current Measure C
Growth Management Program.
& The project's impacts on air quality result from growth patterns in Contra Costa and the Bay
Area.Under any alternative,including the No Project alternative,emissions will decrease
compared to current conditions,but all alternatives also take into account the fact that land
use changes and population increases will result in emissions from increased VMT.After
balancing the benefits of this Project compared to the unavoidable air quality impacts,the
Board has determined that the Project should be approved despite impacts on air quality,for
all of the reasons set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
7. The Project's impacts on agricultural land conversion result primarily from the need to
maintain and improve transportation systems in East County.The Project reduces these
impacts to the extent feasible by reducing the funding allocated to projects in East County.
After balancing the benefits of this Project compared to the unavoidable impacts on
agricultural land conversion,the Board has determined that the Project should be approved
despite these impacts,for all of the reasons set forth in paragraphs 1-5 above.
g:\transportation\twic\board orders\2004\i=suree.7.exhibita.attach#l.doc
Page 35 of 35
ATTACHMENT#2
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION NO. 2004/354
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT:
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive Trans-
portation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension
(sCH No. 2003062128)
Mitigation Monitoring Report
May 19, 2004
1. INTRODUCTION
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program outlines the actions proposed to ensure
that the mitigation measures outlined in the environmental impact report(EIR) on the 2004
Update to the Comprehensive Countywide Transportation Plan(2004 CTP Update) and Meas-
ure C Extension are implemented. It has been prepared to fulfill the requirements of Public Re-
source Code Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),which re-
quire public agencies to establish mitigation monitoring and reporting programs for projects
where they have identified significant impacts and measures that would mitigate those impacts.
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority(the Authority) is the lead agency responsible for
CEQA compliance for the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension EIR. Copies of the
documents and reports relevant to this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are
available at the office of the Contra Costa Transportation Authority,3478 Buskirk Avenue,
Suite 100, Pleasant Hill, California,94523,during normal business hours.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 2004 CTP Update
The 2004 CTP Update focuses on refining the Authority's vision and identifying priorities for
making future transportation improvements. It also includes a Transportation Expenditure Plan
(TEP) and refinements to the existing Growth Management Program (GMP) for a proposed
extension of Measure C. In 1988, the voters of Contra Costa approved a half-percent sales tax
to fund transportation improvements and growth management efforts in Contra Costa.This
sales tax will expire in 2009 and the proposed extension would extend it for another 25 years.
To prepare the draft 2004 CTP Update, as well as the TEP and GMP,the Authority considered
comments from local jurisdictions and agencies, from the Regional Transportation Planning
Committees (RTPCs)—representing the eastern,western, central and southwestern parts of
Contra Costa—and from other stakeholders.The 2004 CTP Update builds on the analysis and
recommendations of year 2000 Action Plans,which were not updated as part of this proposed
project.
The proposed 2004 CTP Update establishes four goals:
■ Reduce future congestion on highways and arterial roads.
............
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Counrywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
• Manage the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy and preserve its en-
vironment.
• Provide and expand safe,convenient and affordable alternatives to the single-occupant
automobile.
• Maintain the transportation system.
These goals,and the strategies established to help achieve them, are designed to realize the Au-
thority's vision for Contra Costa:
Strive to preserve and enhance the quality of life and promote a healthy, strong
economy to benefit the people and areas of Contra Costa that is sustained by
1)a balanced,safe and efficient transportation network;2)cooperative plan-
ning;and 3)growth management. The transportation network should integrate
highways, local streets and roads, public transit, and pedestrian and bicycle fa-
cilities to meet the diverse needs of Contra Costa.
The Measure C Extension
The 2004 CTP Update outlines a new TEP and refined GMP to be placed before Contra Costa
voters on the November 2004 ballot as part of a proposed extension of Measure C.If ap-
proved, the proposed extension could raise an estimated $2 billion to fund transportation pro-
jects and growth management efforts throughout Contra Costa over the 25-year period (from
2009 to 2034) it would be in effect.
Expenditure Plan Alternatives and Growth Management Program
Options
The EIR analyzed three expenditure plan alternatives in addition to the CEQA-required No
Project alternative.
• Alternative A "Project Focus" would have continued the current Measure C funding
approach: 69 percent for projects and 27 percent for countywide programs with the
remainder for administration and contingencies. It emphasized major regional projects
and facilitates the early delivery of regionally significant capital improvements such as
the fourth bore of the Caldecott Tunnel and eBART.
• Alternative B "Local Focus" would have divided expected sales tax revenues about
evenly between programs and projects. It reflects requests for projects and program
funding received from the Regional Transportation Planning Committees. This alterna-
tive added funding for transit and paratransit operations, transportation for children
and Transportation for Livable Communities grants,as well as increasing funding for
major arterials.
May 19, 2004 1 Page 2 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Alternative 13 "Program Focus" would have emphasized transportation programs rather
than major capital improvements.The increased funding for countywide programs
would have gone mainly for transit operating subsidies and local transportation grants,
while capital improvements would have focused on eEART and HOV gap closures
rather than freeway widening.
The EIR also considered three sets of GMP options: (1) keeping the current GMP with refine-
ments to exempt transit-or pedestrian-oriented districts and traffic management corridors from
LOS standards, (2)streamlining the current program while expanding the housing options
component and adding a requirement for jurisdictions to comply with the County's urban limit
line, and (3) streamlining the program,by eliminating the requirements for local LOS and pub-
lic standards,to focus more on cooperative planning, including development of a mutually
agreeable urban limit line.
The EIR found that, because it establishes a process for managing growth and encouraging co-
operative planning among Contra Costa jurisdictions with unspecified outcomes, the GMP
would not have significant environmental impacts.
Proposed Transportation Expenditure plan and Growth Management
Program
After considering the comments on the draft 2004 CTP Update, the expenditure plan alterna-
tives and GMP options, and the analysis in the draft EIR, the Authority developed a proposed
Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP) and GMP. The proposed TEP assumes funding from a
25-year extension of Measure C (rather than the 20 years assumed for the alternatives in the
draft CTP),which is forecast to generate $2 billion for new transportation improvements and
continued growth management efforts.The proposed TEP divides this expected funding among
major capital improvement projects such as the Caldecott Tunnel,e$ART,and HOV improve-
ments; countywide capital and maintenance programs, such as the local street maintenance and
improvement and CC-TLC programs; support for other countywide programs,including bus
and paratransit operations,TDM, and planning and congestion management;subregional pro-
jects and programs including safe transportation for children, ferry service in Richmond, and
supplemental funding for countywide programs in specific parts of Contra Costa; and admini-
stration.
The proposed refinements to the GMP would eliminate the requirements for locally adopted
level-of-service and public facility standards and would eliminate the conflict resolution com-
ponent of the cooperative planning requirement.The proposed GMP would also revise the
housing options component to focus on local efforts and adopted policies, rather than on HCD
compliance. Finally, the new GMP would include a requirement for jurisdictions to adopt a
mutually agreed upon urban limit line.
The effects of the adoption of the 2004 CTP Update, including the proposed TEP and GMP
refinements,were analyzed in the Addendum to the Final EIR. The Addendum established that
the TEP and GMP would not result in any significant impacts on the environment that were
not analyzed in the Final EIR. The mitigation measures included in this report are those from
May 14,2004 1 Page 3 of 36
........... ............ .......11.11 11.1. I'll, -
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003 062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
the FEIR that apply to the mix of projects and programs incorporated into the 2004 CTP Up-
date.
