preliminary environmental analysis report

PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS REPORT
1. Project Information
District
County
Route
3
Sacramento
50
Project Title:
Hazel Avenue/ Route 50 Interchange Improvements
Project Manager
John Jaeger
Sacramento County Department of Transportation
Project Engineer
Megan Johnson
Mark Thomas and Company, Inc.
Caltrans Environmental Office Chief/Manager
Suzanne Melim
PEAR Preparer
Kevin Messerschmitt
Sacramento County Planning and Environmental Review
Division
Post Mile
15.1/17.5
EA
03-3E380
Phone #
916-874-7507
Phone #
916-381-9100
Phone #
530-741-4484
Phone #
916-874-7941
2. Project Description
The proposed project includes the extension and grade separation of Hazel Avenue over Folsom
Boulevard, Hazel Avenue/ Route 50 interchange ramp modifications and roadway and intersection
improvements to Folsom Boulevard. The project also includes a transition lane on the south side of
Route 50 from Hazel Avenue to Folsom Boulevard and modifications to the eastbound off ramp and
eastbound loop on ramp at the Folsom Boulevard/Route 50 interchange.
The proposed project is to extend a six-lane facility south of Folsom Boulevard by extending Hazel
Avenue and grade separating over the light rail tracks, heavy rail track, Folsom Boulevard, and a future
public street adjacent to the southern railroad right of way. Hazel Avenue will be extended approximately
1,000 feet south of its current southern terminus to a future intersection with the proposed Easton Valley
Parkway which is part of the approved Easton Place development.
Modifications to the Hazel Avenue/ Route 50 interchange will include revisions to the current ramp
configurations as well as structure modifications to the overpass. There are currently three alternatives
being considered for this project, all of which include the grade separation and extension noted above.
The first alternative (Alternative 1) includes an L-9 interchange configuration with a viaduct ramp over
Hazel Avenue to carry eastbound traffic on Route 50 to Aerojet Road. A variation of this alternative
(Alternative 1A) includes an L-9 interchange with an undercrossing beneath Hazel Avenue to carry
eastbound traffic on Route 50 to Aerojet Road. The second alternative (Alternative 2) includes a
modified L-9 interchange with a separate eastbound ramp crossing under Hazel Avenue that contains one
lane continuing east to Aerojet Road and two lanes that split to a flyover north over Route 50. The
flyover will merge with the westbound off ramp and connect with Hazel Avenue.
Revised February 2013
Roadway improvements will be constructed along Folsom Boulevard from approximately 1,900 feet west
of Hazel Avenue to approximately 400 feet east of Hazel Avenue. Roadway improvements include
sidewalks, street lighting, and landscaping along the north side of Folsom Boulevard and landscaping and
lighting along the south side of the roadway.
Purpose and Need
The proposed project is intended to accommodate increased traffic demand generated by approved and
proposed development in the project area. In addition, Hazel Avenue serves as a commuter route from
Route 50 to employment and residential areas in the City of Folsom, Carmichael, City of Citrus Heights,
and City of Rancho Cordova over the American River. Hazel Avenue and other connecting new
roadways will eventually extend south of Folsom Boulevard to provide an alternative parallel roadway to
Route 50.
Traffic demand forecasts for this project were conducted using the Sacramento Area Council of
Government’s (SACOG) 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) projected to 2038 (20 years after
anticipated opening day) and supplemented by anticipated levels of additional development currently in
application or advanced planning stages. Based on these projections, it is anticipated the existing
interchange will degrade to level of service “F”. The proposed alternatives will improve the level of
service to “E”.
Description of work
The proposed project is to extend a six-lane facility south of Folsom Boulevard by extending and grade
separating Hazel Avenue over the light rail tracks, heavy rail track, Folsom Boulevard, and a future public
street adjacent to the southern railroad right of way. Additionally, some alternatives will widen the Hazel
Avenue Overpass of Route 50 and will modify the on and off ramps of the Hazel Avenue/ Route 50
Interchange. The project also includes a transition lane along Route 50 from Hazel Avenue to Folsom
Boulevard that will require widening Route 50 including where Route 50 crosses Alder Creek and where
it crosses over Folsom boulevard. Utility pole relocations will be required to allow for the interchange
extension at Hazel Avenue and Folsom Boulevard.
Alternatives
Eighteen alternatives were ultimately considered for the proposed project during the earliest stages of
planning. Through a peer review collaboration process the number of alternatives was narrowed down to
three that presented the greatest number of advantages. Appendix 1 includes an alternative summary
table as well as brief descriptions and pros and cons for each of the 18 alternatives. The 18 alternatives
were narrowed down to three that were considered better than the others based on right-of-way impacts,
access to Folsom Boulevard businesses, costs and traffic operations. The three alternatives progressed
through traffic analysis and geometric design and were not approved by Caltrans. Three new alternatives
were developed and approved by Caltrans for further study and are described below.
