Search

ERDC/CHL TR-13-2 Coastal Inlets Research Program Pilot Study Evaluating Nearshore Sediment Placement Sites, Noyo Harbor, CA Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory Lihwa Lin, Honghai Li, Mitchell E. Brown, Frank Wu, and Lisa Andes February 2013 Mouth of Noyo River, CA (photograph courtesy of www.krisweb.com). Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The US Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) solves the nation’s toughest engineering and environmental challenges. ERDC develops innovative solutions in civil and military engineering, geospatial sciences, water resources, and environmental sciences for the Army, the Department of Defense, civilian agencies, and our nation’s public good. Find out more at www.erdc.usace.army.mil. To search for other technical reports published by ERDC, visit the ERDC online library at http://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/default. Coastal Inlets Research Program ERDC/CHL TR-13-2 February 2013 Pilot Study Evaluating Nearshore Sediment Placement Sites, Noyo Harbor, CA Lihwa Lin, Honghai Li, and Mitchell E. Brown Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199, USA Frank Wu and Lisa Andes U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco 1455 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94103, USA Final report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for US Army Engineer District, San Francisco 1455 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94103 ERDC/CHL TR-13-2 ii Abstract The US Army Engineer District, San Francisco (SPN) and the Coastal Inlets Research Program conducted a pilot study to consider various placement locations for dredged material in vicinity of Noyo Harbor, CA. Approximately 30,000-40,000 cu yd/yr of beach-quality sediment is dredged from the navigation channel and the lower Noyo River, located on the north central California coast. The pilot study investigated several potential locations for placement of dredged sediments in o

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 1978 DRAFTENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT PILLAR POINT MARINA SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION BYSAN MATEO COUNTY HARBOR DISTRICT PUBLIC NOTICE 10942-20SUMMARYPILLAR POINT MARINA SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIAREGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION BY SAN MATEO COUNTY HARBOR DISTRICT PUBLIC NOTICE 10942-20 (X) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ( ) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT RESPONSIBLE OFFICE: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105(415) 556-3660 1. NAME OF ACTION: (X) ADMINISTRATIVE ( ) LEGISLATIVE 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Development of a marina at the north end ofHalf Moon Bay near the communities of El Granada and Princeton within the confines of the existing breakwaters. 3. a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Change in air and water quality; changein traffic and noise'levels; improved aesthetics; enlarged water-related recreational facilities; growth inducement; and change in tax revenue. .- b. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Air, noise, and water pollution; loss of benthic community and increased sedimentation from construction of the breakwaters; traffic congestion; and increased use of natural resources. 4. ALTERNATIVES; Permit denial, conditional permit (different marina layouts, different breakwater layouts, and alternate sites), and grant permit. 5. COMMENTS REQUESTED; U.S. Senator Alan Cranston U.S. Senator S. I. Hayakawa U.S. Representative Paul N. McCloskey, Jr. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of TransportationU. S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Federal'Energy Administration U.S. Federal Maritime Commission State Senator John Francis Foran State Assemblyman Dixon.Arnett State Assemblyman Victor Calvo State Assemblyman Le

DRAFTENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT BEL MARIN KEYS UNIT IV - IGNACIO INDUSTRIAL PARltT^rr'3 MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION BYJACK WEST AND SOILAND AND ASSOCIATES VOLUME 1 OF 2 U.S. AR1IY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIAFEB 1977DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS630 Sansome Street, Room 1216 San Francisco, California 94111 11 February 1977 Re: Draft ES - Bel Marin Keys Unit IV -Ignacio Industrial Park Unit 3 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The San Francisco District, U.S. Army Engineers, is reviewing permit applications made by Jack West and Soiland and Associates to develop a resldential/commercial complex and a light-industrial complex respectively in Marin County, California. In response to the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190, to protect and enhance the quality of the human environment, the staff of the San Francisco District has prepared a Draft Environmental Statement on the proposed project. The District staff is soliciting comments and views of appropriate govern­ment agencies and Interested groups and individuals on the inclosed draft statement. Submission of comments within 43 days would be appreciated so that our final statement can more fully reflect your views. Comments should be sent to the San Francisco District Office, 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. I am authoring this correspondence because Colonel Flertzheim, San Francisco District Engineer, resides in Bel Marin Keys and therefore will not be involved in the processing of the application or in the final decision on the application. ^Siaae^ely yours, RICHARD M. CONNELL Brigadier General, U.S. Army Division Engineer ,SUMMARYBEL MARIN KEYS UNIT IV-IGNACIO INDUSTRIAL PARK UNIT 3 MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION BYJACK WEST AND SOILAND AND ASSOCIATES (X) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ( ) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer Dist

DRAFTENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT EAST SAN RAFAEL ' BAYLANDS DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATIONS MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER-DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIAFEBRUARY 1977 / / ' DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREETSAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94I0S SPNED-E/SPNCO-R 3 March 1977 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The San Francisco District, U.S. Army Engineers, is currently reviewing various permit applications for proposed and existing fill projects in East San Rafael, Marin County, California. All projects are within an area which is being considered in the East San Rafael Redevelopment Plan of the San Rafael Redevelopment Agency. In response to" the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190, to protect and enhance the quality of the tv:man environment, the San Francisco District has prepared a Draft Environmental Statement. i The District is soliciting comments and views of appropriate govern­ment agencies and interested groups and individuals on the inclosed draft statement. Submission of comments within 45 days would be appreciated so that our final statement can more fully reflect your views. Sincerely yours, 1 Incl As stated H. A. FLEtfTZHEIM, JR. Colorfel, CE District Engineer ( / SUMMARY EAST SAN RAFAEL BAYLANDS DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATIONS .MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (X) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ( ) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105(415) 556-3902 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Develop the East Baylands of San Rafaelinto residential, commercial, industrial, and open space uses. This will involve fill, dredging, and development in accordance with the emerging San Rafael Redevelopment Agency plan for the area. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: . Change in land use from basically undeveloped open space t

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT REDWOOD SHORES REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIACCfAUGUST 1976SUMMARY ERRATAFINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTREDWOOD SHORES REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1. Insert new section 6. "6. Appendices: Appendix A was distributed with the DraftEnvironmental Statement and therefore only those documents added since distribution are included. Appendices B and C were also previously distributed and are not included with this final report. Additional sets of these appendices are available from the San Francisco District on request." 2. Change previous Section 6 to 7.SUMMARYREDWOOD SHORES REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ( ) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco 211 Main StreetSan Francisco, California 94105 (415) 556-3660 1. Name of Action; (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Filling and doing storm drainage improve­ments on an approximate 210-acre area and improving the existing dike along Steinberger Slough in preparation for the eventual construction of a regional shopping center and/or other commercial/office type develop­ment, using approximately 925,000 cubic yards of dry earth from con­struction sites in upland areas. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Change in land use from open space tourban space; loss of levee-impounded marshland; increase in vehicular traffic; changes in air and water quality; change in noise levels; and water runoff alteration. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: Loss of marshland habitat; air,water, and noise pollution; and increased local traffic. 4. Alternatives: Permit denial; area restoration. 5. Comments Received: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTPORT SONOMA DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APPLICATION BY: SHELLMAXER, INC.PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIANOVEMBER 1976SUMMARYPORT SONOMA DEVELOPMENT PROJECT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ( ) Draft Environmental Statement (X) Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: The breaching of a levee on the PetalumaRiver for the purpose of constructing a water oriented recreational- commercial-light industrial complex. The completed complex would include 3 boat marinas, a bulk sand depot, a seafood restaurant, barge and boat storage areas, shops and offices for marine hardware, yacht sales office, small boat repair facilities, and a dry dock. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Channel excavation and maintenancedredging would destroy terrestrial and aquatic habitats; increased human activity in the area might endanger the natural environment of the San Pablo Bay Wildlife Refuge; the completed project would cause increases in traffic on State Route 37; Increased boat traffic on the Petaluma River and San Pablo Bay would result from use of the marinas; the proj­ect would provide needed water-oriented recreational facilities. b. Adverse Environmental Effect: Reduction in the number andproportion of live aquatic organisms in existing project waterways riverward of the levee; possible eutrophication in main project channel and basins; increased dissolved solids and surface water pollution; night visual disturbance to Black Point and Green Point residents due to marina lighting. 4. Alternatives: Permit denial. 5. Comments Received: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Navy U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Co

NAPA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY ( ) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer DistrictSan Francisco, California I. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative -• Description of Action: The flood control project for the NapaRiver, from Edgerley Island to Trancas Street, consists of channel widening and realignment, dredging, riprap on portions of the riverbanks and construction of concrete step-walls through the central urban area of the City of Napa. Land will be acquired for fish and wildlife miti­gation and for recreation purposes. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: The project will prevent flooding in theurban area of the City of Napa and provide river oriented recreation facilities. Acquisition of 577 acres of former tidelands will be used to mitigate for permanent loss of fish and wildlife habitat caused by the project. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: Mitigation measures will alle­viate any adverse effects on fish and wildlife. There will be a tem­porary loss of foliage, due to the removal of plant materials, until the new landscaping has had a chance to mature. .4. A1ternatives: Alternatives to the recommended plan were considered.They are: No action, levees along existing channels, offset leveesalong existing channel, bypass channels, flood control reservoirs, and combinations of the above. r' • Comments Requested: Honorable Don H. Clausen - Representative in Congress - California Honorable Peter H. Eehr - State Senator - California Honorable John F. Dunlap - State Assemblyman - California William S. Leet - Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service - Department of Commerce (diaries Roberts - San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Public Works Director - City of Napa chairman, Board of Supervisors - Napa County Public Works Department - Napa County Department of Public Health - Napa County Board of Directors - Napa Sanitation Distr

