Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration

Transcription

1 Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration For the Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement at Coarsegold Creek (State Clearinghouse # ) This Addendum to the Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement at Coarsegold Creek Mitigated Negative Declaration (Project) has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section Background: The County of Madera prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (State Clearinghouse # ) in April 2009 for the Project, which was duly noticed, circulated and adopted by the County in June 2009 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. Since that time, the project description has been modified to include additional areas required for Right-of-Way (ROW) and the construction schedule has been revised. As a result, minor technical changes and additions to the CEQA document are necessary. This Addendum has been prepared to address the adequacy and applicability of the previously prepared MND and to disclose and analyze any changes to the Project and/or the environment that have occurred since the date of adoption in The changes that have been made to this Project will not result in any of the conditions described in Title 14 CCR 15162, calling for the preparation of a subsequent MND. Project Description: The County of Madera, in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration, proposes to replace the existing structurally deficient bridge over Coarsegold Creek in Coarsegold, CA. The proposed bridge replacement and road approach improvement project is located in Madera County on Road 450, Yosemite Springs Parkway ½ mile west of State Route 41. Existing Conditions The existing 30 foot wide x 109 foot long bridge was originally built in 1935 and was comprised of timber superstructure which was subsequently replaced with a composite structural steel wide flange girders and cast-in-place concrete deck superstructure in The existing bridge consists of five -18 foot to 20 foot long main spans that are supported on concrete pierwalls with two short end spans which are supported on short seat type abutments. Both abutments and pierwalls are directly bearing on underlying hard soil strata. The existing bridge has substandard bridge barrier and metal beam guard railing system at its approaches. The bridge also includes short skewed wingwalls at each abutment to support approach roadway embankment. The bridge is listed as Category 5 (not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places [NRHP]) in the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) California Historic Bridge Inventory (as updated). According to the federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation program, the existing bridge structure has been deemed structurally deficient. Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 1 of 9

2 The existing Road 450,Yosemite Springs Parkway is a two-lane undivided roadway with a twofoot paved shoulder on either side of the roadway. The only known existing utilities that cross the creek at the project location are fiber optic lines and overhead electric lines. The fiber optic lines are attached to the south edge of the existing bridge while the overhead electric lines span Coarsegold creek and run along the north side of the bridge. The fiber optic lines have already been temporarily relocated in preparation of construction. The fiber lines will be placed within the new bridge structure once construction has finished. Bridge Design The replacement structure will be a clear span, 42 foot-10 inch wide x 125 foot long cast-inplace concrete box girder bridge supported on short seat abutment at each end. The bridge abutment will be supported on spread foundations due to hard soil strata. The approaches will be widened from 30 feet to 40 feet and will accommodate a 12 foot traffic lane and an 8 foot shoulder on each side of the roadway. The total length of the project, including the bridge and roadway approach work, will be approximately 928 feet. To lessen the environment impacts, the proposed bridge will be constructed, in two phases, one lane at a time, eliminating the need for a detour. The traffic will be controlled by installing a temporary traffic control signal. Temporary k-rail will separate the roadway traffic and construction workers during bridge construction. The proposed bridge will clear span over the creek. The only in-creek activities required for its construction will be the installation and removal of bridge falsework, removal of the existing bridge including piers, installation of rock slope protection around the bridge abutments, bank cutting to create access ramps to the creek bottom, and the placement of temporary drainage pipes/culverts for stream diversion, if necessary. The County or the County s contractor will implement a stream diversion plan using temporary drainage pipes/culverts to allow water to pass through during construction. The County anticipates starting construction in September Construction scheduling may necessitate extending the construction period through the fall, winter, and spring seasons instead of just during the dry seasons --June through October, as originally proposed. ROW will be purchased to accommodate the new bridge structure. Approximately acres of additional ROW will be purchased in fee and +/ acres will be purchased in easement. Temporary construction easements would be necessary and, permits to enter may be required. Construction Equipment Typical construction equipment that would be used on the construction site is described below. Backhoes, excavators and dump trucks will be used for excavating at the abutments, and compacting equipment will be used for backfill compaction. A temporary shoring system such as steel sheet piling or timber lagging at each approach would be required for constructing partial abutments adjacent to an open traffic lane. Shoring installation may require pile driving or drilling equipment at abutment location. Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 2 of 9