Alternative 1: L-9 Interchange with Viaduct Connector
The first alternative includes an L-9 interchange configuration with a viaduct ramp over Hazel Avenue to
carry eastbound traffic on Route 50 to Aerojet Road. Refer to Exhibit 1.
Alternative 1A: L-9 Interchange with Undercrossing Connector
The second alternative includes an L-9 interchange with an undercrossing beneath Hazel Avenue to carry
eastbound traffic on Route 50 to Aerojet Road. Refer to Exhibit 2.
Alternative 2: Direct Flyover to Hazel with Connector
The third alternative includes a modified L-9 interchange with a separate eastbound ramp crossing under
Hazel Avenue that contains one lane continuing east to Aerojet Road and two lanes that split to a flyover
north over Route 50. The flyover will merge with the westbound off ramp and connect with Hazel
Avenue. Refer to Exhibit 3.
Revised February 2013
Each of these alternatives also includes a new transition lane along Route 50 in the eastbound direction
between the Hazel Avenue interchange and the Folsom Boulevard interchange. This will involve
widening the mainline by one lane, widening the Alder Creek Culvert Bridge, widening the Folsom
Boulevard overcrossing and modifying the EB off-ramp and the EB loop on-ramp. Project related
improvements for the on ramp will extend approximately 1,800 feet east of the Folsom Boulevard/Route
50 interchange. Refer to Exhibit 4.
Revised February 2013
3. Anticipated Environmental Approval
Check the anticipated environmental determination or document for the proposed project in the table below.
CEQA
Environmental Determination
Statutory Exemption
Categorical Exemption
Environmental Document
Initial Study or Focused Initial Study
with proposed Negative Declaration
(ND) or Mitigated ND
Environmental Impact Report
CEQA Lead Agency (if determined):
NEPA
Categorical Exclusion
Routine Environmental Assessment
with proposed Finding of No
Significant Impact
Complex Environmental Assessment
with proposed Finding of No
Significant Impact
Environmental Impact Statement
Sacramento County
Estimated length of time (months) to obtain environmental
approval:
24
Estimated person hours to complete identified tasks:
4. Special Environmental Considerations
The project includes special environmental considerations that may affect the project delivery
and may require unusual, exceptional, or extended environmental processes.
Section 106 of the NHPA. Past studies of properties adjacent to the project site have indicated
that there is a potential for historic resources to be located in the area that may be adversely
affected by the project. Additional studies will be necessary to comply with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act. Because historical sites have been identified in the project
area each of the project alternatives may be subject to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) process through Caltrans.
Section 7 ESA Consultation. Previous biological surveys of the project vicinity have identified
elderberry bushes adjacent to the project site. During a windshield survey for the current project,
additional elderberry bushes were identified within the project site. These bushes, which may
contain special status species, may be subject to impacts resulting from the construction of the
proposed project. A Biological Assessment or Natural Environment Study may be required to
determine biological impacts. Dependent on the results a biological monitor may be required
during certain activities to protect sensitive species or habitats. The consultation and permitting
process may take up to two years to complete, and any applicable permits would be required
prior to project construction.
Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit. Because the proposed project includes modifications to a
culvert at Alder Creek which connects with Lake Natoma and the American River, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers jurisdictional waters are anticipated to be impacted. Depending on the scope
of work an individual permit or nationwide permit may be required prior to project construction.
Revised February 2013
California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. A Streambed
Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for disturbance to
Alder Creek and its associated riparian habitat may also be required for the proposed auxiliary
lane over Alder Creek prior to work related activities within the stream zone.
Revised February 2013
5. Anticipated Environmental Commitments
5.1
Land Use: Each project alternative would require right of way acquisition from
private land owners. At the time right of way for the project is needed based on the
final design, the County will work with landowners to provide fair market value for
the property taken for the project. No additional formal land use related impact
analysis is needed.
5.2
Growth: The project is proposed in order to accommodate programmed and
approved development in the project vicinity and to reduce existing and anticipated
congestion. The project is not considered growth inducing. No additional formal
growth related impact analysis is needed.
5.3
Farmlands/Timberlands: No farmlands or timberlands are in the project vicinity.
No additional formal farmland or timberland related impact analysis is needed.
5.4
Community Impacts: The project area is located adjacent to several commercial
businesses. Minor ROW acquisition is expected to occur for several properties in
order to allow for the proposed interchange improvements. In addition to ROW
acquisition, each alternative will result in structure/ business modifications or
removals.