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT FOSTER CITY DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATIONFOSTER CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIASEPTEMBER 1975STATEMENT OF FINDINGSMAINTENANCE DREDGING EXISTING NAVIGATION PROJECTS SAN FRANCISCO MY REGION CALIFORNIA 1. Purpose of SOF. The purpose of this Statement of Findings is to set forth the rationale leading to a recommendation that the maintenance dredging for the Federal navigation projects in San Francisco Bay be continued as authorized, and as described in the Final Composite Environmental Statement. Shoal material from the projects listed a-o are disposed in open water: a. San Francisco Harbor (Main Ship Channel and Islais Creek) b. Petaluma River (Phase I) c. San Pablo Bay and Mare Island Strait d. Richmond Harbor e. Oakland Harbor f. San Francisco Harbor and Bay - Sausalito Operations Base g. Suisun Bay Channel h. Concord Naval Weapons Station i. Alameda Naval Air Station j. Military Ocean Terminal, Bay Area - North k. Naval Supply Center - Oakland l. Military Ocean Terminal, Bay Area - East m. Point Molate n. Government Island o. Horseshoe Cove The disposal sites for the following projects, p-t, are still under re­view. Should land disposal be selected, these projects would be subject to additional assessment followed by preparation of supplemental envi­ronmental statements and statements of findings. Should water dis­posal be selected, these projectSare also recommended for continued maintenance as authorized and described in the Final Composite Environ­mental Statement: p. San Rafael Creek q. San Leandro Marina r. Redwood City Harbor s. Suisun (Slough) Channel t. New York Slough Future Corps permit applications for dredging in the Bay will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and vzill be the subject of addi­tional environmental review and future statements of findings. The Final Composite Environmental Statement will be used as a background source to aid in assessing t

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING,PETALUMA RIVERSONOMA AND MARIN COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA August 1975 Prepared byU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco, Corps of EngineersSTATEMENT OF FINDINGS MAINTENANCE DREDGING, PETALUMA RIVER SONOMA AND MARIN COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA 1. I have reviewed and evaluated, in light of the overall public interest, the documents concerning the proposed action, as well as the stated views of other interested agencies and concerned public, relative to the various practicable alternatives in accomplishing the program for maintenance dredging in Petaluma River. 2. The possible consequences of the Petaluma River maintenance dredg­ing have been studied according to environmental, social well-being, and economic effects, including regional and national development, and engineering feasibility. 3. In evaluation, the following points were considered pertinent: a. Environment.il Cans iderations (1) Dredging Effects: (a) Dredging the Petaluma River will increase the average depth, hence the capacity of the river channel. This will alter the present flow and sediment transport regimens making the project area susceptible to higher average Salinity and increased shoaling rates upstream. The project may alstj cause the existing salt water wedge to intrude further upstream of the project .area than it now does. On the other hand, the project will improve the flushing efficiency of the river and provide greater capacity for flood control purposes. Because the upper reach of the project area is already under tidal influence, the biological response to these physical changes 'would be minimal. (b) As with nearly any dredging project the subject dredging will remove the existing interface between the water and bottom substrate which is an area of nigh biological activity. Benthic organ­isms inhabiting the sediment column to the two-foot overdepth dredged level would not only be destroyed in themselves, but also lest relative to their function

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING,. NOYO RIVER CHANNELNOYO HARBOR, MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314 AUGUST, 1975hazards, or aesthetic sensibilities. All of these are temporary in nature and are minor when one considers the long-range overall enhancement of social and economic productivity of the harbor area by the assurance of continued harbor access. The maintenance will preserve the harbor for use as a commercial and recreational fishing port as well as a harbor of refuge. c. Engineering Considerations. The dredging operation will be accomplished by using a hydraulic dredge. This method employs a floating platform with a cutter head and suction pipe which extends into the wTater through which material is loosened and vacuumed up to a system wThich pumps the slurry (water and sediment) through a transfer pipeline to the disposal site. The pipeline is placed on the river's bank or floated on the surface of the water to the disposal site. The material dredged could be deposited on a five acre land disposal area approximately one mile upstream of the project. Should the contractor choose, he has the option of supplying his own disposal site, different from ttie site provided by the local project sponsor. He must, however, have all necessary clearances and coordination prior to bidding on the job. 4. I find, after a thorough analysis and evaluation of the maintenance dredging of Novo River and Harbor channels versus the option of "no-action", that wherever adverse effects are found to be involved they cannot be avoided by following reasonable alternative courses of action which would achieve the congressionally specified purposes; that where the proposed action has an adverse effect this effect is either ameliorated or substantially outweighed by other considerations of national policy, statutes, and administrative directives; and that, on balance, the total public interest shoul

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MARINER'S ISLAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION SAN‘MATEO, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIAJULY 1975DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314 19 February 1976 Honorable Russell W. Peterson ChairmanCouncil on Environmental Quality 722 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Dear Mr. Chairman: Inclosed is a copy of the Statement of Findings for the Final Environmental Impact Statement concerning the proposed Mariner's Island Development at San Mateo, California. This action is in accordance with our policy as published in paragraph 15 of ER 1105-2-507, "Preparation and Coordination of Environmental Statements." Sincerely yours, /COW R. HILL, JR.LTC, Corps of Engineers Assistant Director of Civil Works, Environmental Programs19 February 1976 Honorable Russell W. Peterson ChairmanCouncil on Environmental Quality 722 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Dear Mr. Chairman: Inclosed is a copy of the Statement of Findings for the Final Environmental Inpact Statement concerning the proposed Mariner's Island Development at San Mateo, California. This action is in accordance with our policy as published in paragraph 15 of ER 1105-2-507, "Preparation and Coordination of Environmental Statements." Sincerely youra, JOHN R. HILL, JR.LTC, Corps of Engineers Assistant Director of Civil Works, Environmental ProgramsSTATEMENT OF FINDINGS MARINERS ISLAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF SAN MATEO, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1. Purpose of SOF. The purpose of this S tatement of Findings is to set forth the rationale leading to a recommendation concerning the granting of a land­fill permit to Security Savings and Loan Associations for a site to be utilized for commercial, office, and residential development. 2. Evaluation of Methodology. The proposed landfill and development was first announced by the San Francisco District in Public

FINALCOMPOSITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGINGEXISTING NAVIGATION PROJECTS SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 1975 VOLUME ISTATEMENT OF FINDINGS MAINTENANCE DREDGING EXISTING NAVIGATION PROJECTS SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION CALIFORNIA 1. Purpose of SOF. The purpose of this Statement of Findings is to set forth the rationale leading to a recommendation that the maintenance dredging for the Federal navigation projects in San Francisco Bay be continued as authorized, and as described in the.Final Composite Environmental Statement. Shoal material from the projects listed a-o are disposed in open water: a. San Francisco Harbor (Main Ship Channel and Islais Creek) b. Petaluma River (Phase I) c. San Pablo Bay and Mare Island Strait d. Richmond Harbor e. Oakland Harbor f. San Francisco Harbor and Bay - Sausalito Operations Base g. Suisun Bay Channel h. Concord Naval Weapons Station i. Alameda Naval Air Station j. Military Ocean Terminal, Bay Area - North k. Naval Supply Center - Oakland l. Military Ocean Terminal, Bay Area - East m. Point Molate n. Government Island o. Horseshoe Cove The disposal sites for the following proiects, p-t, are still under re­view. Should land disposal be selected, these proiects would be subject to additional assessment followed by preparation of supplemental envi­ronmental statements and statements of findings. Should water dis­posal be selected, these project are also recommended for continued maintenance as authorized and described in the Final Composite Environ­mental Statement: p. San Rafael Creek q. San Leandro Marina r. - Redwood City Harbor s. Suisun (Slough) Channel t. New York Slough Future Corps permit applications for dredging in the Bay will he evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and will he the subject of addi­tional environmental review and future statements of findings. The Final Composite Environmental Statement will be used as a background source to aid in assessing these dredging permits in the Bay.'2. Evalua

MAACAMA FAULT STUDY Sonoma and Mendocino Counties,California U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT. SAN FRANCISCOCORF'S OF ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA ^ JANUARY 1978MAACAMA FAULT STUDYSonoma and Mendocino Counties, California U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO CORPS OF ENGINEERS JANUARY 1978MAACAMA FAULT STUDYSONOMA AND MENDOCINO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA TABL2 OF CONTENTS ITEM PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION1 2. PURPOSE AND SCOPE4 3. COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES4 4. CONSULTANTS5 5. GEOLOGIC SETTING6 6. REGIONAL SEISMICITY7 7. INVESTIGATIONS12 8. DESCRIPTION OF THE FAULT19 9. SELECTION OF THE MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKE26 10. CONCLUSIONS29 REFERENCES30 TABLES TABLE 1PARTIAL EARTHQUAKE HISTORY, 1769-19289 TABLE 2LIST OF IMAGERY s 14FIGURES PAGE FIGURE 1 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA 2 FIGURE 2 INDEX OF PLATE LOCATIONS PLATES 6 THROUGH 1417 FIGURE 3 EXPLANATION FOR SYMBOLS SHOWN ON PLATES 6 THROUGH 1418 ftGURE 4 BLOCK DIAGRAM SHOWING LAKDFORMS DEVELOPED ALONG RECENTLY ACTIVE STRIKE-SLIP FAULTS21 PLATES PLATES 1 & 2 FAULTS WITH QUATERNARY DISPLACEMENT PLATE 3 PRELIMINARY EPICENTER LOCATIONS - 1976,USGS CENTRAL CALIFORNIA NETWORK PLATE 4 PRELIMINARY HYPOCENTERS OF EARTHQUAKESOCCURRING IN THE SANTA ROSA AND HEALDSBURG (1:250,000) QUADRANGLES, NAPA TO MENDOCINO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA, JAN 1969 - JUN 1977 PLATE 5 MICROEARTHQUAKE SURVEY, EPICENTRALMAP EVENTS OF "C" HYPOCENTRAL QUALITY OR BETTER, NON-FIXED DEPTH SOLUTIONS AND OCCURRING WITHIN NETWORK PLATES 6 Through14 USGS 15-MIN. QUADRANGLES SHOWING MAACAMAFAULT TRACE (In Pocket) APPENDICES CE-1 RECENTLY ACTIVE BREAKS ALONG THE TALMAGE FAULTZONE, MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. HARDING-LAWSON ASSOCIATES, 1977CE-2 MAACAMA/TALMAGE FAULT STUDY, REVIEW OFMAPS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY, HARDING LAWSON ASSOCIATES, 1977 CE-3 A MICRO-EARTHQUAKE SURVEY OF THE MAACAMA FAULTZONE, NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RANGES, JULY 14 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 23, 1977. DAMES &MOORE, 1977. ; CE-4 EARTHQUAKE CATALOG, 1910-1973MAACAMA FAULT STUDYSONOMA AND MENDOCINO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA V

DRAFTENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT PARKWOOD 101, LTD.REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC NOTICE 11491-49 U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER 1977DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREET SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA MI03 SPNED-E/SPNCO-R 18 November 1977 RESPONSE REQUIRED BY: 2 January 1978 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT: COMMENT PERIOD . . 'For application announced in Public Notice 111*91-1*9 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: 1. As announced in Public Notice 111*91-1*9, Parkwood 101, Ltd., 730-B Distel Drive, Los Altos, California 91*022, through its agent, Wilsey . and Ham, 1035 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Foster City, California 9^0U (tele­phone 1*15-31*9-2151), has applied for a Department of the Army permit to fill an approximate 13 acre diked wetland, adjacent to Belmont Slough,San Francisco Bay (South), in Redwood City, San Mateo County, California. 2. In response to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Public Law 91-190, the San Francisco District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, has prepared a Draft Environmental Statement for the subject permit application. 3. The District is soliciting comments and views of appropriate government agencies and interested groups and individuals on the inclosed draft state­ment. Submission of comments within 1*5 days would be appreciated so that our final statement can more fully reflect your views. Sincerely yours. JOHN M. ADSITColonel, CEDistrict EngineerSUMMARY PARKWOOD 101, LTD.REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION REDWOOD CITY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Public Notice 11491-49 (X) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ( ) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105(415) 556-3660 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Fill and development of 13 acres of wetlandadjacent to Belmont Slough, and landward o

FINALENVIRONMENTALSTATEMENT WALNUT CREEK PROJECTContra Costa County,California Prepared by:U S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIADEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT. CORFS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREETSAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94I0S STATEMENT OF FINDINGSWALNUT CREEK PROJECT CALIFORNIA 1. I have reviewed and evaluated, in light of the overall public interest, information presented in the environmental statement; other documents concerning the Walnut Creek Project, California; and stated views of other agencies, organizations and individuals on the environ­mental impacts and various practical alternatives to accomplish flood protection in the flood plain of Walnut Creek. Numerous public meetings have been held as well as discussions with local governmental officials, landowners, and representatives of environmental, fish and wildlife, and conservation interests. 2. Construction of the first unit of this comprehensive project was initiated in 1964 and will continue until all units are completed. .The consequences of constructing the authorized work, in addition to each alternative considered, were studied and evaluated for engineering feasibility, environmental effects, social well being, and economic factors*. Specific attention was given to the need for flood control, the purpose for which the project was authorized, while also considering the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The environ­mental statement describes in detail the completed portions of the project and the selected plan for lower Pine and Galindo Creeks. A locally acceptable alternative plan for the uncompleted reaches of San Ramon and Walnut Creeks Involving a bypass is also described although no construction in this area is proposed at this time. In making my eval­uation, specific attention was given to the following factors in order to provide a balance of all considerations. a. Engineering considerations. - Alternative flood control solu­tions which were

DRAFT UPPLEMENT TO FINAL ENVIR NMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT,s,' morn-m ABto CREEKS CONTRA CO TA COUNTY .CALIFORNIA WATER RE OURCE PROJECT DECEMBER 1977 U.S. AR Y ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 AIN STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105SUMMAR DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WILDCAT AND SAN PABLO CREEKS WATER RESOURCES PROJECT CONTRA COSTA COUNT , CALIFORNIA (X) DRAFT SUPPLEMENT ( ) FINAL SUPPLEMENT Responsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco,California. 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Channel improvement on Wildcat and SanPablo Creeks. Wildcat Creek: Minimal construction in salt marshes; a250-foot wide earthen floodway from salt marshes to Verde School in­cluding trails, picnic areas, a stilling basin, and landscaping; a covered concrete culvert past Verde School, an open trapezoidal concrete channel upstream to approximately Vale Road, including trails and land­scaping, a rectangular concrete channel from Vale Road to 400 feet upstream, and selected channel clearing to the end of the project, San Pablo Avenue. Mitigation of adverse impacts on cultural resources will be included if appropriate. San Pablo Creek: Minimal construction in salt marshes; an earthenfloodway to vicinity of the Santa Fe CSF) Railway tracks subsequently allowed to revert to natural vegetation; floodflows will be diverted through a concrete culvert from 17th Street under Road 20 to the vicin­ity of Giant Highway. The existing channel for the diverted reach will remain unimproved and will carry flows to channel capacity. Mitigation of adverse impacts on cultural resources will be included if appropriate. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Protection from a 100-year frequencyflood; urban development of the flood plain between the creek in accor­dance with Model Cities Program; proper functioning of improved storm sewers in North Richmond; improved housing in North Richmond; creation of a recreation co

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT HUMBOLDT BAY HARBOR MARINA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION PUBLIC HOTIC* lOtU-31 U.S. ABMY KKGDfXXB DBT*ICT iampbaucisco, cau po bn u AOQUST ItTT PAGINATION AS IN ORIGINAL COPYSUMMARY HUMBOLDT BAY HARBOR MARINA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION EUREKA, HUMBOLDT COUNTY* CALIFORNIA PUBLIC NOTICE 10643-21 ( ) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT RESPONSIBLE OFFICE; U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 556-3660 4 1. NAME OF ACTION: (X) ADMINISTRATIVE ( ) LEGISLATIVE 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION; The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District proposes to develop the southern shore of Woodley Island and the Eureka Inner Reach Channel. The project that was assessed in the Draft Environmental Statement has been revised5to the project described in this Final Environmental Statement. The revised project would be a 237-berth marina with an access road from Highway 255, parking facilities, support facilities and a potential for limited commercial development. Berthing facilities would extend 120 feet into the Federally maintained channel, leaving 260 feet of it navigable. 3. (a) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The proposed project would alter theconfiguration of the Eureka Inner Reach Channel. Subtidal and inter­tidal flats along the southern edge of the Island would be removed, and the existing associated benthic habitat would be altered. Marina con­struction and dredged material disposal would impact existing wildlife habitat values on the southern one fourth of the Island and commit the area to relatively intensive human uses. . There would be an increased, need for maintenance dredging in the area. Building materials and petroleum resources would be irreversibly committed. There would be socio-economic benefits for the Eureka boating community. (b) ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: The proposed project would re­duce the width of the open channel by 120 feet. Development woul

' /* > ev / I # S3 ENVIRONMENTALSTATEMENT Fisherman’s Wharf Area San EKUicisco Harbor, California FEASIBILITY REPORT BREAKWATER STUDYFOR LIGHT DRAFT NAVIGATION MARCH 1976DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS KINGMAN BUILDING FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060 11 April 1977 SUBJECT: San Francisco Harbor; California - Fisherman's Wharf ’ ‘Area Chief of Engineers Department of the Army Washington, D. C. • 1. Authority. —This report is in response to the following resolution adopted 5 May 1966: Resolved by the Committee on Public Works of the House of Representatives, United States, that the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors is hereby requested to review the report on San Francisco Harbor, .California, published as House Document Numbered 196, Seventieth Congress, First Session, and previous reports, with a view to determining whether any modification of the existing project is advisable at this time, with par­ticular reference to providing a harbor for light-draft vessels in the Fisherman's Wharf area. 2. Description. - -The Fisherman's Wharf ar ea fronts on San Francisco Bay and is a distinct segment of the city of San Francisco waterfront.It is bounded on the west by the Municipal Pier and on the east by Pier 45. Existing development consists of a complex of commercial * and recreational facilities. 3. Economic development. --For many years Fisherman's Wharf has been the center of the northern California commercial fishing industry and a world-renowned tourist attraction and recreation area. Approxi­mately 120 fishing boats are currently berthed at Fisherman's Wharf, and most development in the general area is an outgrowth of the com- ' mercial fishing industry. Five historic vessels are open to the public, at the Hyde Street Pier. Excursion vessels provide waterfront tours. Sport fishing is popular; and approximately 30 boats engage in regular for-hire trips. Many commercial businesses, including curio shops, restaurants, sidewalk cafes

FINALSUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL COMPOSITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT, MAINTENANCE DREDGING,EXISTING NAVIGATION PROJECTS,SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION, CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 MAINTENANCE DREDGING SAN LEANDRO MARINA ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA May 1977U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco, Corps of EngineersSUMMARYSUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL COMPOSITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING, EXISTING NAVIGATION PROJECTS,SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION, CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 MAINTENANCE DREDGING SAN LEANDRO MARINA ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ( ) Draft Supplement (X) Final Supplement Responsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco,Corps of Engineers 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Land disposal of 325,000 cubic yards ofdredge material from the routine maintenance dredging of the Federal Navigation Project at the San Leandro Marina. The project is time phased to begin in June 1977 and to be completed by mid October 1977. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Maintenance of the subject authorizedFederal Navigation Project resulting in restoration of regional rec­reation benefits; resolution of land use issues and compensation for adverse impacts via mitigation measures. b. Adverse Environmental Impacts: Disruption of on-site ecosystems;loss of 112 acres of marginal wildlife habitat; temporary inundation of 108 acres of seasonal wetland, with short-term displacement of wildlife; and potential short-term adverse sensory effects on nearby resident. 4. Alternatives - no action, aquatic disposal, reuse, and other land disposal sites. 5. Comments Requested: a. FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service* U.S. Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Economic Development Administration , ‘ Maritime Administration U.S. Department of the Interior (c/o Office of the Secretary, Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Pacific Southwest Region)* Fish and Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service Ad

finalENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT WEST CONTRA COSTA SANITARY LANDFILL PROJECT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIAAPPLICATION BY: RICHMOND SANITARY SERVICERICHMOND, CALIFORNIA PN 9674-52 U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIAMAY 1977SUMMARYWEST CONTRA COSTA SANITARY LANDFILL PROJECT REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ( ) Draft Environmental Statement (X) Final Environmental StatementResponsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco,. CA 94105(415) 556-3660 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Confirmation, and approval of all existingdikes and embankments at the existing sanitary landfill project. This includes rehabilitation, completion and permanent maintenance of the dikes and embankments. Validation of the placement of all existing fill and material behind the dikes and embankments. Continuation of the sanitary landfill operations behind the existing dikes and embankments in connection with future sanitary landfill operations. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Continuation.of ( the fill will result inthe loss of about 50 acres of levee-impounded marsh, and about 90 acres of inclosed water. Continued operation of the site will permit the removal of solid and liquid waste material from the area served by the dump. The disposal operations themselves present^safety hazards to both site employees and users. b. Adverse Environmental Effect: Loss of a waterfowl resting areaand some modified marsh habitat. Loss of approximately 90 acres of water surface area. Continued truck traffic through North Richmond will produce noise and air emissions. 4. Alternatives: Permit denial, partial area restoration. 5. Comments Received: U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare U.S. Department of Transportation California State Resources Ag