PURPOSE OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
To ensure that mitigation measures established for significant environmental impacts identified
through the CEQA process are carried through, the Public Resources Code was amended in
1988 to require a reporting or monitoring program "designed to ensure compliance during pro-
ject implementation." Every time a Lead Agency—such as the Authority for the 2004 CTP Up-
date and Measure C Extension—approves a mitigated negative declaration or an EIR that iden-
tifies significant impacts and measures to mitigate them,it must also prepare a mitigation moni-
toring program.
ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
Section 2 of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program describes the basic program
components and outlines the proposed process and responsibilities for implementing it.
Section 3 summarizes the actions to be taken to implement the mitigation measures prescribed
for the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension Draft EIR and to monitor and report on
their effectiveness. For each measure,the summary tables indicate- (1)who is responsible for
implementation and for monitoring of implementation, (2)what specific actions are required
for implementation and monitoring compliance,and (3) the timing for the action.
May 19,2004 4 Page 4 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
........... ....... ......... ............. ......
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
2. Components of the Monitoring Program
The EIR on the proposed 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension identified significant
environmental impacts and measures that would mitigate those impacts.This document out-
lines the responsibilities,actions required and timing for monitoring and reporting on the im-
plementation of those mitigation measures.
While the Authority has the primary responsibility for implementing and monitoring the im-
plementation of mitigation measures established in the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Ex-
tension EIR,it must rely on the efforts of other agencies in implementing and monitoring miti-
gation measures for the projects in the 2004 CTP Update.These agencies include both project
sponsors—local jurisdictions, transit agencies,the State Route 4 Bypass Authority and Cal-
trans--and agencies responsible for the conservation of natural resources. These latter agencies
include the Bay Area Air Quality Management District,the Bay Conservation and Development
Commission, the Regional Water Quality Control Board,the Environmental Protection
Agency,the Department of Fish and Game and the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.
BASIC STRUCTURE OF MONITORING AND REPORT PROGRAM
The mitigation measures identified in the EIR on the 2004 CTP Update and proposed Measure
C Extension fall into two general categories: (1)project-level measures and(2) program-or
planning-level measures.The project-level measures include those to be carried out during envi-
ronmental review,design and construction of specific projects.The program- or planning-level
impacts would be carried out through the Authority's ongoing planning and programming ac-
tivities.
Almost all of the mitigation measures would apply to projects that the TEP would fund,and
would be the responsibility of project proponents.As part of the existing Measure C program,
the Authority has established a process for reviewing and approving projects that receive Meas-
ure C funding. This process is outlined in Authority Resolution 92-02-P"Management of
Measure C Projects".A summary of this process,focusing on how the implementation of iden-
tified mitigation measures,follows.
Mitigating Project-Level Impacts
The Strategic Plan outlines the Authority's financial plan for carrying out the transportation
improvements identified in the current Measure C and would continue to serve that role for the
proposed extension of Measure C. It estimates expected revenues from the sales tax,establishes
policies for allocating those revenues and the responsibilities of project proponents,and out-
lines a program for allocating expected revenues to specific projects and programs.The Author-
ity adopted its first Strategic Plan in 1991 and has updated it periodically to reflect changing
revenue forecasts and the development of projects.The most recent update was adopted in
February 2004.
To receive Measure C funding, a project must first be included in the Strategic Plan. Once in
the Strategic Plan, the project proponent and the Authority must enter into a cooperative
May 19,2004 1 Page 5 of 36
..............................''I'll 1 I'll.................................... . I'll -.........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
................. .....................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
agreement that details the responsibilities,requirements, and roles of both parties. Before re-
ceiving any Measure C funds, the Authority must approve a funding resolution for the project.
This resolution summarizes expected Measure C and other funding, the anticipated scope of
work, and any conditions required of the project or project proponent.
Resolution 92-02-P requires project proponents to involve the Authority in the environmental
review,design and construction of any Measure C-funded project to ensure that the project is
consistent with Authority policies and guidelines,as well as to ensure that the mitigation meas-
ures outlined in the EIR are carried out.
• Environmental Review. Because the Authority is a "Responsible Agency"under
CEQA,it must be involved in the CEQA process for all Measure C-funded projects.
The Authority's project coordinator is expected to be involved in the scoping of the
project and in the review of measures proposed to mitigate any significant impacts iden-
tified.As a Responsible Agency,the Authority must rely on the project proponent's en-
vironmental analysis and mitigation measures identified therein.
• Project Design and Permitting. Authority staff is involved throughout the process
of designing the project. Resolution 92-02-P also requires projects to undergo a peer
review at major milestones in the process.A subcommittee of the Authority's Technical
Coordinating Committee (TCC)conducts this peer review at the conceptual design,
Phase 1, Phase It,and final review stages.This peer review is not required for major
highway projects,which are overseen and reviewed in detail by Caltrans, or for trails
projects,which are done solely using Authority staff.
• Project Construction. The Authority will assign an Authority staff person to serve as
Construction Liaison to track the project throughout construction. Project proponents
will report on implementation of the mitigation measures as part of regular meetings
with the contractor and project manager.
Authority staff reports on the progress of developing Measure C-funded projects, using infor-
mation provided by project proponents,as part of updates of project status pages in the Strate-
gic Plan and the monthly Project Status Reports prepared for the TCC.
For some projects, the Authority may be the project proponent,serving as lead agency for the
CEQA process,overseeing the design and specification of the project,and managing its con-
struction. In those cases, the Authority will be responsible for monitoring and reporting on im-
plementation of the mitigation measures.
Mitigating Program- and Planning-Level Impacts
The EIR identified mitigation measures requiring the Authority to work with local,regional
and State agencies to reduce the overall impacts of the program of projects outlined in the TEP.
The Authority will carry out those measures as part of its roles as the implementing agency for
Measure C and the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for Contra Costa.The Authority
carries out its responsibilities under Measure C through various actions, including:
May 19,2004 1 Page 6 of 36
........ ...... ..
.. .... ..
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
• Establishing a vision,goals and implementing strategies as part of the Countywide
Comprehensive Transportation Plan,
■ Programming projects that receive Measure C funding through the Strategic Plan,
• Monitoring compliance with the Growth Management Program,and
• Providing technical support to local agencies to evaluate and help improve the connec-
tion between land use and transportation planning.
As the CMA for Contra Costa, the Authority addresses these impacts by,among other things:
■ Identifying priorities for State and federal funding programs,
■ Working with MTC,ABAG and BAAQMD to support the efficient implementation of
adopted Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) for improving air quality,
■ Preparing and updating a Congestion Management Program,and
■ Developing and updating its Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.
As part of these activities, the Authority works to minimize environmental impacts as well as
carry out the Authority's goals.
RESPONSIBILITIES
As noted above, both the Authority and other agencies, including project sponsors, have roles
in the implementation and monitoring of the mitigation measures outlined in the 2004 CTP
Update and Measure C Extension EIR.The following summary outlines the roles in this process
that the various agencies will play.
Project Proponents
One of the basic premises of the Authority's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is
that agencies responsible for carrying out projects included in the TEP are also responsible for
mitigating their impacts. As project sponsors,these agencies are responsible for complying with
CEQA. A project sponsor—acting as a lead agency for the project under CEQA—would comply
with this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program through the preparation of a mitiga-
tion monitoring and reporting program when its own CEQA analysis identifies significant im-
pacts.Many of the projects now contained in the TEP have not yet gone through CEQA re-
view,because they have not yet been programmed or sufficiently defined to have a meaningful
CEQA review.
The project sponsors' role in the implementation of the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Ex-
tension EIR mitigation measures include:
May 19,2004 1 Page 7 of 36
.......... ......I......-..................
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO.2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
■ Conducting CEQA analysis where a project would be likely to have a significant impact
on the environment;
■ Responding to written comments on impacts and mitigation measures from the Author-
ity and others;
Adopting a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for those projects with sig-
nificant impacts; and
• Forwarding to the Authority the recommendations of the EIR or mitigated negative
declaration and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program for those CEQA
documents.