Alternative 1 and Alternative 1A would result in the removal of a gas station
located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Hazel Avenue and Folsom
Boulevard, the removal of several storage units at a self-storage facility located
between Route 50 and Folsom Boulevard and the removal of a restaurant located
just south of Route 50.
Alternative 2 would result in the removal of a gas station at the northwest corner of
the intersection of Hazel Avenue and Folsom Boulevard, a restaurant just south of
Route 50 and the removal of a large multi-tenant commercial building located at the
at the northeast corner of the intersection of Hazel Avenue and Folsom Boulevard.
The project will also require the relocation of utility lines along Folsom Boulevard.
The project will not adversely affect utilities, emergency services or public facilities
with public agency coordination. The project will not result in a new division or
disruption of a community or alter community character or cohesion. However, due
to the number of businesses and structures that may be affected, a community
impact assessment for this project will be required to analyze impacts related to
business relocations, parking, and land use consistency. The cost for the
preparation of the CIA is expected to be $5,000.00- $10,000.00.
5.5
Visual/Aesthetics: The project site is located in a highly developed/ disturbed area
which has been utilized for commercial and industrial purposes for a number of
years. The project will extend Hazel Avenue and improve an existing intersection
and includes on ramps, off ramps, walls, fill and Route 50 overcrossings depending
on the alternative; however, the project area is developed and already contains these
Revised February 2013
or similar features. No visual intrusions that are inconsistent with the existing
development in the area are proposed and no visual impacts are anticipated. No
additional formal visual/aesthetics related impact analysis is needed.
5.6
Cultural Resources: A Historic Properties Survey Report will be completed to
analyze the project’s potential impacts to any cultural resources present in or near
the project APE, and identify appropriate minimization and mitigation measures to
reduce these impacts. The estimated costs to prepare the cultural resources
technical studies are approximately $35,000.00. This cost does not include any
costs associated with permitting, cultural resources monitoring during construction
or mitigation that may be required.
5.7
Hydrology and Floodplain: The interchange is not located within the 100 year
floodplain as noted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood
insurance rate maps. Additionally, the interchange is not subject to localized
flooding from adjacent creeks or drainage ways. However, the proposed auxiliary
lane between Hazel Avenue and Folsom Boulevard will require the widening and
possible reconstruction of the Alder Creek Culvert Bridge. A hydraulic/ hydrologic
study will be completed to analyze the project’s potential impacts to Alder Creek
and its flood zone as well as to identify any appropriate minimization and
mitigation measures to reduce impacts. The estimated cost to prepare the study is
estimated to be approximately $18,000.00. This cost does not include any costs
associated with permitting, monitoring or mitigation that may be required.
5.8
Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff: The primary water quality issues
related to the project is sedimentation and erosion caused by construction and
potential impacts to Alder Creek during culvert widening/reconstruction and
auxiliary lane construction. To address construction related sedimentation and
erosion, a water quality technical report that will analyze potential impacts and
recommended engineering controls and BMPs to reduce or avoid water quality
impacts should be developed. The estimated costs to prepare this technical report
will be determined by SacDOT.
5.9
Geology, Soils, Seismic and Topography: A geotechnical report will be prepared
for the project to evaluate soil issues and to address any potential issues related to
soil limitations within the project area. The estimated costs to prepare this technical
report will be determined by SacDOT.
5.10 Paleontology: Due to the presence of exposed Laguna Formation in the vicinity of
the project area, project related construction activities may encounter
paleontological resources. On-site paleontological monitoring may be necessary
during construction activities at certain areas of the project site. The estimated cost
for a preparation of a paleontological technical report is $6,000.
5.11 Hazardous Waste/Materials: Due to the type of development that has occurred
within the project area and vicinity, the project may incur additional costs for
Revised February 2013
sampling and hazardous waste disposal for contaminated groundwater, asbestoscontaining materials, lead based paint, and contaminated soils including soils
contaminated by ADL.
Although the majority of the site has been included in past site assessments there
remains a potential that unknown hazardous materials or wastes could be
encountered during project construction, thus delaying project schedule and adding
costs for sampling , cleanup and removal. A Phase 1 Initial Site Assessment (ISA)
has been prepared for the project that details potential hazardous waste issues
related to the project and measures that should be taken to minimize potential
impacts; however, the scope of the ISA does not include the auxiliary lane area or
address the potential of lead based paint or asbestos-containing materials to be
encountered if the large commercial structure on the northeast corner of the
intersection of Folsom Boulevard and Hazel Avenue is demolished. The ISA will
need to be updated to include omitted areas. Costs associated with updating the
ISA are currently unknown and should be obtained by SacDOT.
5.12 Air Quality: The proposed project is included within the Sacramento Area Council
of Governments (SACOG) 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). A
separate air quality analysis is not required to address regional air quality concerns;
however, project level air quality emissions and conformity should be addressed in
the environmental documentation prepared for the project. No additional formal air
quality related impact analysis is needed.