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NORTH POINT PARK/MARINA CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO / / REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATIONS BYWATERFRONT RECREATION FACILITIES, INC. U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIAMAY 1977SUMMARY NORTH POINT PARK/MARINA SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA REGULATORY PERMIT APPLICATION BY WATERFRONT RECREATION FACILITIES, INC. ( ) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: District EngineerU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105(415) 556-3660 1. Name of Action; (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Developing a major commercial/recreationalcomplex of restaurants, retail shops, marina, parking garage, and open space/park areas at the Port of San Francisco's northern waterfront adjacent to and including Piers 37, 39, and 41. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Change in land use from maritime tonon-maritime activity; increase in pedestrian and vehicular traffic; changes in air and water quality; and change in noise levels. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: Increased local traffic; in­creased sedimentation from the construction of breakwaters; air, water, aqd noise pollution; and increased use of natural resources. 4. Alternatives: Permit denial; smaller project; development accord­ing to the Bay Conservation and Development Commission Special Area Plan; development’ according to the San Francisco Northern Waterfront Plan; and development of the entire site as open space. 5. Comments Received: U.S. Department of Commerce The Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration ,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Advisory Council on Historic Preservation California State Department of Parks and Recreation The Resources Agency of California Association of Bay Area Governments The Atchison, Topeka and Sant

HAHN SHOPPING CENTER (MARIN MALL REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER)CORTE MADERA, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Public Notice No. 11101-47 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ERRATA SHEET Page Paragraph Addition or Correction 5,20, 44 1.11(h), 2.49, 4.39 In a telephone conversation on 23 May 1978, JoDuphie of the Marin Municipal Water District,provided an update of the water supply situation The Water District Board of Directors is-at this time considering the lifting of the water moratorium for their service area. A California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review will likely be carried out by the Water District as part of the decision making process concerning the lifting of the moratorium.The Water District Board of Directors is now develop­ing a Safe Water Supply Program which would be used as the primary guideline for determining water availa­bility for projects such as the Marin Mall. 25 2.72 This paragraph discusses the Air Quality MaintenancePlan for the San Francisco Bay Area air basin. It should be noted that the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency is now requiring State Implementation Plans (SIP's) by 1 January 1979 which show how National Standards can be attained by December of 1982. For Oxidant and Carbon Monoxide extensions may be granted to 1987 if all reasonable technology has been applied.The 3 March 1978 issue of the Federal Register announced that the Bay Area does now not meet the Primary Standards for Oxidant and Carbon Monoxide and does not meet the Secondary Standard for Total Suspended Particulate.Also, it should be noted that the Federal New Source Review program does not apply because a shopping center is•considered an "indirect source." 47 4.48 Reference is made to "Five different situations. ."which have been considered in Appendix B. Only four situations are listed in paragraph 4.48. The second item is missing and this should be "Projected 1985 activity levels, withoutthe Mall." All five situations are included in the Appendix. 57 5.01 "Some loss of sal

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING FY 1977 MOSS LANDING HARBOR MOSS LANDING, CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIAAPRIL 1975FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENTMAINTENANCE DREDGING FY 1977 MOSS LANDING HARBOR MOSS LANDING, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraph Subject Page 1.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 1.01 Authorization 1 1.02 Project 1 2.00 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT 2 2.01 Location and General Description 2 2.06 Topography 3 2.10 Geology and Soils 3 2.15 Water Quality 4 2.24 Oceanography 6 2.34 ' Erosion and Sedimentation 7 2.49 Climate 11 2.55 Elkliorn Slough Biota 11 2.71 Marine Biota 14 2.85 Historical and Archaeological Sites 17 2.86 Socio-Economic Environment 17 2.92 Recreation 18 3.00 RELATIONSHIP OF THE PROPOSED ACTIONTO LAND USE PLANS 20 3.01 Existing Land Use 20 3.24 Central Coast Regional Coastal ZoneConservation Commission 23 3.28 Monterey County Planning Commission 23 3.30 Association of Monterey Bay AreaGovernments 24 3.31 Regional Water Quality Control Board 24 3.32 Summary 24Paragraph Subject Page 4.00 THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSEDACTION 25 4.02 Short-Term Impacts 25 4.18 Long-Term Impact 27 4.31 Mitigation Measures Consideredto Minimize the Impact 29 5.00 ANY ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED SHOULD THE PROPOSAL BE IMPLEMENTED 31 6.00 ALTERNATIVES 10 THE PROPOSED ACTION 32 6.01 Use of Alternative Disposal Sites 32 6.09 Alternative Means of Dredging 33 6.13 No Project or Delayed Project 34 7.00 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USESOF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY 35 8.00 ANY IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTSOF RESOURCES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED 36 9.00 COORDINATION, COMMENT AND RESPONSE 37 9.01 Public Participation 37 9.02 Government Agencies 37 9.03 Citizen Groups 37 9.04 Comments and Responses 37 9.07 Comments Related to the ProjectDescription 38 9.10 Comme

FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING (FY 1975-1976) SANTA CRUZ HARBOR SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA byU.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco, Corps of EngineersApril 1975MAINTENANCE DREDGING (FY 1975)SANTA CRUZ HARBOR SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA SUMMARY ( ) DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT (X) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT Responsible Office: U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco,California. 1. Name of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action: Maintenance dredging of the entrance channelto Santa Cruz Harbor and disposal of dredge material on the beach east of the east jetty. 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Annual dredging and disposal will in­crease turbidity. A portion of the benthos will be removed through dredging, and a portion of the biota at the disposal site will be buried. Maintenance dredging will permit the harbor to remain open. The beaches• downcoast subject to erosion by wave action will receive annual sand nourishment from the dredging operation. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: There will be disruption of thebiota, and a temporary increase in turbidity. 4. Alternatives: a. Disposal Sites (1) Downcoast beach disposal (2) Upcoast beach disposal (3) Land disposal (4) Offshore disposal (5) Deepwater disposal (over 100 fathoms) b. Alternative Means of Maintenance c. No Project or Delayed Project 5. Comments Received: Soil Conservation Service, USDA Federal Highway Administration, Region IX U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Region IX U.S. Department of the Interior, Pacific Southwest Region The Resources*Agency of California California Department of Parks and Recreation (State Historic Preservation Officer) Santa Cruz County Planning Department Mr. Michael Sequeira 6 . Draft Statement to CEQ 21 March, 1974. Final Statement ___2 6 AUG 1975 'FINALENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT MAINTENANCE DREDGING (FY 1975-76) Santa Cruz Harbor SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS Par

To this Gate, I gave the name Chrysopylae, or Golden Gate, for the same reasons that the harbor of Byzantium was named Chrys()iccr;IS, or Golden Horn. -John C. Fremont ]oseph]eremiah Hagwood,]r. Historian u.s. Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District 211 Main Street San Francisco, California 94105 Engineers at the GoldenGate i Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data: Hagwood,Joseph]. , Engineers at the Golden Gate Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. San Francisco District - History. I. Title. lIG2'i .C2H33 358'.2'09'9'i61 81-16991(AACR2) PACIFIC OCE!\.'\ US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District :\E\ADA ii iii PREFACE FOREWORD I LOCATION II DISCOVERY III ACQUISITION IV FOUNDATION vi viii Fortification Lighthouses 1 7 15 21 22 36 43 49 74 Maps and Roads Harbor Development Shipping on the Redwood Coast V GROWTH 97 Rivers and Harbors 1900-1950 104 Oakland 104 Richmond 124 San Pablo Bay 134 Napa River 142 Petaluma 143 San Rajael 143 Redwood City 148 San Francisco 150 Drift Collection 153 Treasure Island 158 Crescent City to Monterey 1900-1950 167 Crescent City Harbor 169 Humboldt Harbor 175 Noyo River Harbor 186 Bodega Bay 191 Monterey Bay 196 Moss Landing Harbor 202 VI MILITARY 209 Earthquake 1906 210 World War [ and the Great Depression }(:ars 212 World War II 235 Korea and the Cold War 256 VII FLOOD CONTROL 275 Policy 276 Floods 279 Flood Control Projects 292 Multi-Purpose Projects 307 Warm Sp rings Dam 316 Studies 322 VIII NAVIGATION 325 Reber Plan and Bay Model 326 Bay Area Harbors 330 North Coast Harbors 339 Harbors South of San Francisco Bay 352 Studies 356 IX ENVIRONMENT 359 Postal Construction Program 369 APPENDICES 377 BIBLIOGRAPHY 411 DISTRICT ENGINEERS 445 INDEX 446 v Preface The San Francisco District was established in 1866 when Major ~.S. Will.iamson was designated "Officer-in-Charge" with authorIty for flver and harbor work on the Pacific Coast. With Lieutenant William H. Heuer to assist h