TCC Peer Review
The Authority has established a peer review process for the projects in the Strategic Plan. In this
process,members of the Authority's TCC,which is made up of technical staff from local juris-
dictions,review the proposed design for projects in the Strategic Plan.To implement the miti-
gation measures identified in the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension EIR, the Author-
ity would continue the TCCs peer review process, which requires that TCC members look at
changes in the design, construction or operation of the proposed project that could mitigate
certain environmental impacts.The TCC review would look at those aspects of the projects
that would not necessarily be covered by other agencies and that would result directly from the
projects'construction and operation. Cumulative impacts and impacts on other areas of the
environment (such as biological resources)would be addressed in other forums.
The Authority
As the primary agency responsible for implementing the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Ex-
tension EIR, the Authority has the most significant role in this process.This role includes.
■ Direct implementation of some mitigation measures including review and revision of
the Comprehensive Countrywide Transportation Plan,
■ Use of the peer review process for projects in the Strategic Plan to consider project
changes and incorporation of best practices that would reduce their environmental im-
pacts,
• As part of comments on EIRs and other CEQA documents, recommend as appropriate,
that project sponsors and lead agencies incorporate mitigation measures identified in
this EIR,
• Reporting on mitigation measures proposed or implemented for Strategic Plan projects
in the periodic Project Status Reports,and
May 19,2004 1 Page 8 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
■ Working with regional agencies (such as the Bay Area Air Quality Management Dis-
trict) and other bodies to implement other actions that would minimize the environ-
mental impacts of the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension.
One of the methods for developing more environmentally sensitive projects is the compilation
of best practices for mitigation.The Authority will work with sponsors of projects that will re-
ceive Measure C funding to incorporate design changes and best practices, as described below.
Resource Agencies
Agencies charged with the protection and conservation of natural resources would be involved
through comments on project CEQA compliance and permit issuance.
DETAILED IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING
In designing the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, three questions were consid-
ered:
■ Who is the responsible agency?
■ What action is required?
■ When is the action required?
The tables in Section 3 answer those questions for both implementations of the mitigation
measures and the monitoring and reporting of their implementation. They distinguish between
the implementation of the mitigation measures and the monitoring and reporting on their im-
plementation,because these two actions are distinct.The first set of actions describes who will
implement the measure and how they will do it. The second set of actions describes how they
will measure the success of the implementation measure and inform the Authority (and thus the
public) of the results of the mitigation program.
To verify that the mitigation measures adopted by the Authority are fully implemented, the Au-
thority shall review information submitted that is relevant to the proposed mitigation measures
for the 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Extension.The review shall be conducted as required
by CEQA Section 21081.6.
May 19,2004 1 Page 9 of 36
.............. .1.1 11.11,I'll. -........... .............. ........I.......
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
3. IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING OF MITIGATION
MEASURES
This section summarizes which agencies are responsible for implementation of the mitigation
measures identified in the Contra Costa Countywide 2004 CTP Update and Measure C Exten-
sion ETR and the actions required for implementation, monitoring and reporting on these
measures.
In the tables, the term "Project Sponsor" means the lead agency responsible for environmental
clearance,design, right-of-way procurement and construction of the project.While the Project
Sponsor will usually be a local jurisdiction,transit operator, Caltrans or other agency,the Au-
thority may serve as Project Sponsor or co-sponsor for certain projects. In those cases, the term
"Project Sponsor" will refer to the Authority,which would be responsible for implementing
and reporting on the mitigation measures outlined below.
Reference to local jurisdictions includes Contra Costa County and all cities within Contra
Costa. The Authority will support agencies in carrying out the implementation,monitoring and
reporting procedures outlined below for each impact.
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
2.2 AIR QUALITY
Iib
kaq f s3
'N"
Mitigation Appropriate dust abatement programs,patterned after the BAAQMD approach,
Measure 2.2-/a shall be implemented by the sponsor for individual projects under the proposed Ex-
penditure Plan.The BAAQMD approach calls for"basic"control measures that
should be implemented at all construction sites,"enhanced"control measures that
should be implemented at construction sites greater than four acres in area,and
"optional"control measures that should be Implemented on a case-by-case basis at
construction sites that are large in area,located near sensitive receptors or which,
for any other reason,may warrant additional emissions reductions(BAAQMD,
1999).
1-1-1-111--.................. ...................................... .........
IMPLEMENTATION
.............. .......... ............................... ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
........... .............. ...........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
May 19,2004 Page 10 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Mitigation measures included in the Caltrans'Highway Design Manual that are de-
Measure 2.2-Ib signed to limit air quality impacts from construction should be used by the project
sponsor,as appropriate,during the design phase of projects and written into con-
struction documents.Caltrans has several policies for dust abatement during con-
struction that may serve as a model for dust control at construction sites.There are
far-reaching measures such as the use of special contract provisions to require that
burrow pits and temporary haul roads be restored to a condition such that their
potential as sources of blowing dust or other pollution is no greater than that of
their original condition.The checklist of on-site measures includes provisions for
temporary erosion protection with mulches,fiber mats,dust palliatives,etc,and for
timely planting of slopes to permanently abate wind erosion,etc.
.......... ......
IMPLEMENTATION
11-11-1-11111111-11111.......... ......... ............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
___.1............. ......................... ........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation If a specific project under the Expenditure Plan would entail the demolition of a
Measure 2.2-1c building containing asbestos materials,the Authority shall require that the project
sponsor consult with SAAQMD staff concerning the specific requirements of Regu-
lation 11,Rule 2(Asbestos Demolition,Renovation and Manufacturing)of
BAAQMD's regulations.
.............. ...............
IMPLEMENTATION
".1.11-1-11...........-................. ............ .................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Consult with BAAQMD staff,Incorporate measures into project
specifications and construction requirements
Timing Consultation. before construction. Measure:During project con-
struction
............. ..........11.1.1.1.11,11,..................................................... .............
REPORTING
...........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
May 19,2O04 I Page I I of 36
..........................''I'll, 1 11.1............................''I'll'' 11......I................. .
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
............................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
rn0- A ft 0
kb h_ Vr
t
"U'RA-11" 0
E t
..........I
g 4_
0-R Wx�,f'Ni'I
3�!P'51
Mitigation The Authority should work with local,regional and State agencies to implement
Measure 2.2-2a TCMs effectively as a way to reduce the number and length of trips made in Contra
Costa County and the region.These measures could include:
• Support or require the development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities as part of
the widening and extension of arterials where feasible and consistent with coun-
tywide or local bicycle pedestrian and facilities plan;
• Seek funding priority for TCM projects in the 2004 CTP Update from State and
regional agencies;
• Follow requirements of regionally adopted particulate attainment plans when
such a plan is prepared and adopted;
• Continue to support or expand Transportation Demand Management to en-
courage drivers to reduce motor vehicle use;and
• Support local jurisdiction efforts to modify land use patterns and implement
development projects that reduce VMT,consistent with Measure C Growth
Management Program.
.......... ..............11-11-1-11--..........
IMPLEMENTATION
..........._................. ........ ..........................
Responsible Party Authority
Action Required As part of Authority's responsibilities as implementing agency for
Measure C and as the Congestion Management Agency(CMA)in
Contra Costa,various actions,to support implementation of
adopted TCMs,including-
• Establishing a vision, goals and imple-
menting strategies as part of the Coun-
tywide Comprehensive Transportation
Plan,
• Programming projects that receive Measure C
funding through the Strategic Plan,
• Monitoring compliance with the Growth
Management Program, and
• Providing technical support to local
agencies to evaluate and help improve
the connection between land use and
transportation planning.