5.13 Noise: The proposed project is not expected to result in an increase in traffic
volumes that would generate noise over the existing conditions; however,
Alternative 2 proposes an elevated eastbound off ramp which is to extend north
over Route 50 and connect with Hazel Avenue and all alternatives propose a new
auxiliary lane from Hazel Avenue to the Folsom Boulevard off ramp. The project is
likely to be considered a Type 1project requiring a detailed noise study.
A noise study will be prepared for use in future environmental documentation that
should include potential project effects on adjacent land uses and should
recommend engineering and design features and mitigation measures to reduce any
significant impacts. The estimated costs to prepare this technical report are
approximately $10,000.00.
5.14 Energy and Climate Change: The proposed project will not result in an obvious
difference in energy consumption and is not considered a “major project” and does
not require a separate energy report. The proposed project is intended to
accommodate increased traffic demand generated by approved and proposed
development in the project area and to improve the expected LOS for the project
site and decrease traffic congestion. No additional formal energy and climate
change related impact analysis is needed.
5.15 Biological Environment: Site reconnaissance and literature review indicates that
there are no known occurrences of special status species within the project site.
Revised February 2013
However, elderberry shrubs have been observed within and adjacent to the project
work area. Additionally, there are a number of large trees on the project site which
may provide suitable nesting habitat for protected raptor species that may be
disturbed by project development and redevelopment. The project will also require
modifications to a culvert bridge structure crossing over Alder Creek. Subsequent
environmental documentation, a wetland delineation, a Biological Assessment or
Natural Environment Study, should be prepared to detail biological impacts of the
project and mitigation measures to reduce impacts.
Wetland Delineation: The estimated cost to prepare this technical report is
approximately $8,000.00.
Biological Assessment/NES: The estimated costs to prepare this technical report
are approximately $13,000.00.
5.16 Cumulative Impacts: Environmental commitments to reduce or avoid cumulative
impacts cannot be estimated until the draft NEPA/CEQA document is prepared.
5.17 Context Sensitive Solutions: The project proponent will schedule meetings with
the public and agencies with jurisdiction over potentially affected resources as well
other affected public agencies and service providers throughout the planning
process to consider and address any input on the project design.
6. Permits and Approvals
Acquisition of permits and other agency coordination may be required under each of the
proposed alternatives, including the following:
 Sacramento County: Right of way and property acquisition; approval of site
development permits/plans in the project area within Sacramento County, the City
of Rancho Cordova and the City of Folsom. The County and City right of way
acquisition process is predicated on the CEQA/NEPA document certification, and
can take 6- 12 months.
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Section 7 ESA consultation and Incidental Take
Permit: Review and authorization of any activities impacting federally listed
species. The section 7 ESA consultation process is predicated on the Caltrans
approval of the County’s Biological Assessment or NES. This could take 9-18
months.
 Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration: Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, including a Historic Properties survey Report. If studies
find that the project will have an adverse effect on historic properties, the County
will also prepare a Finding of Effect Document Report or a Draft Memorandum of
Agreement for the resolution of adverse effects. The time frame for preparing and
approval of the Section 106 NHPA document could take 12-18 months.
Revised February 2013
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Review and approval of any improvements
impacting wetlands, Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit. Depending on the
scope of the project an individual permit or a nationwide permit may be required.
The 404 Individual Permit process includes a Section 404 b (1) analysis and
identification of the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative and
could take 9-12 months. The Nationwide Permit process could take 4-6 months to
complete.
 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board: National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permits (Clean Water Act Section 402) and Water
Quality Certification and/or waiver (Clean Water Act Section 401). A Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan will also be required. These activities would be
coordinated with the State Water Quality Control Board. The 401 Water Quality
Certification application is submitted to CVRWQCB at the same time as the 404
permit application. The 401 water quality certification process could take 4-6
months.
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Streambed Alteration Agreement.
The timeframe for the preparation and approval of the Streambed Alteration
Agreement document is approximately 6 months.
7. Level of Effort: Risks and Assumptions
As described in the PEAR technical summaries section, there is a potential for state and
federally listed species that may occur in the project area and may be impacted by the
project, triggering federal ESA Section 7 consultation. It is possible that external factors
beyond the County’s control, such as resource agency staffing shortages, may lengthen
consultation and permit approval timeframes. This also holds true for Section 106
consultation and compliance issues.
The County assumes at this time that the CEQA environmental document will be an
Environmental Impact Report due to the strong possibility that impacts in some of the
environmental topic areas will be found to be significant. These environmental topics are
anticipated to include air quality, climate change and biological resources.
