Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
217217217
200200200
255255255
000
163163163
131132122
2396553
110135120
1129256
62102130
1025648
130120111
237237237
8011927
252174.59
“The views, opinions and findings contained in this report are those of
the authors(s) and should not be construed as an official Department
of the Army position, policy or decision, unless so designated by other
official documentation.”
USACE San Francisco DistrictMarin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
November 13, 2018, 5:30 pm, BOS Chambers
CORTE MADERA CREEK FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT DRAFT EIS/EIR
MARIN COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING
1
PRESENTATION AGENDA2
1. Welcome Lieutenant Colonel David Kaulfers, Acting Deputy Commander U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
2. Project ObjectivesTony Williams, Assistant Director Marin County Public Works Department
3. Ross Valley Flood Protection & Watershed Program, Project Schedule Tonya Redfield, Capital Planning & Project ManagerMarin County Flood Control & Water Conservation District
4. USACE Process, Project AlternativesBenjamin Reder, Project PlannerU.S. Army Corps of Engineers
5. NEPA/CEQA Process, Key FindingsNadia BurlesonBurleson Consulting
PEAK STORM DISCHARGES AT ROSS CREEK GAGE - 1952-2017
2017
HISTORICAL FLOODING IN ROSS VALLEY
EXISTING CONDITION
Ross Fish Ladder, Feb 2017
4
Ross Fish Ladder, ~June 2016
PROJECT OBJECTIVES5
• Address the abrupt transition between Units 3 and 4 created by the existing Denil fish ladder and the narrow channel condition;
• Ensure proposed Project is consistent with District’s Ross Valley Flood Protection and Watershed Program.
• Reduce the likelihood and consequences of flooding on human life and safety;
• Reduce the risk of flood damages, including critical infrastructure;
• Develop and implement environmentally sustainable flood risk management (FRM) features consistent with natural geomorphic processes and ecological functions of the study area;
• Improve fish habitat conditions for salmonids;
• Use environmentally sustainable designs and construction methodologies, which would minimize environmental impacts from future operation and maintenance actions in the study area;
Kentfield1966
EIS/EIR ROLES 6
USACEFlood Control District
/Marin CountyPublic/Agencies
Project LeadNEPA Lead Agency (Federal Funding)
Local Sponsor CEQA Lead Agency
(Local/State Grant Funding)
Review EIS/EIR
Respond to Public Comments
Support Response to Public Comments
Provide Public Comments
Certify EIS (Federal) Record of Decision
Certify EIR (State) Project Approval
Public Comment, Attend Public Hearing
Project ConstructionProject Approval
(District BOS)On-going Stakeholder
Engagement
Ross Valley Flood Control & Watershed Program, Project Schedule
Bolinas Ave, 1944
Nov, 2018
San Anselmo Flood Risk Reduction Project
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Corte Madera Creek Flood Risk Management Project - Ph. 1
Corte Madera Creek Flood Risk Management Project - Ph. 2
Lower Corte Madera Creek & Geomorphic Dredge Study
Morningside/Sleepy Hollow Creek Study
Azalea Ave. Bridge
Madrone Ave. & Nokomis Ave. Bridges
Winship Ave. Bridge
Bridge Ave & Sycamore Ave./Center Blvd. Bridges
Program Environmental Impact Report
Hillview Neighborhood Pump Station & Storm Drain Improvement Project
Annual Ross Valley Creek Maintenance
Flood Risk Reduction Project(Project Lead – Zone 9)
Flood Risk Reduction Project(Project Lead – Town/City)
Feasibility Evaluation/Study
Environmental Review Complete
Ross Valley Flood Protection & Watershed Program - 2018 – 2027 Work Plan
9
Foreseeable Future Projects;
• Have funding allocated in
Program 2018-19 Work Plan
& Budget
• Currently in or moving through
environmental review phase
• Are supported by Zone 9
Advisory Board, BOS,
representative Towns/City
Ross Valley Flood Control & Watershed Program
SCHEDULE & PUBLIC INPUT10
10/12/18 Public Draft EIR/EIS Release, 45-day Comment Period Begins
10/23/18Community Workshop #1, Town of Ross Residents 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm, Ross Town Hall
10/24/18Community Workshop #2, Ross Commercial Businesses 10:00 am – 11:30 am, Ross Town Hall
10/25/18Community Workshop #3, Kentfield & Unincorporated County 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm, Ross Town Hall
11/1/18Ross Valley Watershed Community Conversation w/ Congressman Huffman 5:00 – 6:30 pm at Ross School Gym
11/13/18Public Hearing on Draft EIS/EIR 5:30 pm, District Board of Supervisors, Marin County Civic Center, Rm 330
11/27/18 Draft EIS/EIR Comment Period Closes
Sept. 2019 Final Project EIR/EIS Released
Oct. 2019 Public Hearing on Final Project EIS/EIR
2019 - 2020 Project Approval and Final Design
2020 - 2025 Construction (Phase 1, Phase 2)
USACE Process & Project Alternatives
Ross Commons, Ross, 1982
Focus on alternatives identification and evaluation to identify a recommended plan for more detailed design
Focus on scaling the measures and features for the recommended plan
ScopingAlternative
Evaluation & AnalysisFeasibility Analysis of
Selected PlanWashington-level Review
Alternatives Milestone
Tentatively Selected Plan Milestone
Agency Decision Milestone
Chief’s Report Signed
Draft Report Released for
Concurrent Review
District Final Report Package
TransmittalDecision Milestone
Product Milestone
Key
USACE Feasibility Study Process 12
Jan 2016 Sept 2016 – Oct 2017 Nov 2018 – Feb 2019 2019