Timing Ongoing Measure C and CMA activities
............................. ................ ................-........... ..........
REPORTING
111.11-1-................ ................ .............................. ............................. .......... .............
Responsible Party Authority
Action Required Identify role of Authority actions in supporting and implementing
TCMs as part of documentation
May 19,2004 1 Page 12 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
1--1---1---....--....... ...... ....... ......---,1—1—----..... ....................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Timing Ongoing
Mitigation Use cleaner fuels such as electricity, instead of diesel for the eBART project.The
Measure 2.2-2b increased use of electricity,however,depending on the method of production,could
have secondary and potentially significant impacts where the electricity is produced.
The cost of substituting electricity for diesel could make its use infeasible.
--.........................----.................... .......... .......... ............................
IMPLEMENTATION
........... ............ .........-............
Responsible Party BARTand Authority
Action Required Evaluate economic feasibility and environmental impacts of using
electricity instead of diesel for the eBART project
Timing During environmental review
..........------
REPORTING
111-1-1111-1............. .................. .............
Responsible Party BART and Authority
Action Required Report as part of environmental review
Timing Environmental review
2.4 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY
12,1
4-hK
A
W
110
oi�
R
Mitigation Potential seismic hazards associated with projects located within tsunami inundation
Measure 2.4-1 a areas shall be minimized through designs to diminish wave inundation and associated
damage.For example,precautionary measures such as specifying final foundation or
roadbed elevations greater than the expected height of a tsunami with a given return
frequency would be effective,
...................--.....................
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............. .................... ............--...................----...........
Reporting
............ .........................
Responsible Parry Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
May 19,20041 Page 13 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
C•iiighr+r;t atrr'rarl, tsw{i`sf£ ietiri cititl�ir' rIfi+�airf+ irkriakaanc
Mitigation Sponsors of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP update shall be re-
Measure 2.4-2a quired to comply with Mitigation Measure 2.7-1a,as discussed in Water Resources
Section 2.7,to reduce potential erosion during construction activities.
. ... ,.., . ...w................
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Parry Project Sponsors H
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
n ............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation The project proponent shall ensure that all construction activities and design criteria
Measure 2.4-2b comply with applicable codes and requirements of the 1997 Uniform Building Code
with California additions(Title 22),and applicable Caltrans construction and grading
specifications.In addition,the project proponent shall ensure that project designs
provide adequate slope drainage and appropriate landscaping to minimize potential
future occurrences of slope instability and erosion.
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing during project construction
REPORT€NG.... _ . . . .. .. .. .. _. .._ . ......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
ir`rY�rarit 2 d � °Prtijerat�bulli~+ort hi,�hl�3�timp€ressibl+a�cir•oxpeuas)�+aa sb1#�cs�c�#'d b�cotne
daunItged' tf w �knd}aver trrtt#x ` r . t.
Mitigation The project proponent shall require that a site-specific geotechnical investigation be
Measure 2.4-3a conducted by qualified professionals(registered civil and geotechnical engineers,
registered engineering geologists)to identify potential geologic hazards associated
with surficial soils and subsurface sediments.Recommended corrective measures,
such as structural reinforcement,soil treatment,or replacing existing soil with engi-
neered fill shall be incorporated into project designs.
May 19,2004 1 Page 14 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Leasure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
.... ............<.......a.........,...,.........,,..........,,...........,.....,.,,...,.
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
IMPLEMENTATION
........................................................................ .........,_............,......,........................_......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
...,. .,..._.,,.M ..,r.....,., _,.... ..._w.............._.,......,........,..... .,__,...._......u,.._......,........,.._..,H......,
REPORTING
w........_...................._................_.....................,.._..,..........................,,._,.............
._.,.,......,......,....,..
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Select alignments to avoid areas of resource sensitivity and to minimize the need for
Measure 2.5-l a large areas of cut and fill that would remove vegetation and habitat.Stabilize cut and
fill slopes and revegetate immediately following construction.To the extent possible,
use native vegetation to landscape project sites to provide some wildlife habitat and
minimize the need for fertilizers and pesticides.Avoid introducing invasive species
and monitor and control pampas grass,broom and other weedy plants.
.................__.......................................... .....................................................................................................................
IMPLEMENTATION
r......._.................................................._......,...............................,...........................,..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
r............................_.._.............,..,._................,....._......................................
,.a......_.,.....,..,.
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Avoid construction in wetland areas.Wherever possible,place above ground struc_
Measure 2S-I b tures along an alignment to avoid shading of wetland or riparian vegetation,Control
discharges from facilities so that pollutants in runoff do not affect wetland habitats.
_........................_..................._.....................,..............._......................,.... ...........,.. .............................
.....
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
May 19,2004 1 Page 15 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed.Measure C Extension {SCH No . 2003062128}
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
_....».......................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Where wetland disturbance is necessary,require restoration.The new vegetation
Measure 2.5-1 c should consist of plants that are of similar species to those that were removed,such
as cattail,rush,and willows.Restoration requirements would be determined on a
project by project basis depending upon the value of the habitat At a minimum
there should be no net loss of wetlands.
.. . . ...... .
IMPLEMENTATION
111-1-........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
w,._.,..... ..._.._..., .,r_.
----------------w.._.._.,.....,..�.,. ... _..r,.._..w.. ..........._..,,... .....,.._.,_w.......
REPORTING
v,..,,u. ...K.. . .....,...v...............................
Responsible Warty Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Preserve existing and mature trees and snags as nesting and roosting habitat to the
Measure 2.5-l d extent feasible,except when trees are diseased,over-aged,or otherwise constitute a
hazard to persons or property.Remove topsoil,stockpile and respread to preserve
natural vegetation.
IMPLEMENTATION
..
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
a . .. ..._.w...............................................,.......,....._...,,...,w......._.4,w,.,,,.................,.,.,
REPORTING" ^
Responsible Party Project Sponsors ^ w ^n ~A ^
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
TimingAs part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Keep disruption of soils within streambeds to a minimum and implement stabilization
Measure 2.5-i e efforts around support pillars.
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Parry Project Sponsors
May 19, 2004 1 Page 16 of 36
. ........... '..........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
............. .......
MITIGATIOM MONITORIMG REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
...............'............................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Conduct field surveys for rare and endangered plants,as well as candidate species as
Measure 2.5-If part of the environmental review process for proposed projects,where suitable
habitat exists.Such surveys are not mitigation in themselves,but provide critical in-
formation for assessing impacts and determining if effective mitigation is possible.
.............. ..........
IMPLEMENTATION
.........._ ............ ............ ....... .............. .........................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
........... .................. .......... ...... ............................
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information for required Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Protect rare and endangered animal species through controlling or eliminating de-
Measure 2.5-Ig velopment in primary habitat areas.Where wildlife habitat is disturbed,undertake
relocation efforts where feasible.
IMPLEMENTATION
..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
...........
REPORTING
........... .................................. ........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Avoid known animal movement corridors where possible when designing new road
Measure 2.5-1h and rail alignments,pedestrian/bike paths,and other transportation facilities-,design
lighting to be responsive to wildlife sensitivities.Place pass through-culverts under
highways to allow wildlife movement.Fencing should be used to prevent wildlife
from entering highways.
May 19,2004 1 Page 17 of 36
.........................1.111,111.11................. .........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
............
MITIGATION MOMITORIMG REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
IMPLEMENTATION
...........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
.............. ..........
REPORTING
..........._............. ........... ...............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Schedule construction activities to avoid disturbance to wildlife;require appropriate
Measure 2.5-1 i erosion control measures in conjunction with new development to minimize wildlife
habitat destruction.
............. ............ ....... ..............
IMPLEMENTATION
............... ..................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
......................... ..................................