The County also assumes that the NEPA document will be a Routine Environmental
Assessment with proposed Finding of No Significant Impact rather than an
Environmental Impact Study (EIS). EISs are relatively rare and involve a major federal
action that significantly affects the quality of the environment. The definition of what
constitutes a “significant” effect under NEPA is not as stringent as a “significant impact”
under CEQA. Preparation of an EIS would involve considerably more time and effort to
prepare and process to achieve a Record of Decision than an EA/FONSI.
8. PEAR Technical Summaries
8.1
Land Use The majority of the land surrounding the project site is zoned for
commercial or light industrial uses. However, the northeast portion of the site is
Revised February 2013
located on land zoned for recreational purposes and the south side of the site is on
land zoned as Aerojet Special Planning Area (SPA). The commercial and light
industrial zoned properties are developed with commercial uses such as gas
stations, restaurants, retail, entertainment, hotel, storage, and apartments. The
recreation zoned property is developed in part as the American River Parkway. The
land south of Folsom Boulevard zoned SPA has historically been utilized by
Aerojet and the currently permitted uses within the Aerojet SPA include propulsion
testing systems, routine component testing, office uses, and industrial uses. The
portion of the SPA east of the proposed Hazel Avenue alignment is also part of
Easton Place which is a recently approved project which would allow for high
density residential and office uses. Although several different types of land uses
surround the project area, the development of the proposed interchange would
largely be within the existing right of way (ROW) for the existing Hazel Avenue/
Route 50 interchange.
The 2030 Sacramento County General Plan Transportation Diagram shows the
portion of Hazel Avenue in the project area to be a six lane thoroughfare and the
project is included in the SACOG MTIP.
The project is consistent with adopted and proposed land use plans and will not
result in incompatible land uses. ROW will be required of a number of commercial
parcels as well as the removal of several businesses. Relocation impacts should be
documented in the CEQA environmental document. Impacts to traffic circulation
during construction should also be addressed in the environmental document.
Although the project site is adjacent to the American River Parkway no ROW is
expected to be acquired from the Parkway and construction related to all
alternatives is proposed outside of the Parkway limits. No park, recreation, wildlife
or waterfowl refuge Section 4(f) properties have been identified that would be
affected by the proposed project.
8.2
Growth: The Hazel Avenue extension, which this project is a part of, is a priority
improvement within the sub-region surrounding Route 50. The purpose of these
improvements along with other priority improvements identified by the 50 Corridor
Mobility Partnership is to relieve congestion on Route 50 and to accommodate
growth as identified by the adopted SACOG Blueprint and Regional Transportation
Plan. The intent of the project is to accommodate existing and future traffic flows
that are expected from future development in the area like the Easton Specific Plan
and other projects. Additionally, the proposed project is not located along a new
alignment nor will it provide new access that will result in unplanned growth.
8.3
Farmlands/Timberlands: No farmlands or timberlands are in the project vicinity.
8.4
Community Impacts: The project area is located adjacent to several commercial
businesses. ROW acquisition is expected to occur for several properties in order to
allow for the proposed interchange improvements. Of the alternatives proposed,
Revised February 2013
two (Alternative 1 and 1A) would require acquisition that would result in the
relocation of a gas station and a restaurant. These alternatives would also result in
structural modification to storage units associated with a self-storage facility
Alternative 2 would result in the relocation of the gas station, restaurant as well as
the relocation of several businesses located within a large multi-tenant structure.
ROW acquisition will also be required of a property housing a fire station.
Although ROW will be acquired from the fire station property, the ROW
acquisition area is minor and will not result in the relocation of the fire station.
Aside from ROW acquisition and business relocations the project will require that
utility lines along Folsom Boulevard be relocated to allow for the Hazel Avenue
extension. It should be noted that although Regional Transit operates light rail
along Folsom Boulevard, the falsework for the structure is to be erected at night
during non-operational hours and the project will not affect light rail operations.
Relocation, public utility and public facility impacts should be documented in the
CEQA environmental document as well as a Community Impact Assessment.
8.5
Visual/Aesthetics: The project site is located in a highly developed/ disturbed area
which has been utilized for commercial and industrial purposes for a number of
years. The project will extend Hazel Avenue and improve an existing intersection
and includes on ramps, off ramps, walls, fill and Route 50 overcrossings; however,
the project area is developed and already contains these or similar features. No
visual intrusions that are inconsistent with the existing development in the area are
proposed and no visual impacts are anticipated.
8.6
Cultural Resources: Past studies of properties adjacent to the project site have
indicated that there is a potential for historic resources to be located in the area that
may be adversely affected by the project. Additional studies will be necessary to
comply with Section 106 of the Sate Historic Preservation Act.