3 Falsework construction typically requires a crane, forklift, and earth-moving equipment (i.e. backhoe or grader). This equipment will also be required during falsework removal. Abutment and superstructure construction would require the use of cranes and concrete pumps during concrete placement. Superstructure prestressing and post-tensioning would require hydraulic jacks and will be performed at the abutments only. Construction Staging Areas A staging area will be secured by the contractor for the purpose of storing equipment and material and use of parking for construction workers. One staging area has been designated for the proposed project. This staging area is located on the northeast side of the proposed bridge site where the existing land area of the project is relatively flat. This staging area would be needed for the duration of construction activities to store equipment and materials and to provide parking areas for construction workers and equipment. This temporary staging area would be restored to conditions equivalent to existing conditions after project construction has been completed. Determination: The County has reviewed the previously prepared MND and the proposed Project, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162, has determined that no substantial changes to the MND are necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162, staff has determined the following: No substantial changes have occurred or are proposed which would require major revisions to the previous MND (April 2009) such that new significant environmental effects or substantial increases to the severity of the previously identified significant effects occurred. The Project will not in itself create new substantial environmental impacts above and beyond what was already analyzed in the previous environmental document. (The mitigation measures below correspond with the mitigation measures in the April 2009 MND document rather than the numerical numbering of the mitigation measures contained in the Biological Resources Report dated April 23, 2008.) The determination is based on the following analysis: o Aesthetics: Widening of the bridge will involve the removal of some oak and willow trees, as well as vegetation. Mitigation measures #3.1.1 and #3.4.5 have been incorporated into the project to require oak tree preservation. The mitigation measures in the original MND did not include measures to address the removal of vegetation, however pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement No R4 Coarsegold Creek Madera County, the project will be required to implement a revegetation plan/plant establishment with monitoring and maintenance for 3 years to ensure 60 percent survival if riparian vegetation is removed. The original biological report (2008) did not identify any heritage trees on the project site, however an oak and riparian survey conducted in February 2010 for the Project Impact Areas identified one heritage tree with a diameter breast-height (dbh) of 65 inches. A total of two oak trees and two willow Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 3 of 9

4 trees were removed prior to February 15, 2010 after authorization was provided by the biologist conducting the survey. Compensation for the removal of these trees is discussed under Biological Resources. Impacts will not increase beyond what was previously analyzed in the April 2009 MND because the original survey distance in the April 2008 Biological Resource Report already included the area of additional ROW that the County recently determined would be necessary for the project: no additional mitigation measures would be required.. o Agricultural Resources: The additional ROW would not be located on lands currently used for agricultural production or involve the conversion of agricultural uses to non-agricultural use. As such, there are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Air Quality: As discussed in the MND, air quality impacts related to this project will come mainly from three sources particulate (dust) emissions from construction on properties, particulate (exhaust) emissions from construction on the properties and operational emissions from vehicular trips associated with the project. Air quality impacts were determined to result in less than significant air quality impacts through compliance with regulatory measures. The proposed Project would add additional ROW and adjust the construction schedule, but would not result in an increased impact to air quality. The proposed Project would comply with regulatory measures. Compliance with regulation would reduce potential air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, there are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Biological Resources: The previous MND included a Biological Resource Report and survey that was done in April The survey included a 100 foot buffer on each side of the project area, which includes the location of the additional ROW. The Biological Resource Report (2008) determined that the project had the potential to significantly impact orange lupine, foothill yellow legged frog, raptors, and special status bird species. Mitigation measure #3.4.1 required pre-construction surveys for orange lupine and standard avoidance and preservation measures if it was found to be present. A biological survey report was prepared for the project site in June 2010 by Compliance One Solutions, Inc. which included a survey for orange lupine as directed by the above mitigation measure and the 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement No R4. The Biological Survey Report (2010) determined that no orange lupine was present on the project site. Additionally, the project site is located seven miles south and 1,000 feet below the lowest known occurrence of orange lupine in Indian Lakes Estate and 850 feet below the elevation range listed for the orange lupine in the Jepson Manual of Higher Plants of California (Jepson, 1996) Accordingly, the 2010 survey concluded that the project area is outside of the elevation range listed Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 4 of 9