REPORTING
..............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation The project proponents,as a condition of project approval shall work with agencies
Measure 2.5-11 involved in the development of the East Contra Costa County HCP I NCCP and
determine whether the Plan could incorporate the Project into its list of covered
activities.The January 2003 draft list of activities covered in the HCP I NCCP in-
cludes road and highway construction and maintenance.Because projects and pro-
grams included in the Project involve these types of activities,it is likely that the final
list of activities covered by the HCP/NCCP could cover potential impacts of the
Project. If the Authority and other agencies determine the HCP approach would
provide such benefits for Project activities,the CCTA will work to support the de-
velopment of the Plan.CCTA also may need to develop an HCP to address impacts
of Project activities on biological resources located in Western and Central Contra
Costa outside the East County HCP/NCCP coverage area.
Upon completion of CEQA/NEPA documentation and finalization,the East
Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP will provide an effective way to achieve local
goals for preserving habitat and maintaining environmental quality within Eastern
Contra Costa while balancing other development goals.This HCP I NCCP would
have the effect of preserving key habitat in a systematic fashion,and would allow for
a"taking"of listed plants and animals in a way that would still ensure no net loss of
the region's ability to maintain populations of listed species.
May 19,2004 Page 18 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
.......... 1-111 11,........ ..........__.................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
IMPLEMENTATION
-1............. . -............ .............................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors and Authority
Action Required Work with HCP/NCCP agencies;participate in HCP/NCCP
process if appropriate and beneficial.
Timing Project sponsor.Prior to project construction.Authority: During
HCPINCCP development.
.............. .............
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsor and Authority
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports.Au-
thority:Measure C Cooperative agreements and funding resolu-
tions,as appropriate;establishment of strategy for implementa-
tion,if determined to be beneficial.
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Prior to project implementation,project proponents shall obtain applicable permits
Measure 2.5-2a from the appropriate agencies(Corps,Regional Water Quality Control Board
[RWQCB],Bay Conservation and Development Commission[BCDC],and CDFG)
and agree to comply with permit conditions to protect jurisdictional waters and
other sensitive habitat.This requirement obligates project proponents to implement
measures that avoid,minimize,and compensate for significant impacts on jurisdic-
tional wetlands and other aquatic resources within or adjacent to the project area.
In accordance with guidelines of the Corps,RWQCB,BCDC,and CDFG,a goal of
no net loss"of wetland acreage and value will be Implemented,wherever possible,
through avoidance of the resource. Mitigation for wetlands impacts due to proposed
transportation projects would be based on project-specific wetland mitigation plans,
subject to approval by the Corps and commenting agencies.Mitigation for placing fill
in wetlands would be partially achieved by avoiding wetlands and by minimizing fill
where avoidance is not feasible.
Avoidance,compensatory restoration,or creation of new wetland commu-
nities to onset the conversion of wetlands for proposed transportation improve-
ments would achieve"no net loss"of wetland acreage and value.
..................................................... ......................
IMPLEMENTATION
............ ...... ...... ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Obtain permits as necessary;incorporate measures into project
specifications and construction requirements
Timing Permits:prior to construction, Measures: During project con-
struction
.................. ............. .............
REPORTING
.._..,.,,...............r.._....,...............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
May 19, 2004 1 Page 19 of 36
............. .............................I'll, ...........................
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO.2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
;J
0
Mitigation Project-level analysis will determine whether the Project will result in the removal of
Measure 2.5-3a trees protected by Contra Costa County or City Ordinance.The project propo-
nents will avoid work activities within the drip-line of protected or heritage trees. In
the event that it is Infeasible to avoid the drip-line of protected or heritage trees,the
project proponents would apply for any applicable permits and comply with local
City or County replacement mitigation guidelines for impacts to protected trees
specified in the permits.
IMPLEMENTATION
.......... ..........._111.1.-...... ........... ...........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
.......... .................
REPORTING
............
Responsible Pony Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1,7
d
Mitigation The project proponent or local jurisdiction shall be responsible for ensuring utiliza-
Measure 2.6-1 a tion of construction best management practices that are typically implemented as
part of construction.The use of construction best management practices would
minimize the potential negative effects on groundwater and soils.Best management
practices could include the following-
• Follow manufacturer's recommendations on use,storage and disposal of chemi-
cal products used in construction;
• Avoid overtopping construction equipment fuel gas tanks;
• During routine maintenance of construction equipment,properly contain and
remove grease and oils-,and
is Properly dispose of discarded containers of fuels and other chemicals.
.................... ............... .............. ............... ...... ..........
IMPLEMENTATION
..................... .............. .................. ............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
May 19,2004 1 Page 20 of 36
2004 Update mthe Contra Costa Counrywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure Extension (SC}{NO. 2003082128)
............`.._.....^..~...~....,^~.....'.........~'...~...^...^........^.~..,.~.~.........
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing Du�m�pr�e#cnm�rucdoo
--~--~-~--~---`^'~^'-~-'-~—^-------------'-----^-~---`-~~-----~-~-^'
REPORTING
...... ........'_--_--'_-_.'--_-...........
_�'_-'
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation A soil sampling plan shall be prepared and i plemented along construction corridors
Measure 2.6-2a to determine the presence or absence of soil contamination. If soil contamination is
found,the contaminated soil shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with all
applicable regulatory requirements.
IMPLEMENTATION
------`-----`-----------------^^----------^---~------`--------
Responsible Pony Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing Durinup��to,m�u��
__.~.~--___-__-_-_~~_--'.--_~-_--~-'_--~---.__--~-.........
REPORTING
---_---__. ......... '~-___~_-...........__'' ..............-........ ............
-_`--_'-___'~__-_�
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation In the event that soil contamination is encountered,project sponsors shall insure
Measure 2.6-2b that one competent professional is onsite at all times during construction phases to
perform soil analyses.All construction shall cease until the contaminated soil is re-
used or removed and disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulatory re-
quirements.A competent professional shall collect verification soil samples to en-
sure complete removal of contaminated soil.
IMPLEMENTATION
-----_-_-.......................-_~--_--_-...... .... .............----`--~--___-_--_-_---_ .................
'
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During construction
............
REPORTING
.......... ...........
~-_-_'
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
May |9,20U4 1Page 2| of 36
................ ............ -
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
......I............__.... ................. ...........
MITIGATIOM MOMITORIMG REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation If any underground storage tanks are discovered during construction,all construc-
Measure 2.6-2t tion in the immediate area shall stop until the UST is removed under the guidance of
the Contra Costa Environmental Health(CCEH)or other regulatory agency.If re-
quired by the regulatory agency,removal may include the over-excavation and dis-
posal of any impacted soil that may be associated with such tanks to a degree con-
sidered sufficient by the CCEH.
__.......... .............._.____.....................n...__._.. ..................
IMPLEMENTATION
.......... .......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures Into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
..............
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
M"
X�'
Mitigation Prior to the demolition of any building,a pre-demolition asbestos containing material
Measure 2.6-3a (ACM)and lead-based paint(LBP)survey shall be performed by the project propo-
nent.Abatement of known or suspected AGMs and loose or peeling LBP shall occur
prior to demolition or construction activities that would disturb those materials.
............................... ............ ..
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
........... ........... ....... ..........-
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation In the event that PCB-containing materials are identified prior to demolition activi-
Measure 2.6-3b ties they shall be removed,and shall be disposed of by a licensed transportation and
disposal facility in Class I hazardous wastelandfill cells.
............ ...................................-
IMPLEMENTATION
..............................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
May 19, 2004 1 Page 22 of 36
................. . .... ..
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
......-................... ...........___..........
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
1.11.111111,..................n...,._,........_ ........... .......w...._., ................ .......