8.7
Hydrology and Floodplain: The majority of the project site is not located within
the 100 year floodplain as noted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) flood insurance rate maps; however, Alder Creek, where culvert widening
will be required to allow for the proposed auxiliary lane, has an associated flood
zone.
The headwaters of Alder Creek begin just south of White Rock Road approximately
five miles east of the project site. The creek flows generally westward through the
Aerojet/GenCorp property, north of the Folsom Auto Mall, beneath Route 50 and to
Lake Natoma. Alder Creek and its tributaries have a watershed of approximately
11 square miles. Alder Creek widens near the auto mall and is approximately 150
feet wide where it meets Route 50. At this location, Alder Creek has a Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone AE designation and has a
100-year water surface elevation of 128 feet.
Revised February 2013
Construction activities related to the development of the proposed auxiliary lane
and associated culvert widening will be located within the flood zone. Project
related impacts to the flood zone as well as upstream and downstream creek flows
should be analyzed in a hydraulic/ hydrologic report and any required mitigation
measures should be identified. Issues related to project impacts to Alder Creek and
the flood zone should be discussed in the environmental documentation.
8.8
Water Quality and Storm Water Runoff: The primary water quality issues
related to the project is sedimentation and erosion caused by construction and
potential impacts to Alder Creek during culvert widening/reconstruction and
auxiliary lane construction.
Because the project would disturb more than one acre of land, the following
measures are applicable:
1. A Notice of Construction would be submitted to the Central Valley Regional
Water Quality Control Board at least 30 days prior to the start of construction. The
tentative start date, tentative duration, location of construction, description of
project, estimated number of affected acres, resident engineer in charge of the
project, and the telephone number of the resident engineer would be reported.
2. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan should be prepared and implemented
during construction to the satisfaction on the resident engineer.
3. A notice of Construction Completion would be submitted to the Central Valley
Regional Water Quality Control board upon completion of construction and
stabilization of the site. A project would be considered complete when the criteria
for final stabilization in the Construction General Permit are met.
The design and construction of the proposed project must adhere to the
requirements set forth in the Caltrans national Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permit, the Caltrans Storm Water Management Plan, the Caltrans Project
Planning and Design Guide, the Construction Site Best Management Practices
Manual and the Caltrans Standard Specifications. In the construction phase, the
contractor has the responsibility to exercise every reasonable precaution necessary
to eliminate potential impacts (as stated in Caltrans Standard Specifications 71.01G). If adequate measures and precautions are taken, then there would not be
any adverse effects to water quality in project area.
8.9
Geology, Soils, Seismic and Topography: The project site is flat except for an
approximately 30 foot rise on the north and south sides of Route 50 where the
existing overpass and on and off ramps are located. Soils in the project vicinity
include Natomas loam, Natomas-Xerorthents, Red Bluff-Xerorthents, Redding
Gravelly Loam, Urban land, Urban land-Natomas complex and Xerorthents.
According to the Soil Survey of Sacramento County prepared by the Soil
Conservation Service, some of the soils or subsoils in the project area have
Revised February 2013
limitations due to their low strength and shrink-swell potential. However, the soil
survey also indicates that properly designed roads and streets help to compensate
for this limitation. A geotechnical report will be prepared for the project to evaluate
soil issues and to address any potential issues related to soil limitations within the
project area.
8.10 Paleontology: The project site is located in an area that has been developed for a
number of years and is located predominantly on soil units classified as dredge
tailings (soil units 182, and 245) and urban land (soil units 227 and 228) by the
Natural Resources Conservation Service web soil survey. However, according to
the State of California Department of Conservation Geologic map of the
Sacramento Quadrangle, a small section of the Laguna Formation is exposed south
of the project site. The Laguna Formation has produced substantial fossil remains
at many localities within Central Valley and is considered to have high sensitivity
under criteria established by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology.
Due to the presence of the Laguna Formation in the project vicinity, there is a
potential for paleontological resources to be encountered during project related
construction activities.
8.11 Hazardous Waste/Materials: In order to develop the current project, right-of-way
will be obtained from adjacent property owners. Only minor amounts of right-ofway strips will be acquired from individual property owners and businesses along
the south side of Route 50, Hazel Avenue, Folsom Boulevard and Nimbus Road.
The majority of the area to be acquired includes driveways, parking lots and
roadside landscaping. However, ROW acquisition can result in the removal of
three structures as well as several storage units at a self-storage facility depending
on the alternative selected.
The area along Hazel Avenue, Route 50 and Folsom Boulevard has been developed
for several years and a number of uses in the area have the potential to house/utilize
hazardous materials. In particular, under current conditions, the project area
contains several commercial and industrial uses, which by their very nature are
more likely to house or distribute hazardous materials. Additionally, the roadways
in the project area have supported vehicular traffic since the interchange was
constructed in the 1960’s and vacant parcels in the area may contain aerially
deposited lead. Other hazardous materials that may be encountered during project
construction include soil contamination resulting from rail road use that has
occurred along Folsom Boulevard since the early 20th century, contaminated
groundwater resulting from past Aerojet practices and lead based paint and
asbestos-containing materials that may be within structures that are to be
demolished.