5 for this species (2,000 and 5,580 feet) and that the project area does not offer suitable conditions for the orange lupine. Mitigation measure #3.4.2 prescribes measures to protect the yellow legged frog including but not limited to construction scheduling and vertebrate exclusion fencing. Construction activities in the previous MND stated work in the stream bed was to occur during the dry season (June 15 to October 15), however construction scheduling may now necessitate extending the construction period through the fall, winter, and spring season. Should construction occur during this time, a stream diversion plan utilizing temporary drainage pipes/culverts will be used instead of a cofferdam as stated in the previous MND. Mitigation measure #3.4.3 required pre-construction surveys for raptors and other special status birds with standard avoidance and protection measures if the species were found to be present. The residual impact after implementation of mitigation measures was determined to be less than significant. An oak and riparian survey was conducted for the project site on February 2, 2010, which included a survey of trees that were identified for removal. Trees were removed the same day as the survey after authorization was given by the qualified biologist that no listed species or special status species were present. Trees were removed prior to the nesting season, before February 15, The 2008 Biological Resource Report identified the removal of oak trees as part of the project to be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation measures #3.1.1 and #3.4.5 have been incorporated into the project to require oak tree preservation and replacement. The measures required a 3 to 1 ratio for replacement oak trees. The 2008 Biological Report did not identify any heritage trees on the project site; however, an oak and riparian survey was prepared in 2010 to identify potential changes in the Project Impact Area since the 2008 report. The 2010 oak and riparian survey identified one heritage tree with a diameter breast-height (dbh) of 65 inches. The 2008 Biological Report has been updated with the revised information. Compensation for replacement of heritage trees is at a 10 to 1 ratio. A total of two oak trees and two willow trees were removed prior to February 15, 2010 after authorization was provided by the biologist conducting the survey. The 2010 oak and riparian survey included the following oak and willow trees within the Project Impact Area to be removed and replanted as a result of the project: Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 5 of 9

6 Tree Type dbh Observed Mitigation Ratios Total Planting Quercus wislizeni 65 inches 10:1 for >24 inch dbh 10 (oak) Quercus wislizeni 22 inches 3:1 for 4 24 inch dbh 3 (oak) Salix nigra 17 inches 3:1 for 4 24 inch dbh 3 (willow) Salix nigra 19 inches 3:1 for 4 24 inch dbh 3 (willow) Total Tree Plantings 19 Source: Compliance One Solutions, Inc., Oak and Riparian Survey Letter Report, February 12, 2010 Removal of these trees shall be compensated for through replacement planting of 13 interior live oak trees and 6 willow trees. Replacement plantings will occur within or near the project area within Madera County. Alternatively, the applicant can contribute to a Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund, as established under subdivision (a) of Section 1363 of the Fish and Game Code or the applicant can contribute to a different fund or conservancy as approved by Fish and Game. In general, native oak trees are protected under Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 17, which requests state agencies to provide replacement planting of oak trees removed from oak woodlands. The 2008 Biological Report did not identify impacts to riparian habitat that required mitigation; however, the project will be required to implement a revegetation plan/plant establishment pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement No R4 Coarsegold Creek Madera County, issued for the project. The revegetation plan/plant establishment will require monitoring and maintenance for three years to ensure 60 percent survival if riparian vegetation is removed. Impacts will not increase beyond what was previously analyzed in the April 2009 MND because the original survey distance in the April 2008 Biological Resource Report already included the area of additional ROW that the County recently determined would be necessary for the project. o Cultural Resources: A cultural records search which encompassed the project site and a 0.5 mile radius around the project site was conducted in February 2009 by the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) at CSU Bakersfield. The results of the records search showed that no archaeological or historical sites have been recorded, nor have any surveys been conducted on the project area. According to the SSJVIC records, two isolates, a historical site, and three prehistoric sites have been recorded within 0.5 mile of the Project Area. Because the project site is located near Coarsegold Creek where a high concentration of sites have been previously reported there is the possibility that previously undiscovered cultural resources could be uncovered during ground disturbance. The MND concluded that implementation of Mitigation measure #3.5, which prescribes Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 6 of 9