REPORTING
.............. ............... ................................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
1.40,4vo
Mitigation In the event of an inadvertent release of hazardous materials during project opera-
Measure 2.6-4a tions,cleanup shall occur in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
_........._..........,w
IMPLEMENTATION
...........,___.....................___....... .................... .......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
_w,._........,._.,..... ......................... ............
REPORTING
........... ...................................... ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Spent oil and other solvents used during maintenance of transportation facilities and
Measure 2.6-4b equipment shall be recycled or disposed of in accordance with all applicable regula-
tory requirements.All hazardous materials shall be transported,handled,and dis-
posed of in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements.
............ ......
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............. ............... ............ ..................
REPORTING
.................. .............. ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
May 19,2004 1 Page 23 of 36
................ I--...__................. I
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
...............................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
2.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES
All
Mitigation Construction-related grading and other activities shaft be required to comply with
Measure 2.7-1 a ABAG's Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures(ABAG,
1995)and with the California Stormwater Quality Association(CASQA),Stormwa-
ter Best Management Practice Handbook for Construction(CASQA,2003a).The
project proponent shall also apply for coverage under the SWRCS NPDES General
Construction Permit for construction projects that incorporate over one acre,as
required by the SWRCB. Under NPDES permit regulations,the project proponent
would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP.The SWPPP shall be consis-
tent with the State Construction Storm Water General Permit,the Manual of Stan-
dards for Erosion and Sedimentation Control by the Association of Bay Area Gov.
ernments,policies and recommendations of the local urban runoff program (city
and/or county),and the recommendations of the applicable RWQCB.Implementa-
tion of the SWPPP shall be enforced by inspecting agencies during the construction
period.Typical elements of a SWPPP Include:
• Excavation and grading activities will be scheduled for the dry season only(April
15 to October 15),to the extent possible.This will reduce the chance of severe
erosion from intense rainfall and surface runoff,as well as the potential for soil
saturation in swale areas.
• If excavation occurs during the rainy season,storm runoff from the construction
area will be regulated through a storm water managementlerosion control plan
that may include temporary onsite silt traps and/or basins with multiple dis-
charge points to natural drainages and energy dissipaters.Stockpiles of loose
material will be covered and runoff diverted away from exposed soil material.If
work is stopped due to rain,a posWve grading away from slopes will be pro-
vided to carry the surface runoff to areas where flow can be controlled,such as
the temporary silt basins.Sediment basin/traps will be located and operated to
minimize the amount of offsite sediment transport Any trapped sediment will
be removed from the basin or trap and placed at a suitable location onsite,away
from concentrated flows,or removed to an approved disposal site.
• Temporary erosion control measures will be provided until perennial revegeta-
tion or landscaping is established and can minimize discharge of sediment into
nearby waterways,For construction within 500 feet of a water body,straw
bales will be placed upstream adjacent to the water body.
• After completion of grading,erosion protection will be provided on all cut-and-
fill slopes.Revegetation will be facilitated by mulching,hydroseeding,or other
methods and should be initiated as soon as possible after completion of grading
and prior to the onset of the rainy season(by October 15).
• Permanent revegetation/landscaping will emphasize drought-tolerant perennial
ground coverings,shrubs,and trees to Improve the probability of slope and soil
stabilization without adverse impacts to slope stability due to irrigation infiltra-
May 19, 2004 Page 24 of 36
. .............
..........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
tion and long-term root development.
• BMPs selected and implemented for the project will be in place and operational
prior to the onset of major earthwork on the site.The construction phase facili-
ties will be maintained regularly and cleared of accumulated sediment as neces-
sary,
• Hazardous materials such as fuels and solvents used on the construction sites will
be stored in covered containers and protected from rainfall,runoff,and vandalism.
A stockpile of spill cleanup materials will be readily available at 9 construction
sites.Employees will be trained in spill prevention and cleanup,and Individuals will
be designated as responsible for prevention and cleanup activities,
.....................
IMPLEMENTATION
........... ...... ............__""_................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Obtain any permit coverage required and incorporate measures
into project specifications and construction requirements
Timing Permit:prior to construction.Measures:during project construc-
tion
.............. ................ ............. ......
REPORTING
'............... ........... .....................................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
a
V
0,11 A I'M f, i,
gz. ' �T"' 1011.� 1
III F_T ' I �'
h
WOW
Mitigation Individual project proponents under the 2004 CTP Update shall obtain a discharge
Measure 2.7-2a permit from the appropriate regulatory agency prior to discharge of groundwater
generated by excavation dewatering activities to storm drains or sewer systems.For
projects located in areas where dewatering activities would require the discharge of
groundwater generated by construction directly to a local water body,the project
proponent shall obtain a permit from the appropriate RWQCB.
Alternatively,the project applicant shall arrange for temporary storage of groundwa-
ter generated by dewatering on-site,and arrange for future transport of groundwa-
ter to an appropriate disposal facility.
...............'.............. ............ ................................... .........................
IMPLEMENTATION
..............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Obtain relevant permit(s)and/or incorporate measures into pro-
ject specifications and construction requirements
Timing Permits:prior to construction.Measures: during project con-
struction
................... ..............................
REPORTING
............................ .......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
May 19,2004 1 Page 25 of 36
...............-..................."Ill-..''.............11...... 1.11,
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Proponents of individual projects proposed under the 2004 CTP Update shall com-
Measure 2.7-3a ply with Caltrans and local regulatory agency design standards for projects within a
FEMA-designated I00-year flood zone.
........... ...................... ....................
...
IMPLEMENTATION
.......... .............. ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
.. . ......
Mitigation Proponents of individual projects under the 2004 CTP Update shall be required to
Measure 2.7-4a meet the provisions of the federal Clean Water Act by submitting plans to eliminate
and control potential pollutants in storm water discharge through incorporation of
structural and treatment BMPs,in addition to minimizing Increases in storm water
runoff volumes and rates,in accordance with Contra Costa's Municipal NPDES per-
mit,Caltrans NPDES permit,or,if applicable a NPDES permit specific to the project
site. In order to minimize water quality impacts associated with proposed projects,
existing pervious surfaces shall be preserved to minimize the amount of storm runoff
to the greatest extent possible,in accordance the recommendations provided in the
Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association's(BASMAA)Start at the
Source Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection(BASMA, 1999).
The project shall also incorporate appropriate water pollution and storm water run-
off control measures recommended in the California Storm Water Best Manage-
ment Practice Hand-book for New Development and Redevelopment(CASQA,
2003b).
............................ ..........
IMPLEMENTATION
........... ...........,_..,.,_,.......... ........... ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Obtain any necessary permits and incorporate measures into
project specifications and construction requirements
May 19,2004 1 Page 26 of 36
200Update mothe Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure CExtension (3CBNO.2O03Q6212Q)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
'
Mitigation
and Monitoring Requirements
Timing Permits:prior to construction.Measures:during project con-
struction
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Projects shall be designed to allow lateral transmission of storm water flows across
Measure 2.7-4b transportation corridors with no increased risk of upstream flooding.Culverts and
bridges shall be designed to adequately carry drainage waters through project sites,
in accordance with Caltrans design requirements.
IMPLEMENTATION
----~---~-^--`-~~—^--^------..........................~---^--'-----------~-------'--~--
ResponsiblePony Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During ___________________________
REPORTING
.........._-..............`_-_-___.--.........---._-~~--..........
-'
Responsible Pony Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Tkning As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2-8 VISUAL RESOURCES
fi 00
,21
Mitigation Design projects to minimize contrast in scale and massing between the project and
Measure 2.8-2a surrounding natural forms and urban development Site or design projects to mini-
mize their intrusion into Important view sheds.