Feb 2019
Oct-Nov 2018We are
Here
Sept 2019
MHWA1A
500’
Study focuses on
completion of Unit 4
and ties into
completed project
with possible features
in Units 3 & 2
STUDY AREA13
Project Alternatives
A Top-of-bank Floodwall
BTop-of-bank Floodwall, Setback Floodwall, College of Marin Widening
FBypass, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, College of Marin Widening
GTop-of-bank Floodwall, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, College of Marin Widening
J Bypass, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, Top-of-bank Floodwall
No Action Existing Condition
Tentatively Selected Plan
14
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS
15
ALTERNATIVE J Tentatively Selected Plan – Figure 3-5a
16
• Bypass, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, Top-of-bank Floodwall
ALTERNATIVE J – Figure 3-5b17
ALTERNATIVE J – Figure 3-5c18
ALTERNATIVE J – Figure 3-5d19
ALTERNATIVE J – Figure 3-5e20
ALTERNATIVE J – Figure 3-5f21
Structures removed from
floodplain
Flooding Changes at 4% AEP (25-Yr Flood)22
Structures removed from
floodplain
Flooding Changes at 2% AEP (50-Yr Flood)
Structures removed from
floodplain
23
Structures removed from
floodplain
Flooding Changes at 1% AEP (100-Yr Flood)
Structures removed from
floodplain
Structures removed from
floodplain
24
ALTERNATIVE A Figure 3-1a
• Top-of-bank Floodwalls
25
ALTERNATIVE B Figure 3-2a
• Top-of-bank Floodwall, Setback Floodwall,
College of Marin Widening
26
ALTERNATIVE F Environmentally Preferred Alternative, Figure 3-3a
• Bypass, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, College of Marin Widening
27
ALTERNATIVE G Figure 3-4a
• Top-of-bank Floodwall, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, College of Marin Widening
28
ALTERNATIVE J Tentatively Selected Plan – Figure 3-5a
29
• Bypass, Allen Park Riparian Corridor, Top-of-bank Floodwall
NEPA/CEQA Process & Key Findings
Kentfield, Granton Park, 1949
JOINT PROJECT EIS/EIR31
EIS addressed National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) - FederalEIR addressed California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) - State
What is a EIS/EIR?
• Common practice to combine EIS/EIR to evaluate a broad range of environmental topics to reduce duplication & maximize resources
• Combines planning processes, research/studies, public hearings and environmental assessments
What is the purpose of a EIS/EIR?
• Review environmental effects of a proposed project and a reasonable range of alternatives (5 Alts + No Action Alt)
• Identify potential significant impacts and mitigation measures
TOPICS EVALUATED IN EIS/EIR32
RESOURCES EVALUATED IN DETAIL
Section Topics
4.1 Hydrology and Hydraulics4.2 Water Quality4.3 Geology and Soils4.4 Air Quality4.5 Climate Change4.6 Biology Resources4.7 Cultural Resources4.8 Aesthetics4.9 Recreation
4.10 Noise4.11 Land Use4.12 Human, Health, and Safety4.13 Traffic, Transportation and Circulation4.14 Environmental Justice4.15 Socioeconomics4.16 Utilities and Public Services
LEVELS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT33
• No Impact
• Beneficial Impact
• Less than Significant Impact
• Less than Significant with Mitigation
• Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
NO IMPACT, LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT, OR BENEFICIAL IMPACT
34
Resource topics found not to be significant:
• Hydrology
• Air Quality
• Climate Change
• Recreation
• Environmental Justice
• Public Services and Utilities
35
Draft EIS/EIR, Table 3-8
NO IMPACT, LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT, OR BENEFICIAL IMPACT
36
Draft EIS/EIR, Table 3-8
NO IMPACT, LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT, OR BENEFICIAL IMPACT
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION
37
Resource topics with significant impacts that can be mitigated to less than significant:
• Noise and vibration
• Transportation and circulation
• Health and safety
• Cultural resources
• Biological resources
• Geology
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION
38
Draft EIS/EIR, Table 3-8
SIGNIFICANT & UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS39
Resource topics with significant and unavoidable impacts for which there is no feasible mitigation:
• Water Quality
• Aesthetics
• Biological Resources
• Noise and Vibration
• Transportation and Circulation
• Land Use
• Socioeconomics
SIGNIFICANT & UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS40
Draft EIS/EIR, Table 3-8
SIGNIFICANT CUMULATIVE IMPACTS41
Resource topic with significant cumulative impacts due to construction occurring simultaneously with other projects in the area:
• Traffic & Circulation
Ross, 1982
Staff Recommendations & Public Hearing
RECOMMENDATIONS43
1. Open public hearing for public comment;
2. Close the public hearing on the Draft Joint EIS/EIR;
3. Discuss those issues regarding the Project’s impacts that are of primary concern to your Board and provide recommendations to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Marin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) staff, and the EIS/EIR consultant on any additional items which should be addressed in the Final Joint EIS/EIR; and
4. Recommend that the USACE prepare a Final Joint EIS/EIR based upon the written responses to all of the oral and written comments received at the Draft Joint EIS/EIR hearing, as well as all of the written comments received during the public review and comment period.
44