US Army Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division Water Resources Development in Nevada 1989 TC 423 . A15 NEVADA 1989 Water Resources Development in Nevada 1989 U.S. ARMY CORPS Of ENGINEERS SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION 630 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111-2206 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District 300 N. Los Angeles Street Los Angeles, CA 90012-3308 (P.O. Box 2711) Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento District 650 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814-4794 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District 211 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94105-1905 HECSA TECHNICAL LIBRARY Bristlecone Pine, silhouetted against Wheeler Peak (Nevada's second highest mountain at 13,063 feet) in Great Basin national Park, NV. Bristlecone Pines —Wheeler Peak's 150-acre bristlecone forest—are considered the oldest living things on earth, some being more than 4,000 years old. (Photo by Nevada Commission on Tourism) This publication is authorized by the Secretary of the Army as required by PL 99-662 Letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Partnership has changed the way we do business. It has committed us to pursue new strategies to deal with old problems. We are also finding that partnerships mean results. With a program of more than $3 billion annually for civil works projects, the Army Corps of Engineers is the largest water resources development and management agency in the Federal Government. The civil works program consists of water resources project activities— planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance, and regulatory program activities. Numerous navigation and flood control projects serve additional purposes. The Corps produces nearly 30 percent of the Nation's hydropower. One hundred fifteen Corps lakes store 275.2 million acre-feet of water for agricultural, municipal and industrial use. In the 1930s and 1940s, many of the Corps reservoirs were built for a host of benefits, including reducing flood sta

ENVIRONMENTALSTATEMENT Fisherman's Wharf AreaSan Francisco Harbor, California FEASIBILITY REPORT , CB 2 F ',281 BREAKWATER STUDY FOR LIGHT-DRAFTNAVIGATION DECEMBER 1977 • SUMMARY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEHENT FISHERNAN' S WHARF AREA SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT( ) DRAFT ( ) REVISED DRAF'!' (X) U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco, CaliforniaResponsible Office: 1. Name of Action: ( ) Administrative (x) Legislative Fishing Craft Harbor, consisting of a 700­foot (210m) concrete pile and baffle breakwater extending from the solid portion of the Hyde Street Pier, a 1,200-foot (370m) concrete sheet pile breakwater extending from the baffled breakwater, with a 10-foot (3m) wide concrete walkway and a 370-foot (110m) concrete pile and baffle breakwater extenJing along the bayward end of Pier 45. 2. Description of Action: • 3. a. Environmental Impacts: Construction of breakwater structures would displace an area of the benthos; water circulation patterns would be altered; altered habitat provided fo-r sessile organisms; commercial fishing activities would be encouraged by rehabilitation and improvement of existing conditions in the wharf area; secondary effects on vehicular and pedestrian traffic; recreational opportunities would be increased by pier fishing access, wave protection for historic vessels; relocation of the vessels on State Historic Maritime Park during construction. b. Adverse Environmental Effects: Conmiitment of 5,400 square feet (490 sq. m.) of natural benthos; displacement of fishing vessels from other nearby harbors. No-action; dry land storage; floating breakwaters;4. Alternatives: concrete pile and baffled breakwater for fishing ::!'aft harbor; rubble­mound breakwaters for fishing craft harbor; solid concrete sheet pile break<.rnters for fishing craft harbor; combined concrete sheet pile and baffled breakwater for recreation vessel and fishing craft harbor . • • 5. f:;',omments Received (District Review): Departme

srxrn-E TO 1moH lT CONCERNS : DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Solt.N FFIANCI SCO DISTRICT, COOPS OF E>lOlNEE RS 211 MAIN STREET SAN FFt.ANCISCO, CAI.IFOANIA 94105 f ):~:j:s~ #MN<' r 8?a9B9a , .. ; : ',~Ii ~~ .... _... ... I••· ,. JAN ,· 7 ·1ser l. Th e atcilched Supple111en tal Infor mation Report provides addition:11 1nformation t o tha Final Environmental Stt\.Cement for t:l, e Walnut Cnek Project , Con tra Costa County, Califot"nia , whi ch was distributed in J uly 1977 by the San Frt'.ncisc:o District, Cor ps of Engineers. 2 . This Suppl+:niental l n( ormation Rcpcrt uas pr~ par-ed to nddress a change i n thr:. proposed p lan a long tiC:t.: tions of Pine and Galindo Creeks i n t he City of Concord. Ti,e o r iginal plan would hava bC(!i'I a covered rect angul,n: con­crete chanl\el with lan

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Proposed BarracksNumbers 098, 119, and 124 Presidio of San Francisco, California JUNE 1987 U.S. ArmyPresidio of San Francisco US Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento DistrictFINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT HEADQUARTERS PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94129 PROPOSED BARRACKS NUMBERS 098,119,AND 124, PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO PREPARED BY: SACRAMENTO DISTRICT, CORPS of ENGINEERSforHEADQUARTERS, PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO APPROVAL RECOMMENDED BY:CLIFFORD N. GOFFCOLONEL, U.S. ARMYDIRECTOR, ENGINEERING and HOUSING PRESIDIO OF SAN FRANCISCO DATE APPROVED BY:JOSEPH V. RAFFERTY COLONEL, U.S.ARMY COMMANDING PRESIDIO Of SAN FRANCISCO DATEFINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT LEAD AGENCY - Headquarters, Presidio of San Francisco TITLE OF PROPOSED ACTION AND AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Proposed barracks Numbers 098, 119, and 124 Presidio of SanFrancisco, California ABSTRACT This report documents the environmental impacts of the development of three barracks projects proposed for construction within the Main Post area of the Presidio. Facilities would be provided for housing approximately 600 bachelor enlisted personnel and for dining, supply and operations facilities required to support these soldiers. The 098 barracks project would contain 10 barracks modules for 313 persons, a dining facility , and two administrative buildings. The 119 project would consist of two barracks (8 modules) for 167 persons; these would be •medical staff who would dine at the Letterman Army Medical Complex. Design of the 124 barracks project was recently initiated. It would be one barracks (5 modules) building for 120 persons and these soldiers would utilize the dining facilities planned as part of the 098 project. These new barracks would replace present older barracks facilities that are Inadequate, contain life-safety hazards, do not meet current seismic standards, and are difficult and expensive to operate and maintain. Alternatives of no action, rehabilitat

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYSAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREETSAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94105 SPNED-E/SPNCO-R SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT TO THEPORT SONOMA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT TO WHOM IT CONCERNS: 1. The attached Supplemental Information Report provides additional information concerning the Environmental Statement (ES) for the Port Sonoma Marina Development, (Permit No. 75-212-039), which was distri­buted in February 1977, by the San Francisco District of the Corps of Engineers. 2. This Supplemental Information Report has been prepared to address the issue of potential growth-inducement of a related permit applica­tion by Shellmaker, Incorporated. Shellmaker proposes to install a 2 1/2-inch private water supply pipeline under the Petaluma River (PN 12548-39) and connect it with an existing 1 1/2-inch meter on the Marin County (south) side of the river, which is serviced by the North Marin Municipal Water District (NMMWD). This water pipeline would supply water to the Port Sonoma Marina Development. The issue of potential growth-inducement was not discussed in the Port Sonoma ES, since at the time of ES preparation the applicant, (Shellmaker, Inc.), indicated that no external water or sewage utility connections would be needed for the development. 1 Inclosure As stated C/JOHN M. ADSIT / Colonel, CE( District EngineerSUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT FOR THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT, PORT SONOMA DEVELOPMENT, SONOMA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1. INTRODUCTIONThis Supplemental Information Report reviews the potential for growth­inducing impacts of a San Francisco District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit application (PN #12548-39) by Shellmaker, Incorporated, to install a private domestic water supply pipeline near Elack Point, in Sonoma County, California. The pipeline would cross beneath the Petaluma River ,the boundary between Marin and Sonoma Counties. This Report supplements the Final Environ­mental Statement (FES) (dated January 1977)

wo [?w©mr THE SHORELANDS GENERAL POLICIES PLAN AMENDMENT 83-23 ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION 83-24 - Public Notice No. 15283E49 WO MARCH 1987 prepared forCITY OF HAYWARD U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS byCOLE/MILLS ASSOCIATES in association with ALAN KROPP and ASSOCIATES MUNDIE and ASSOCIATES, INC.OMNi-MEANS, INC.RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC. WESTERN ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMPANY, INC.DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYSAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREETSAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 9*105 - 1905 Environmental Branch March 19, 1937 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/STATEMENT THE SHORELANDS Regulatory Permit Application by The Shorelands Corporation Hayward, Alameda County, California 1. As described in Public Notice No. 15283E59 dated June 1, 1984, The Shorelands Corporation, Hayward, California has applied for a Department of the Army permit under Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C.403) and under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) to construct a horse racing facility, theme park, and other commercial development at the Baumberg Tract in the city of Hayward, Alameda County, California adjacent to San Francisco Bay. The overall project involves approximately 1256 acres, including approximately 690 acres to be developed for commercial and light industrial uses and roads and approximately 566 acres to be used for public parks and wildlife habitat. 2. In accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190), the Corps of Engineers has prepared a joint Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) on the proposed activity in cooperation with the City of Hayward. A Notice of Intent to prepare a Draft EIR/EIS was distributed on September 5, 1984. The Draft EIR/EIS is now available and is being distributed to Federal agencies which have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any of the environmental impacts involved; appropr

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT COYOTE CREEKFLOOD CONTROL SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA January 1987FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT COYOTE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROPOSAL SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LEAD AGENCY: U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT COVER SHEET ABSTRACT An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), was required to process an application for a Department of the Army permit (no. 15336S12) submitted by the Santa Clara Valley Water District, San Jose, California for a proposal to construct flood control facilities on Coyote Creek in the southern San Francisco Bay region. Legislative authorities applicable to this regulatory permit action are Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1344). The structural flood control alternatives evaluated in-depth in this final EIS would involve construction of earthen bypass and overflow channels, and earthen levees along a 6.5 mile stretch of the Creek to provide protection frail major flooding. Implementation of the applicant’s recommended alternative, the "Proposed Project" alternative, would result in displacement of aquatic and wetland habitat, removal of approximately 14 acres of the riparian trees in the project area, adverse effects on fish and wildlife, and impacts to habitat of an endangered species. A mitigation program developed to canpensate for the adverse environmental effects Includes establishment of wetland and upland habitat, planting of 42 acres with riparian species, and protection and long-tem management of endangered species habitat. LEAD ACENCY CONTACTS Frank Kelleher, Regulatory Action Officer San Francisco DistrictCorps of Engineers 211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105-1905Telephone (415) 974-0424FTS 454 -042 4 Richard Stradford, EIS Coordinator San Francisco DistrictCorps of Engineers 211 Main StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105-1905 Telephone (415) 974-0445FTS 454 -04 4 5 REVIEW PERIO