IMPLEMENTATION
--^�~-`.--`'-__'----_........................ _.............................-~~____---...............
----~-
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During crion
REPORTING -
-----------------
---'-------------'
Responsible Party Party ProjazOponyors
May 19,2004 | Page 17of36
....................."I'll'.-...................... ...-..._11 I'll, -,......I.......... I'll, -
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
......... .......... ................11—11.....I......
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Use natural landscaping to minimize contrasts between the projects and existing
Measure 2.8-2b natural and human-made features.Where possible,develop interchanges and transit
lines at the grade of the surrounding land to limit view blockage.Contour the edges
of major cut and fill slopes to provide a more natural looking finished profile.
....... _.,_........................... .......
IMPLEMENTATION
......,..,.w.,..._.,,... ........----------............. .............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............ ._................ ....... .......... ........ .........
REPORTING
................W............_.._..,__...,
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Design landscaping along highway corridors to add significant natural elements and
Measure 2.8-2c visual interest to soften the hard edged,linear travel experience that would other.
wise occur.
........... ............-..........
IMPLEMENTATION
..................... ...... ......... ........ ..............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
71ming During project construction
.......... ...... .............
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Complete design studies for projects in designated or eligible Scenic Highway corri-
Measure 2.8-2d dors.Consider the"complete"highway system and develop mitigation measures to
minimize impacts on the quality of the views or visual experience that originally
qualified the highway for Scenic Highway designation.
..............
IMPLEMENTATION
............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............ ......................-.............................. ................. ............
May 19, 2004 Page 28 of 36
............
. .... .........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
REPORTING
111.1....". .......... ........................
Responsible Parry Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2.9 NOISE yy
3"
V
US"
Mitigation CCTA should continue to advise project sponsors as to appropriate construction-
Measure 2.9-1a related noise mitigation measures to include in their projects,such as requiring muf-
flers on heavy construction equipment and specifying time restrictions consistent
with local noise ordinances and with the activities of sensitive land uses in the vicin-
ity(limitations on allowable hours for construction,however,could have significant
adverse impacts on traffic movement if construction is limited to the daylight hours
and prohibited during nighttime hours).Further project level analysis conducted for
individual projects shall determine the level of mitigation required. Mitigation meas-
ure could include,but not be limited to:
Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall utilize the best available
noise control techniques(e.g.,improved mufflers,equipment redesign,use of intake
silencers,ducts,engine enclosures and acoustically-attenuating shields or shrouds,
wherever feasible):
• Impact tools(e-g.,jack hammers,pavement breakers,and rock drills)used for
project construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever
possible to avoid noise associated With compressed air exhaust from pneumati-
cally powered tools.However,where use of pneumatic tools is unavoidable,an
exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used;this muffler can
lower noise levels from the exhaust by up to about 10 dBA.External jackets on
the tools themselves shall be used where feasible,and this could achieve a re-
duction of 5.0 dBA. Quieter procedures shall be used,such as drills rather than
impact equipment,whenever feasible;
• Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from sensitive receptors as pos-
sible,and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds,incorpo-
rate insulation barriers,or other measures to the extent feasible,
• To reduce the potential for noise impacts from pile driving,alternate methods
of driving shall be used,if feasible.Alternate measures may include pre-drilling of
plies,the use of more than one pile driver to lessen the total time required for
driving piles,and other measures;
• Erect temporary plywood noise barriers around the entire construction site,if
necessary to buffer noise from sensitive land uses;
• Utilize noise control blankets on the building structure as the building is erected
to reduce noise emission from the site-,
• Evaluate the feasibility of noise control at the receivers by temporarily improv-
May 19,2004 1 Page 29 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
........... .......... ................. ......
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Ing the noise reduction capability of adjacent buildings;
• Monitor the effectiveness of noise attenuation measures with noise measure-
ments;and
• Establish a process for responding to and tracking complaints pertaining to con-
struction noise with the following components:
• A procedure for notifying city and county police departments and building divi-
sion staff throughout Contra Costa County-,
• A plan for posting signs on-site pertaining to permitted construction days and
hours and complaint procedures and who to notify in the event of a problem-,
• A listing of telephone numbers(during regular construction hours and off-
hours)
• The designation of a construction complaint manger for the project;and
• Notify neighbors within 300 feet of the project construction area at least 30
days in advance of pile-driving activities about the estimated duration of the ac-
tivity.
.......... ..........................-....... ..................
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Noise mitigation measures should respond to the land use compatibility criteria in-
Measure 2.9-2a cluded in the General Plans of the applicable jurisdictions.If federal funding is used
for the project,mitigation measures should also conform to applicable FHWA and
FTA noise abatement criteria.These commitments obligate project sponsors to im-
plement,measures that would minimize or eliminate any significant impacts.Depend-
ing on the type of project,typical mitigation measures that should be considered by
project sponsors shall Include but not be limited to-
• Construction of sound walls adjacent to new or modified roads or transit lines,
especially when projects are located in the vicinity of sensitive receptors.Noise
level increases could,in most cases,be mitigated to levels at or below existing
levels if soundwalls were constructed along the rights-of-way.A determination
of the specific heights,lengths and feasibility of soundwalls must be part of the
project-level environmental assessment.
• Adjustments to proposed roadway or transit alignment to reduce noise levels in
May 19,2004 1 Page 30 of 36
.........
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
............... ......... ..................
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
noise sensitive areas.Depressed roadway alignments are effective at mitigating
roadside noise levels.
• Insulation of buildings or construction of noise barriers around sensitive recep-
tors,
• Vibration isolation of track segments.
• The CCTA will encourage local jurisdictions to establish development standards
and land use policies that limit the exposure of sensitive receptors to noise gen-
erated by new or expanded transportation facilities.Such policies could include
guiding commercial,industrial,and other similar uses to sites adjacent to major
roadways or rail lines and requiring noise mitigation measures when residential,
educational and other similar uses are to be developed near major transporta-
tion facilities.
...............
IMPLEMENTATION
-1.1-111-1............_................. .............................................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
.............. ............................ ............ ........... ...............................
REPORTING
...............'.._'.".............
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2, 1 Q CULTURAL RESOURCES
PW
'W
ni
R,N','
Mitigation Inventory and Evaluate Cultural Resources. A complete cultural resources inventory
Measure designed to identify potentially significant resources shall be conducted for all pro-
2.10-la jects that have the potential to impact cultural resources.Minimally,a cultural re-
sources inventory shall consist of a cultural resources records search to be con-
ducted at the Northwest Information of the California Historical Resources Informa-
tion System located at Sonoma State University;consultation with the Native Ameri-
can Heritage Commission (NAHC) and with interested Native Americans identified
by the NAHC;a field survey(if one has not previously been conducted);recordation
of all identified archaeological sites and historic buildings and structures on California
Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Site Record forms,and preparation of a
cultural resources inventory report describing the project setting,methods used in
the investigation,results of the investigation,and recommendations for management
of Identified resources.Certain agencies,such as the Federal Highway
Administration and Caltrans,have specific requirements for inventory areas and
May 19,2004 1 Page 31 of 36
............I'll,...........I............................."'I"...... ....................
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003 06212 8)
............
MITIGATION! MOMITORIMG REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
documentation format.
Identified cultural resources that may be impacted by a proposed project shall be
evaluated for eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR).Cultural resources that are eligible for the CRHR are considered to be
significant cultural resources. Cultural resources that are identified within project
areas subject to federal approval,permits,or funding shall also be evaluated for eligi-
bility for listing on the NRNP,Cultural resources determined to be eligible for listing
on the NRHP are automatically eligible for listing on the CRHR and are considered
to be significant cultural resources.
.....................
IMPLEMENTATION
.......... ........-
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
"_............ -------------- .........._.__...._...................a....._.._...._......_......_.._..