7 specific measures to protect cultural resources and/or human remains that are inadvertently discovered during construction would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. An Archeological Survey Report for the proposed Project was prepared in October The Area of Potential Effect (APE) in this October 2009 original Archeological Survey, already included a distance surveyed that encompassed the additional ROW area that the County recently determined would be necessary for the project. According to 36 CFR (d), the Area of Potential Effects is the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, if such properties exist. The Archeological Survey concluded that there was no evidence of prehistoric occupation or use of the area. The proposed Project would not cause any new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Geology/Soils: The proposed Project includes additional ROW. The ROW areas are underlain by the same soil types under the original site. Geologic and seismic impacts were determined to be less than significant for the original project. The additional ROW would have comparable geologic and seismic impacts. There are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Greenhouse Gas: The MND did not include an analysis of greenhouse gas because it was adopted prior to the March 18, 2010 amendments to the CEQA guidelines. The proposed Project involves widening of a bridge and roadway approaches. This would include approximately acres of additional ROW. The Project would generate a minor amount of construction-related CO 2, with most of the emissions generated by off-road construction equipment and construction worker trips. Currently, there are no known mitigation measures that directly reduce GHG emissions from construction equipment. Construction activities that generate GHGs would be limited by the nature and scope of the project, which is limited to the construction of the bridge widening. AB 32 requires that emissions within the State be reduced to 1990 levels by the year These construction emissions are minimal and would occur prior to 2020; therefore, construction-generated GHGs are less than significant and no mitigation is required. o Hazards/Hazardous Materials: The MND determined that the original project would result in less than significant impacts. The proposed Project would cause no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Hydrology/Water Quality: Construction timelines in the previous MND stated work in the streambed shall occur during the dry season (June 15 to October 15), however construction scheduling may now necessitate extending the construction period through the fall, winter, and spring season. The MND determined that hydrology and water quality impacts would be less than significant through compliance with regulatory measures and the Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 7 of 9

8 implementation of mitigation measure #3.8.1, which requires the use of a cofferdam to divert water if construction occurs during a time when the creek is flowing with water. The County will now implement a stream diversion plan by using temporary drainage pipes/culverts instead of a cofferdam as stated in the previous MND. The piped stream diversion plan would be equivalent to a cofferdam in regards to protecting water quality. The MND previously concluded that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would not be required for compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for Discharge and Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity because less than one acre was being disturbed. However, with the inclusion of the additional ROW, more than one acre of land would be disturbed and as such, it is now required that a SWPPP be submitted. The previous MND concluded that compliance with regulatory measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. This is still correct, however it is now required that the proposed Project submit a SWPPP. The residual impact from stormwater would be less than significant and the proposed Project would cause no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Land Use/Planning: The proposed Project would not change any of the County s existing General Plan Land Use designations or zone district boundaries. As a result, no changes in existing or proposed land uses are expected. As such, there are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Mineral Resources: The additional ROW is located within and adjacent to the project site. There are no known deposits of oil, gas, or other minerals within or adjacent to the project site. As such, the proposed Project would cause no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Noise: The MND concluded that noise impacts associated with construction of the bridge would be less than significant. The proposed Project would not result in increased noise impacts. Therefore, there are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Population/Housing: The proposed Project would not involve the construction or demolition of existing dwelling units nor the relocation of existing residents. Accordingly, there are no new impacts above those previously disclosed in the April 2009 MND: no additional mitigation measures would be required. o Public Services: The proposed Project will provide for a wider bridge and roadway approaches which will be constructed in accordance with local and state fire codes. Emergency service responses would only cause temporary impacts to fire services, not resulting in a notable increase to fire risk and Yosemite Springs Parkway Bridge Replacement Project CEQA Addendum Page 8 of 9

9