US Army Corps of EngineersSan Francisco DistrictDRAFT COYOTE AND BERRYESSA CREEKS INTERIM FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTGUADALUPE RIVER AND ADJACENT STREAMS INVESTIGATIONSANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICTDECEMBER 1986DRAFT INTERIM FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Recommended Plans for Flood Control Coyote and Berryessa Creeks Santa Clara County, California The responsible lead agency is the U.S. Army Engineer District, San Francisco. This combined Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement complies with the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Council on Environmental Quality, and is intended to reduce duplication. ABSTRACT Covote Creek. The lower Coyote Creek study area is located in the Cities of San Jose and Milpitas, Santa Clara County, south of San Francisco Bay. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, has investigated public concerns regarding flood prevention for Coyote Creek, and associated environmental Impacts. Twelve preliminary structural and non-structural plans were considered to address the flooding from Coyote Creek; four alternatives, including No Action, were selected for detailed study. The Alternate Sides Overflow Channel and Offset Levees Plan meets the planning objectives of prevention of human suffering and possible loss of life, and reduction of damages due to flooding from Coyote Creek. It would include hiking and bicycling trails, and other recreational amenities, to provide aesthetic quality and other recreational values on the east levee along Coyote Creek, and it would reduce floodproofing costs for the Rincon de Los Esteros Redevelopment project. The Alternate Sides Plan was tentatively selected as the recommended plan because it meets all of the planning objectives, and It is the plan which maximizes the net economic development benefits. It would mitigate for adverse environmental impacts includin

US Army Corps of EngineersSan Francisco District July 1985 FINAL GUADALUPE RIVER INTERIM FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATEMENT GUADALUPE RIVER AND ADJACENT STREAMS INVESTIGATIONBERH-PLN DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYBOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS KINGMAN BUILDINGFORT BELVOIR. VIRGINIA 2104&—9S7« REFL* TO ATTENTION OF: 29 June 1986 SUBJECT: Guadalupe River and Adjacent Streams, California Chief of Engineers Department of the Army Washington, DC 20314-1000 SUMMARY OF BOARD ACTION The Board concurs in the recommendations of the reporting officers regarding improvements for flood control along the Guadalupe River in San Jose, California. The proposed plan consists of 2.5 miles of channel improvements providing 100-year-frequency flood protection to a portion of downtown San Jose. Total first cost of the channel improvements is estimated at $33,015,000, of which $15,386,000 would be non-Federal under traditional cost-sharing polices. The benefit-cost ratio is 1.4. The Board recommends the proposed plan subject to cost­sharing and financing arrangements satisfactory to the President and the Congress. SUMMARY OF REPORT UNDER REVIEW 1. AUTHORITY. The study of Guadalupe River and Adjacent Streams was conducted as part of an ongoing study authorized by section 4 of the Flood Control Act of 1941 quoted in the District Engineer's report. 2. DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA. The study area encompasses the 160-square-mile drainage area of the Guadalupe River in central California. The stream rises in southwestern Santa Clara County, flows generally in a northerly direction, and empties into the south end of San Francisco Bay in the vicinity of San Jose. The upstream portion of the drainage basin is characterized by steep mountains that reach elevations of almost 4,000 feet above sea level. In the downstream area, the basin is a large alluvial valley that has been urbanizing rapidly. 3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Santa Clara County is a mix of rural steep mountainous terra

US Army Corps of EngineersSan Francisco DistrictDRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTCOYOTE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROPOSALSANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIAVOLUME ONE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT AUGUST 1986DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT COYOTE CREEK FLOOD CONTROL PROPOSAL SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LEAD AGENCY: U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT COVER SHEET ABSTRACT This draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), was required to process an application for a Department of the Army permit (no. 15336S12) submitted by the Santa Clara Valley Water District, San Jose, California for a proposal to construct flood control facilities on Coyote Creek in the southern San Francisco Bay region. Legislative authorities applicable to this regulatorypermit action are Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1344). The feasible, structural flood control alternatives described in the permit application would involve construction of earthen bypass and overflow channels, and earthen levees along a 6.5 mile stretch of the Creek to provide protection from major flooding. Significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project alternative include elimination of aquatic and wetland habitat, removal of approximately 15% of the existing riparian trees in the project area, and adverse effects on rare and/or endangered species. Mitigation measures proposed to compensate for these adverse environmental effects include establishment of wetland and upland habitat, a program of vegetation planting with riparian species, and protection and long-term management of endangered species habitat. LEAD AGENCY CONTACTS Frank Kelleher, Regulatory Action OfficerSan Francisco District Corps of Engineers 211 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94105-1905 Telephone (415) 974-0424 FTS 454-0424 Richard Stradford, EIS Coordinator San Francisco DistrictCorps of Engineers21

~[l@@ [p) .·~~[f)[l~a ~ ~ ,-n•, _rM , ' [f @OO ~~ 1ra@ ~ 'l'-KINITY RIVER LEWISTON LAKE TO JUNCTION CITY APRIL 1976 I PREFACE .......• BACKGROUND INFORMATION. Settlement ..... TABLE OF CONTENTS The First Discovery of Gold. River and Creek Mining The Stream and Its Valley. Developments in the Flood Plain. FLOOD SITUATION Page 2 3 5 6 Sources of Data and Records 6 Flood Season and Flood Characteristics. 7 Factors Affecting Flooding and Its Impact. 7 Obstructions to flood flows. . 7 Other factors and their impacts. . I I FI ood warning and forecasting. • I I Flood-fighting and emergency evacuation plans. 11 Material storage on the flood plain I I Flood damage reduct ion measures. PAST FLOODS. Summary of Historical Floods. Flood Records Flood Description FUTURE FLOODS . Intermediate Regi onal Flood . . . • II 14 . 14 . 14 14 19 • 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Standard Project Flood . Frequency, ••• Hazards of Large Floods. Flooded areas and flood damages Obstructions ••. Velocities of flow Rates of rise and duration of flooding Photographs of future flood heights GLOSSARY TABLES Number I • Ora I nage Areas . . . . . • 19 20 20 21 21 . 22 • 22 23 . 26 Page 4 2. Flood Crest Elevations - Trinity River at Lewiston 6 3. Flood Crest Elevations - Trinity River at Douglas City 7 4. Storage Capacity - Trinity Dam - Clair Engle Lake. 12 5. Peak Flows for Intermediate Regional and Standard Project Floods . . . • . . • . . . . . . . . 20 6. Elevation Data - Bridges Across Trinity River. 22 7. Rates of Rise and Duration of Flooding (Trinity River) 23 i i I ,._ • .. ,, ---·· "!If \ \ -~ Number 2 3-29 30-36 37-40 TABLE OF CONTENTS PLATES GENERAL MAP FLOOD LI Ml T AND INDEX MAP FLOODED AREAS PROFILES SELECTED CROSS SECTIONS iii (Cont'd) Opposite page At end of report At end of report At end of report At end of report TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) • FIGURES Figure Page v · DOUGLAS CITY BRIDGE 9 2 PRIVATE BRIDGE OFF STEEL BRIDGE ROAD 9 3 BROWNS MOUNTAIN ROAD BRIDGE 10 4 LEWISTON TURNPIKE BR

U. S. HIGHWAY 101 Marin County, California BY JORDAN/MATHIS AND ASSOCIATES V'Jl'TE.i:, 1, ­f. ~~..._.., .. ; I CONSULTING ENGINEERS REPORT ,_ --· SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA , ' . UNDE c,9)NTRACT TO THE U~ ARMY E~_!PJ_3ER DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO CORPS OF ENGINEERS JUNE 1975 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE • • • • • . • • BACKGROUND INFORMATION .Settlement The Stream and Its Valley. Development in the Flood Plain FLOOD SITUATION Sources of Data and Records. . . . . .. . Flood Season and Flood Characteristics Factors Affecting Flooding and Its Impact •• Obstructions to flood flows •••• Flood damage reduction measures Other Factors and Their Impacts ••• Flood warning and forecasting PAST FLOODS Flood fighting and emergency evacuation plans Material storage on flood plain Summary of Historical Floods Flood Records •• Flood Description. FUTURE FLOODS •••• Intermediate Regional Flood Standard Project Storm and Flood Frequency . ..•......••. 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 7 8 8 9 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Hazards of Large Floods GLOSSARY. Table No. 1 Plate No. 1 2 3-5 6-8 9-10 Flooded areas and Flood Damages. Obstructions Velocities of Flow Hydraulic Studies. Photographs of future flood heights. TABLES . . . . Drainage Areas, Peak Discharges, Intermediate Regional and 500 Year Floods •.•..•.. PLATES General Map of the Study Area. Index Map •• Flooded Areas. Water Surface Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . Selected Cross Sections Page 9 10 10 10 11 12 18 8 Follows Contents At end of report At end of report At end of report At end of report .,.. .. Figure No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Box Culvert • • • • • • . . . . "' . . . . . Outlet of five culverts draining the Basalt area Inlet Double Box Culvert near Atherton Avenue Culverts at mouth of Rush Creek .. . . . . Inlet of Gated Culvert draining area B Additional 36-Inch Culvert to be installed at mouth of Rush Creek •••• Novato Pump Station. Flood Potential in the Ponding area along Frontage Road Backyard o

US Army Corps of Engineers TECHNICAL REPORT HL-86-10 c-/ SAN LORENZO RIVER SEDIMENTATION STUDY Numerical Model Investigation by Ronald R. Copeland Hydraulics Laboratory STATION. THOUSAND FT DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers PO Box 631, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631 Prepared for US Army Engineer District, San Francisco San Francisco, California 94105-1905 .M U '* '87 Bureau of Kecla^^,on Oenvtf. Coterado Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator. The findings in this report are not to be construed as an officia Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, or promotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an officia! endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. a BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DENVER UBRARY <2-1 *12007047 Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No 0704-0188 Exp. Date Jun 30, 1986 1a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified 1b. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS 2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 2b. DECLASSIFICATION / DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) Technical Report HL-86-10 5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION USAEWES-Hydraulics Laboratory 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable) WESHP 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION 6c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) PO Box 631 Vicksburg, MS 39180-0631 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 8a. NAME OF FUNDING / SPONSORING ORGANIZATION USAE District, San Francisco 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable) 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT San Francisco, CA 94105-1905 ELEMENT NO.