REPORTING
....... --------
REPORTING
............. .........._w_... .......................................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Avoid Impacts on Cultural Resources. If feasible,impacts on identified cultural re-
Measure sources including prehistoric and historic archaeological sites,human remains,and
2.10-lb historical buildings and structures should be avoided.Methods of avoidance may
include,but not be limited to,project re-route or re-design,project cancellation,or
identification of protection measures such as capping or fencing.
.......... ........................ ........ ....... .............
IMPLEMENTATION
.................. ................. ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
.......
. w-----.,w.............................................................
REPORTING
................. ...............----
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Measure In the event that impact avoidance is not feasible,any alterations,including reloca-
2.10-1c tion,to historic buildings or structures shall conform to the Secretary of the Inte-
nor's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines for
Preserving,Rehabilitating,Restoring,and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.This
mitigation Measure will reduce impacts on significant historic buildings and strucures,
but would not reduce it to a less-than-significant level.Impacts on significant historic
buildings are considered significant and unavoidable.
May 19, 2004 Page 32 of 36
2004Update mthe Contra Costa
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure CExtension (0C8No. 20D3O6212#)
............
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring s
Where such treatment is not feasible,a qualified cultural resource specialist shall be
retained to document the impacted historical architectural resource to Historic
American Buildings Survey(HABS)and Historic American Engineering Record
(HAER)standards.HABS and HAER documentation packages shall be entered into
the Library of Congress as well as the Northwest Information Center of the Califor-
nia Historical Resources Information System,
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
_____________________________
REPORTING
........... ..........
_-
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Conduct Archaeological Monitoring, If ground-disturbing activities that have the poten-
Measure tial to impact archaeological remains will occur in an area that has been determined
2.10-2a by a qualified archaeologist to be an area that is sensitive for the presence of buried
archaeological remains,a qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor those
activities.Archaeological monitoring shall be conducted in areas where there is a
likelihood that archaeological remains may be discovered but where those remains
are not visible on the surface,Monitoring shall not be considered a substitute for
efforts to identify and evaluate cultural resources prior to the project initiation.
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project mpecUficadonmand construction
requirements
Timing During conxtruction_____________________________
REPORTING
'-- ................ --~--^—~--~—......'^`......... -'.............---``----'......--^--.............
---------
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Stop Work if Archaeological Remains are Discovered During Project Construction. If po-
Measure tentially significant cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activi-
2.10-2b ties associated with project preparation,construction,or completion,work shall halt
in that area until a qualified archaeologist can access the significance of the find,and,
May 19.%004 | Page 33 of 36
-
�
- - - ' -
.............. ......11.11 ''1
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
if necessary,develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with Contra
Costa and other appropriate agencies and interested parties.
.............. ...............
IMPLEMENTATION
...............................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
............
REPORTING
.......... ..........._..........
Responsible Pony Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Conduct Archaeological Data Recovery. If it is Infeasible to avoid impacts on archaeo-
Measure logical sites that have been determined to be eligible for listing on the CRHR or the
2.10-2c NRHP(significant resources),additional research including,but not necessarily lim-
ited to,archaeological excavation shall be conducted.This work shall be conducted
by a qualified archaeologist and shall include preparation of a research design,addi-
tional archival and historical research,archaeological excavation,analysis of artficts,
features,and other attributes of the resource,and preparation of a technical report
docurrventing the methods and results of the investigation.The purpose of this work
is to recover a sufficient quantity of data to compensate for damage to or destruc-
tion of the resource.The procedures to be employed In this data recovery program
will be determined in consultation with responsible agencies and interested parties,
as appropriate.
.......... ------ ........
IMPLEMENTATION
..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
.................. .......... ..............
REPORTING
____..........."......
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
2.11 POPULATION AND LAND USE
"Pa,-
could
+
L`5
Mitigation Corridor realignment,where feasible,to avoid agricultural land areas.
May 19,2004 1 Page 34 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Flan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH NO. 2003062128)
MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
Measure IMPLEMENTATION
2.1 I o I ar...............W....,.,,........n.u__..M.._.,_,.w..,,._..........,.,..............,........_,....,._..,., ......,.........,...............w.......—..................................,....
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Buffer zones and setbacks to protect the functional aspects of agricultural land areas.
_.,..........._,..,......__............._..r.....__....,...._,......_.......:........._.._...............,..,.,..,,,.....,......,.._..................,......,_......,..,..........,.........._,........,........
Measure IMPLEMENTATION
2.11-1b -........ ........._.u,.v.,...w,..._.,..n_,r.,.....M .,.,.,.. �.....w._ x,..W, ..w, w.a.._ _.._.u�._. ,r.._.,_,A....__w._„_...,w....,
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing [luring project construction
n .,, ... „................_..w...,.......v......
.,.,...,.,.............,....
REPORTING
„...,........... ......._.....m,,....._..............,...,...,.....................,.,,......,........,,...,...........
..,._,........,,,.
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
Mitigation Berms and fencing to reduce conflicts between transportation uses and agricultural
Measure land uses.
2.1 I-Ic
4........................_.......__,,....,...._._.,,................,,,_._....,.._......_.............,............_,.........._....,..
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
r............................._._.......,...,....._........,.,.,,.,,..,.,..,...,.._........,.,.,....,..,.....,....,,,.,...,....,..........,...............,......
REPORTING
%......,,._....... ... .... ..._.,n............,......,_,........,..a_.,.,................---............n..........,..................................
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
tri Isact 1luvv
"��Upi��te a 11k�N1►0�S�gz�:Il�e�atnit.Iy°�t�isr�pt� �ajniti�'�ni�tt�+as jh '�,
thel shcrrl*tette � � � '
e*
Mitigation Construction operations on existing facilities will be regulated to minimize traffic
Measure disruptions and detours,and to maintain safe traffic operations.
May 19,2004 1 Page 35 of 36
2004 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan and Proposed Measure C Extension (SCH No. 2003062128)
............... .......................
MITIGATIOM MOMITORINIG REPORT
Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements
2.11-2a IMPLEMENTATION
.......... ............................."'__""_'.'__..................-
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Incorporate measures into project specifications and construction
requirements
Timing During project construction
REPORTING
........ .......... ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
21=
Mitigation Require project sponsors of eBART,SR 4 East(Loveridge Road to SR 160).Martinez
Measure Intermodal Facility,Vasco Road Widening,Byron Highway Widening, Brentwood
2.11-3a Boulevard Corridor Improvements,SR 4 Bypass(Lone Tree Way to Vasco Road),
SR 242/Clayton Road,South 1-680 HOV Direct Access,and various local arterial
projects to commit to preparation and execution of relocation assistance plans as a
mitigation measure for displacement Impacts as a condition of Measure C Extension
funding.As a minimum,relocation assistance plans will Include-,
• Criteria for replacement housing,
• Reimbursement levels for moving costs and differential housing costs to those
eligible for displacement;
• Construction schedules that allow adequate time for all commercial and indus-
trial businesses to find and relocate to adequate substitute sites;and
• Reimbursement levels for the costs associated with relocating a business to an
acceptable facility,including search costs and criteria for payment in lieu of relo-
cation if a business cannot be relocated without a substantial loss of existing pa-
tronage.
.11,-.,,,-.11,ll.-ll",-"...................
IMPLEMENTATION
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Preparation and execution of relocation assistance plans.
Timing Prior to project construction
-11111".1-1 -............... .._...,.... .,......w...- .......................................................
REPORTING
.................................. .............. ..........
Responsible Party Project Sponsors
Action Required Provide the information required for Project Status reports
Timing As part of regular meetings with Authority's Construction Liaison
May 19,2004 Page 36 of 36