A Phase 1 ISA has been prepared for the Hazel Avenue/ Route 50 interchange area
but does not include an assessment of the auxiliary lane area or the large
commercial structure located at the northeast corner of Hazel Avenue and Folsom
Revised February 2013
Boulevard that may be demolished to allow for project construction. The ISA
should be amended to include omitted areas.
8.12 Air Quality: The proposed project is included within the Sacramento Area Council
of Government (SACOG) 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP).
Federal regulations require that the Sacramento Area Council of Governments
(SACOG) prepare Air Quality Conformity Determinations on its transportation
plans and programs. The purpose of the conformity determination is to ensure that
SACOG’s plans and programs "conform" to all applicable federal air quality
requirements. Based on the conformity requirements found in the Federal Clean Air
Act, Section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)), and Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations,
Part 93, Subpart A, conformity determinations must be based on the most recent
estimates of on-road vehicle-based emissions. The emissions estimates must also be
based upon the most recent population, employment, travel and congestion
forecasts from SACOG, acting as the federally designated metropolitan planning
organization (MPO) for the Sacramento region.
The results of the emissions analyses shows that the 2035 MTP, including the Sutter
Buttes ozone nonattainment area, meets the emissions conformity tests as outlined
in the conformity requirements for both the Sacramento ozone, carbon monoxide
and PM-10 air quality planning areas and the Sutter Buttes ozone nonattainment
area.
Separate air quality analysis is not required to address regional air quality concerns;
however, project level air quality emissions and conformity should be addressed in
the environmental documentation prepared for the project.
8.13 Noise: Residential units are located adjacent to the south side Route 50; however,
the proposed project will not increase the capacity of Route 50 or other roadways in
the area. Because the project will not result in an increase in traffic, the proposed
project is not expected to result in increased traffic noise related to increased
capacity. However, Alternative 2 includes a substantial vertical alteration with the
proposed eastbound off ramp “flyover” which will direct eastbound traffic off of
Route 50 north across Route 50 to Hazel Avenue and all alternatives propose an
auxiliary lane along the south side of Route 50 from Hazel Avenue to the Folsom
Boulevard off ramp. Due to the vertical alteration and new auxiliary lane the
project is expected to be considered a Type 1 project as detailed in the Caltrans
Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol requiring a detailed noise analysis.
The noise analysis should be prepared to identify nearby sensitive receptors and
applicable federal and local noise policies and standards. The study should analyze
potential noise impacts resulting from the proposed project, and identify appropriate
minimization and abatement measures to reduce these impacts.
Revised February 2013
8.14 Energy and Climate Change: The proposed project will not result in an obvious
difference in energy consumption and is not considered a “major project” and does
not require a separate energy report. The proposed project is intended to accommodate
increased traffic demand generated by approved and proposed development in the project
area and to improve the expected LOS for the project site and decrease traffic
congestion. Future environmental documentation should include project details on
climate change resulting from project related construction and vehicle emissions.
8.15 Biological Environment: The majority of the project area is developed with
commercial and industrial buildings, parking lots, driveways, roadways and typical
roadside landscaping. Although some vacant property is adjacent to the interchange
work area, no wetland features or large continuous tracts of natural habitat are
located where interchange improvements are proposed.
Although much of the project site is developed or disturbed, the proposed auxiliary
lane will cross over a vacant area approximately 3,700 feet east of the Hazel
Avenue/Route 50 interchange where Alder Creek passes beneath Route 50. This
area contains Alder Creek and its associated riparian habitat.
Review of USFWS species lists and the California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) indicates that some sensitive habitats, plants, and animals occur within
the Folsom, Carmichael and Buffalo Creek 7.5 minute USGS quadrangles.
However, none of those species identified by the USFWS or CNDDB as species of
concern, rare, threatened, or endangered are known to occur on-the project site.
The primary limitation is suitable habitat, as many of those species and habitats
identified as sensitive require environmental conditions that are not widely present
at the project site.
Although there are no known occurrences of special status species within the
project site, elderberry shrubs have been observed within and adjacent to the project
work area. Previous biological surveys of the project vicinity have identified
elderberry bushes adjacent to the project site. During a windshield survey for the
current project, additional elderberry bushes were identified within the project site.
These bushes, which may contain special status species, may be subject to impacts
resulting from the construction of the proposed project. Additionally, there are
large trees on the project site that may provide suitable nesting habitat for protected
raptor species that may be disturbed by project development. Subsequent
environmental documentation, including a biological assessment or natural
environmental study, should be prepared to detail biological impacts of the project
and mitigation measures to reduce impacts.