TECHNICAL REPORT HL-88-27 US Army Corps of Engineers SAN FRANCISCO BAY: MODELING SYSTEM FOR DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL AND HYDRAULIC TRANSPORT by Virginia R. Pankow Hydraulics Laboratory DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers PO Box 631, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39181-0631 November 1988 Final Report Approved For Public Release; Distribution Unlimited prepared for US Army Engineer District, San Francisco San Francisco, California 94105-1905 When this report is no longer needed return it to the originator. The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, orpromotional purposes. Citation of trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of the use of such commercial products. Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 1a. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified 16. RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS 2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 2b. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) Technical Report HL-88-27 5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION USAEWES Hydraulics Laboratory 6b. OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable) CEWES-HE-E 7a. NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION 6c. ADDRESS (City,, State, and ZIP Code) PO Box 631 Vicksburg, MS 39181-0631 7b. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 8a. NAME OF FUNDING /SPONSORING ORGANIZATION USAED, San Francisco 8b. OFFICE SYMBOL (If applicable) 9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 211 Main Street 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT ELEMENT NO. NO. NO. ACCESSION NO. •1905 11. TITLE (Include Security Classification) San Fran

i Efhnohotanical Mitigation Warm Springs Dam - L a k e Sonoma C a l ifo rn ia David W. Pe r i Scot t M. P a t t e r so n Jenn ie L. Goodr ich L M3 R ARY JAN 1 5 Í1385 I Bureau ot Reclamation Denver, C o ln r*^ BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DENVER LIBRARY w\ TEDlSlöfi ETHNOBOTANICAL MITIGATION; WARM SPRINGS DAM - LAKE SONOMA, CALIFORNIA by DAVID W. PERI SCOTT M. PATTERSON JENNIE L. GOODRICH Chapters 1 and 7 by RICHARD N. LERNER Edited by ELGAR HILL and RICHARD N. LERNER Prepared by ''l/Elgar Hill, Environmental Analysis & Planning'Z/ Penngrove, California JULY 1982 2nd printing, May 1983 92012188 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Peri, David W., 1939- Ethnobotanical mitigation, Warm Springs Dam— Lake Sonoma, California. "Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District"— P. "July 1982." Bibliography: p. 1. Porno Indians— Basket making. 2. Porno Indians — Religion and mythology. 3. Ethnobotany— California— Sonoma County. 4. Indians of North America— California— Sonoma County— Basket making. 5. Indians of North America— California— Sonoma County— Religion and mythology. I. Patterson, Scott M., 1952- . II. Goodrich, Jennie. III. Hill, Elgar. IV. Lernet, Richard N. V. United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. San Francisco District. VI. Title. E99.P65P47 1982 639.9?9 82-16336 ABSTRACT This is one of a number of cultural resource and vegetative management reports, sponsored by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, designed to mitigate for adverse impacts on and describe the manage­ment of the cultural and natural resources of the Warm Springs Dam - Lake Sonoma project area, Sonoma County, California. This report describes the events leading up to the Corps' ethnobotanical research in the project area; experimental transplant program which was concerned in particular with two plants significant in making Pomoan baskets (sedge, Carex barbare, and white willow, Salix hindsiana ) , and two plants significant in Pomoan religion and

J )HE EF'F'I;;CT.3 OF FF..ESHWATER TI1MERSION ON CULTUHAL RESOURCES OF 'IHE COYOTE DAM-LAKE MENIOCINO PROJECT AREA, UKIAH, CALIFORNIAJ A Report of the Lake Mendocino Cultural Resource Inundation Study Jerry L. Cox Associate Investigator Victoria D. Kaplan A::ii.;oc~ato I nvl'mt.i p;nt.nr Scott H. Patterson Staff Ethnologist Ethnographic LaboratOI""'J Steven E. Stoddard Staff Archaeologist Anthropology Laboratory Submitted Under the Auspices of .:(David A. Fredrickson 4.,,,._cf ~,J/:i,,.,.,_ ""' Principal Investigator ~ Prepared in Satisfaction of a Contract between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, Development Inc., Rohnert Park, California. ~June 1977 I\ COYOTE DAM - LAKE MENDOCINU The r:ffects of Freshwater Immersion on Cultural Resources of Coyote Dam - Lake Mendocino, Ukiah, California was written in fulfillm~nt - of a contract between the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District and the Foundation for Educational Development, Inc. at the California State College in Sonoma. Dr. David N. Fredrickson, professor of anthropology at the college, was the principal investi­gator. This report documents the physical and chemical impacts which have affected the cultural resources located within the Coyote Dam impoundment. This research project was undertaken at no cost to the National .Reservoir lnundation Study, and the results of the investigation were structured to dovetail into the ongoing research of the study. Many of the specific hYPothcsos and test impl i c;itiom; prosontad in the lrmnr:!Htion Study P1tll.LllliUUl}' RcpO.!.'L \vet~ ct

) \., \) ~ ~ ~ ' ti> <('/) ~ ~ \...~.. ... \o ~ 6o ~ ~ 5 . Supplementary J:nvestigations into the Etf'ects of Freshwater Immersion on Ou.ltural. Resources of' the Lake Mendocino Reservoir Basin, Mendocino County,. CalltonJia. 3 {' Steven B. ,~toddard David A. F.redrickaon{' Th• ~tbropology Laboratory nom.a State Collll'": Rohnert Park, CalltOrnia 1Jul.7, im+ Submitted in partial satisfaction ot Contract DACW07-78-C-0009, Corps.of Engine.-111, San Francisco District and . Parchase Order Pr/0'29-7-a?f73, National. Park Service Southwest Region, Santa Fe, New Mexico ,. ~ LAKE MENDOCINO RESERVOIR Supplementary Investigations into the Effects of Freshwater Immer­sion on Cultural Resources of the Lake Mendocino Reservoir Basin, Mendocino Countx, California, was written in fulfillment of a cooperatively funded contract by the San Francisco District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Reservoir Inundation Study (NRIS) with the Foundation for Educational Development, California State College, Sonoma. Dr. David A. Fredrickson acted as principal investigator~ and Stephen E. Stoddard directed field operations. The report presents the results of archeo1ogica1 in­vestigations into the mechanical impacts, differential preservation, and site preparation for re-flooding, of several prehistoric and historic sites that have been subjected to freshwater immersion be­tween 1957 and 1976. These sites became available for research as a resu1t of the recent prolonged drought in the west. Following the winter rains of 1977 - 1978~ these sites were re-inundated by Lake Mendocino. A total of six archeological sitei were located and prepared accord­ing to the Guidelines Chapter of the Preliminary Report of the Na­tional Reservoir Inundation Study. Information gathered on mechan­ical impacts through field observation was compared to predicted impacts out1ined in the Preliminary Report. The Relat·ive Impact Chart~ which outlines a matrix of soil types and erosional factors, was used

TC 423 .S28 1978a c.3 f'\....- '123 .s2r 17-iP'a-c. l WINTER STORM DAMAGE ALONG THE CALIFORNIA COAST 1977-1978 SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT LOS ANGELES DISTRICT PREPARED BY GEORGE W. DOMURAT SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT SUBJECT INTRODUCTION THE STORMS Heterology Waves Tides COASTAL DAMAGE Seasonal Changes Beach Profiles Damage to North Coast Damage to South Coast CONCLUSION CALIFORNIA COAST STORM DAMAGE WINTER 1977-78 TABLE OF CONTENTS i PAGE l 1 1 3 4 5 5 5 6 8 11 FIGURE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 TABLE 1 2 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) SATELLITE PHOTOS WAVE POWER vs. TIME REFRACTION DIAGRAM SEASONAL CHANGES AT SANTA CRUZ SEASONAL CHANGES AT SANTA CRUZ SUMMER AND WINTER CONDITIONS WINTER SHORELINE (Santa Cruz) SUM}ffiR SHORELINE (Santa Cruz) LOCATION OF PROFILES HYDROSURVEYS (Santa Cruz) HYDROSURVEYS (Santa Cruz) PIER PROFILES (Imperial Beach Pier) PIER PROFILES (Imperial Beach Pier) PIER PROFILES (Imperial Beach Pier) PIER PROFILES (Hueneme Pier) PIER PROFILES (Ventura Pier) SOUTH JETTY, HUMBOLDT HARBOR DISPLACED BOULDER, HUMBOLT JETTY HORGAN POINT BRIDGE MATTOLE ROAD SAND BAGGING AT SEADRIFT PROTECTION OF THE DUNE SCARP CLIFF EROSION AT PACIFICA BLUFF EROSION AT EL GRANADA EROSION AT POTBELLY BEACH UNDERHINING OF STRUCTURES OCEANSIDE BEACH EROSION AT OCEANSIDE BEACH DAMAGE TO OCEANSIDE PIER NORTH JETTY OCEANSIDE HARBOR SOUTH JETTY OCEANSIDE HARBOR SOUTH JETTY OCEANSIDE HARBOR EROSION AT EL SEGUNDO BEACH EROSION AT MALIBU BEACH DAMAGE AT VENTURA MARINA DAMAGE TO COAST HIGHWAY LIST OF TABLES WIND AND WAVE HEIGHT WAVE HEIGHT, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUMMARY OF WAVE DAMAGE COST ii FOLLOWS PAGE 2 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 PAGE 2 4 10 APPENDIX A TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) APPENDIX REPORT BY CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION iii INTRODUCTION California experienced significant coastal damage during the winter of January and February 1978. A combination of high astronomical tide

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105 Environmental Branch FEB 21984 Supplemental Information Report Acme Landfill Expansion Contra Costa County, California January 1984 1. Acme Fill Corporation has applied for a Department of the Army permit to place dredged material and landfilled wastes on 173.7 acres of land adjacent to the existing Acme Landfill located approximately two miles east of Martinez, California, adjacent to Walnut and Pacheco Creeks. Acme Fill Corporation’s current application which was announced in Public Notice No. 13881E59 (Revised) issued December 19, 1983, is a modification of a previous application which was announced in Public Notice No. 13881E59 issued August 13, 1982. In June 1983, the Corps of Engineers circulated a Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Inpact Statement (FEIR/EIS) regarding the proposed expansion of Acme Landfill. The FEIR/EIS was prepared in cooperation with the Contra Costa County Planning Department. The purpose of this Supplemental Information Report is to provide interested parties with information regarding changes in the environmental impacts of the proposed project due to Acme Fill Corporation’s modification of its application. The attached Environmental Evaluation describes the modifications to the proposed project in detail and discusses differences between the environmental effects of the current proposed project and those described in the FEIR/EIS. Pursuant to the Corps of Engineers’ Policy and Procedures for Implementing NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) (33 CFR 230), this Supplemental Information Report is being filed with the Environmental Protection Agency and circulated to concerned agencies and the interested public who provided comments on the Draft or Final EIR/EIS. 2. As announced in Public Notice No. 13831E59 (Revised), the Corps of Engineers will conduct a public hearing on Acme Fill Corporation’s application

DRAFT FEASIBILITY STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OAKLAND INNER HARBOR CALIFORNIA DEEP-DRAFT NAVIGATION AUG 02 1983 %'SCH\U>£> United States Army Corps of Engineers ...Serving the Army ...Serving the Nation San Francisco District JULY 1983 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 211 MAIN STREET SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105 OAKLAND INNER HARBOR ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DEEP DRAFT NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENTS DRAFT FEASIBILITY STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SYLLABUS The purpose of this study is to investigate navigation conditions at Oakland Inner Harbor and to determine whether the provision for improvement of existing deep-draft channels is advisable. Oakland Inner Harbor Channel provides deep-draft access for the Port of Oakland. It was found that the growth of foreign and coastwise shipments and the introduction of larger vessels in the World Pacific Basin Fleet have rendered the existing Federal project channel and turning basin inadequate and inefficient for modern transportation needs. Traveling and maneuvering of the vessels are restricted and the channel is too shallow for larger containerships which must await high tide to navigate the channel. Various solutions to the navigation problems in the Oakland Inner Harbor Channel were analyzed. The most practicable and feasible plan consists of deepening the existing Oakland Inner Harbor Channels, from -35 feet, mean lower low water (MLLWj, to -43 feet, MLLW, and widening the channel at a number of places to permit optimum utility of restricted channel dimensions. The estimated total cost of the selected plan is $27.1 million. Using a 7-7/8 percent discount rate and 50-year period of economic evaluation, the annual charges would be $2.2 million, and the annual project benefits are $34.9 million. Therefore, the benefit/cost ratio would be 15.9 to 1. It Is recommended that the foregoing plan of improvement be adopted as a modification of the existing Federal project for Oakla

c^' -S'4 A* FRAACZSCO BA Y TO ^WCA'? C77r-------- CAFZFORAZA PROJECT b —tnn rnt—,r DRAFT JAN 9 1984 ' S40 DO^ b ^*^^^**"** INTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM No. 5 AND ENVtRONMENTAL !MPACT STATEMENT JOHN F. BALDWIN SH!P CHANNEL PHASE H CENTRAL SAN FRANCISCO BAY SEGMENT DECEMBER 1983 US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District SAN FRANCISCO BAY-TO-STOCKTON CALIFORNIA (JOHN F. BALDWIN & STOCKTON SHIP CHANNELS) DRAFT INTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL PHASE II CENTRAL SAN FRANCISCO BAY SEGMENT December 1983 Department of the Army San Francisco District, Corps of Engineers San Francisco, CaliforniaINTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL PHASE II CENTRAL SAN FRANCISCO BAY SEGMENT DESIGN MEMORANDUM No. Date Title __________________________ Approved 1. Sept 80 Avon to Stockton 18 Dec 81 2. Nov 68 Bank Protection 20 Dec 68 3. June 69 Levee Setbacks 6 Jan 70 4. Apr 71 San Francisco Bar 17 Aug 71 5. Nov 83 West Richmond Channel & Richmond Long Wharf 6. San Pablo Bay and Mare Island Strait 7. Carqumez Strait and Suisun Bay ChannelsINTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 JOHN F. BALDWIN PHASE II Pertinent Data of Recommended Plan 1. GENERAL DATA Name Authorization San Francisco Bay to Stockton, California (John F. Baldwin and Stockton Ship Channels) River and Harbor Act of 1965 Public Law 89-298 2. Water Body Counties and State Purpose Local Sponsor NAVIGATION DATA Location San Francisco Bay Contra Costa and San Francisco, California Navigation Contra Costa County Central San Francisco Bay near Richmond, California Length Depth 1.1 miles (Maneuvering Area, irregular) -45 feet MLLW Bottom Width 600 Feet Side Slopes IV on 3H 3. a. Dredging Disposal ECONOMIC DATA First Costs Federal Non-Federal 7,900,000 cys Aquatic at Alcatraz Site (SF-11). $41,700,000 1,450,000 Disposal - Total $43,150,000 b. Inst. Dur. Const. 2,730,000 c. Annual Cost (50 years $ 3-1/4X) (50 years 0 7-7/3) C

SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCK f<5^ CALIFORNIA PROJECT 1 FINAL INTERIM DESIGN MEM0RANDU1VrN^"5^-^ AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL PHASE II RICHMOND HARBOR APPROACH MAY 1984 US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District imm rasa BEST »£« SAN FRANCISCO BAY-TO-STOCKTON I CALIFORNIA I (JOHN F. BALDWIN & STOCKTON SHIP CHANNELS) I FINAL I INTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 I AND I ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL PHASE II RICHMOND HARBOR APPROACH May 1984 Department of the Army San Francisco District, Corps of Engineers San Francisco, CaliforniaINTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT I JOHN F. BALDWIN SHIP CHANNEL I PHASE II I RICHMOND HARBOR APPROACH I DESIGN MEMORANDUM I No. Date Title Approved 1. Sept 80 Avon to Stockton 18 Dec 81 2. Nov 68 Bank Protection 20 Dec 68 3. June 69 Levee Setbacks 6 Jan 70 4. Apr 71 San Francisco Bar 17 Aug 71 5. May 84 Richmond Harbor Approach 6. San Pablo Bay and Mare Island Strait 7. Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay ChannelsINTERIM DESIGN MEMORANDUM NO. 5 JOHN F. BALDWIN PHASE II Pertinent Data of Recommended Plan 1. GENERAL DATA Name San Francisco Bay to Stockton, California (John F. Baldwin and Stockton Ship Channels) Authorization River and Harbor Act of 1965 Public Law 89-298 Water Body San Francisco Bay Counties and State Contra Costa and San Francisco, California Purpose Navigation Local Sponsor Contra Costa County 2. NAVIGATION DATA Location Central San Francisco Bay near Richmond, California Length 1.1 miles (Maneuvering Area, irregular) Depth -45 feet MLLW Bottom Width 600 Feet Side Slopes IV on 3H Dredging 8,800,000 cys Disposal Aquatic at Alcatraz Disposal S- e (SF—11). 3. ECONOMIC DATA a. First Costs Federal $41,200,000 Non-Federal 1,300,000 Total $42,500,000 b. Inst. Dur. Const. $ 2,050,000 c. Annual Cost (50 years @ 3-1/4%) (50 years 0 8-1/8) Capital $1,815,000 $3,694,000 0&M 250,000 250,000 Total $2,065,000 $3,944,000 d. Annual Benefits Naviga

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPOR] FOR ROCK REMOVAL BY BLASTING CRESCENT CITY INNER HARBOR BAS! DEL NORTE COUTY, CALIFORNIA JULY 1983 KEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION In order to deepen the inner harbor basin at Crescent City, California, ro -20 feet, mean lower low water (MLLW), as authorized for navigation improvements, it has been determined that rock removal by blasting is required. The Final Supplémentai Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was completed in December 1981 and a mechanical dredging contract was awarded in July 1982. The contracter was not able to reach the authorized 20-foot depth in some portions of the inner harbor basin, leaving about 5,000 cubic yards of rock and 81,000 cubic yards of sand still to be removed. A cost escimace for the blasting work has been developed. It is estimated that about 33 consecutive days of blasting will be necessary. After blasting, material will be dredged to establish the authorized 20 foot depth. This project, as authorized, will provide for more efficient barge shipment of petroleum products into Crescent City Inner Harbor, and will improve the safety margin for navigation of vessel traffic using Crescent Cicy Harbor. It is estimated that the proposed improvements will be sufficienc until the year 2032. The information furnished in the previous FEIS is incorporated as a part of this assessment. SETTING Crescent City is located in Del Norte County, on the California Coast about 230 miles north of San Francisco and 20 miles soiita of the Oregon border. Crescent City Harbor is a 450-acre commercial harbor which consists of a 308-berth small boat basin, a 527-slip mooring facility, fish processing plants and docks, an oil terminal, a small boat repair facility, a Coast Guard pier aad other auxiliary commercial and recreational facilities. The harbor’s naturally crescent-shaped beach is bounded by a 4,700-foot rubble-mound outer breakwater to the west, a 2,400-foot sand barrier ro the east and a 1,600-foot rubble mound inn