8.16 Cumulative Impacts: Environmental commitments to reduce or avoid cumulative
impacts cannot be estimated until the draft NEPA/CEQA document is prepared.
8.17 Context Sensitive Solutions: To date, during the conceptual planning process, the
project proponent has used several of the Context Sensitive Solutions approaches to
guide the design of the project elements. During the early stages of project design,
the project proponent held a peer review meeting with Caltrans, the County of
Revised February 2013
Sacramento, Sacramento Regional Transit and GenCorp to discuss challenges and
viable options in order to reach a consensus on the strongest alternatives to be
carried through. Ultimately 18 alternatives were developed and the pros and cons
of each were discussed related to right-of-way impacts, access to Folsom Boulevard
businesses, costs and traffic operations. The alternatives were ranked based on
which provided the most benefit within the categories noted above.
Additionally, public outreach has occurred as part of the environmental review
process for the Easton Place Project and local businesses are aware of future
interchange improvements and a grade separation over Folsom Boulevard.
The project proponent is and will continue to consider public and agency comments
on the conceptual design during the project development process. The project
proponent will schedule meetings with the public and agencies with jurisdiction
over potentially affected resources as well other affected public agencies and
service providers throughout the planning process to consider and address any input
on the project design.
9. Summary Statement for PSR or PSR-PDS
Each of the project alternatives would have similar project constraints and impacts,
except that Alternative 1 and Alternative 1A would have different impacts to buildings
and businesses in the project area than Alternative2.
Alternative 1 and Alternative 1A would result in the removal of a gas station, several
storage units at a self-storage facility and the removal of a restaurant while Alternative 2
would result in the removal of a gas station, restaurant and the removal of a large multitenant commercial building.
The following technical reports will or have been prepared to analyze potential
environmental impacts: a Historic Properties Survey Report, a Hydraulic/Hydrologic
Report, a Water Quality Report, a Geotechnical Report, a Biological Assessment/ Natural
Environmental Study, an amended Initial Site Assessment, Traffic Study, Paleontological
Technical Report and a Noise Study. The anticipated environmental document will be a
CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The anticipated NEPA document will be an
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI). Key
environmental issues are anticipated to include traffic operations, cultural resources,
water quality, air quality, climate change, noise and hazardous materials.
The estimated cost of preparing and receiving the biological documents and permits is
$30,000.00 and the estimated time frame for completing these permits is 12-18 months.
Based on costs for preparation of recent projects of similar size and scope in Sacramento
County, the cost for preparing the EIR/EA for the project including all technical studies,
is $200,000 to $250,000.00, the time frame for certification of the EIR/EA is 24-36
months.
Revised February 2013
If cultural or paleontological resources are discovered, an archaeological or
paleontological monitor may be required during construction. Also, if any unknown
hazardous materials or wastes are discovered, then additional costs may be incurred for
sampling, investigation, remediation, and hazardous waste disposal. Depending on
results of the biological studies, a biological monitor may also be required during certain
activities to protect sensitive habitats. Water quality monitoring may be required to
ensure that pollutant levels in waterways are below allowable levels.
10. Disclaimer
This Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) provides information to
support programming of the proposed project. It is not an environmental determination or
document. Preliminary analysis, determinations, and estimates of mitigation costs are
based on the project description provided in the Project Study Report (PSR). The
estimates and conclusions in the PEAR are approximate and are based on cursory
analyses of probable effects. A reevaluation of the PEAR will be needed for changes in
project scope or alternatives, or in environmental laws, regulations, or guidelines.
11. List of Preparers
PEAR Preparer
Kevin Messerschmitt, Associate Environmental Analyst
Date: 2-8-2013
12. Review and Approval
I confirm that environmental cost, scope, and schedule have been satisfactorily completed
and that the PEAR meets all Caltrans requirements. Also, if the project is scoped as a
routine EA, complex EA, or EIS, I verify that the HQ DEA Coordinator has concurred in
the Class of Action.
Date:
Environmental Branch Chief
Date:
Project Manager
APPENDICIES:
Appendix 1: Project Alternatives Analysis
REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: PEAR Environmental Studies Checklist
Attachment B: Estimated Resources by WBS Code
Attachment C: Schedule (Gantt Chart)
Attachment D: PEAR Environmental Commitments Cost Estimate (Standard PSR)
Revised February 2013
Exhibit 1: Project Alternative 1
Revised February 2013
Exhibit 2: Project Alternative 1A
Revised February 2013
Exhibit 3: Alternative 2
Revised February 2013
Exhibit 4: Transition Lane
Revised February 2013