FAIRFAX TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE April 15, 2026
PREPARED FOR Mayor and Town Council
PREPARED BY Kristin Arnold, Public Works Director
SUBJECT Adopt a Resolution Adopting the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP) and Approve the BPMP.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct public hearing
2) Adopt resolution adopting the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP) and approve the BPMP.
BACKGROUND
The Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP) covers three bridges in the Town of Fairfax (Town):
Canyon Road Bridge, Spruce Road Bridge, and Marin Road Bridge. The purpose of the BPMP is to maintain the existing inventory of bridges in good or fair condition and to correct structural deficiencies before costly rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement is required. This project will extend the service life of the existing bridges. Various improvements and levels of repair are needed for each of the three bridges, which are briefly described in Table 1 below.
Table 1 – Planned BPMP Bridge Improvements
Bridge Name Planned Rehabilitation Work
Canyon Road Bridge • Replacing the existing northwest wingwall • Repair of the structural damage to the north abutment • Repair of the northeast bridge wingwall
• Repairs to fish ladder
• Sealing the cracks in the bridge deck
• Installation of safety signage and guard railings
Spruce Road Bridge • Sealing of the deck
• Repair of expansion joints
• Repair of structural concrete spalls on the underside of the bridge Marin Road Bridge • Repair of the toppling bridge wingwall • Repair of the tattered rock slope protection (RSP) around the above wingwall • Repair of the structural damage to another wingwall
• Repair of structural concrete spalls on the underside of the bridge
Caltrans inspects bridges every two years and these bridges have been identified as needing work since 2013. The BPMP bridges are part of the larger contract with MGE Engineering Incorporated (MGE, formerly California Infrastructure Consultancy) that also includes the Meadow Way Bridge Replacement, Azalea Bridge Rehabilitation, and Creek Road Bridge Preventive Maintenance and Seismic Retrofit Project. Council awarded the original contract in October 2013, and it has been brought to Council numerous times over the years for updates and amendments.
The most recent milestone was the receipt of NEPA clearance from Caltrans in February 2026. The project team is in the process of updating funding authorizations with Caltrans to program the next phase of funding for the BPMP, allowing it to move into right-of-way acquisition, utility coordination, environmental permitting, and final design.
ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION
WRA, Inc., as a subconsultant to MGE, prepared the environmental review documents for the BPMP project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
An Initial Study was prepared for the project, which addressed all environmental topics identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, as well as the Mandatory Findings of Significance. The Draft Initial Study determined that the project could result in potentially significant impacts to the following environmental topics: Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources. Mitigation measures were included to reduce all identified potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level. As all potentially significant impacts could be fully mitigated, the Town, acting as the CEQA Lead Agency, can conclude that the project would qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and therefore would not require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to CEQA.
On January 16, 2026, the Town released the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for public review in accordance with Section 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines. The public review and comment period began on January 16, 2026, and closed on February 16, 2026. A Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt an IS/MND was circulated to interested parties and posted on the Town’s website along with the Draft IS/MND and its technical appendices. The Draft IS/MND was also made available at the Town Hall lobby, located at 142 Bolinas Road, Fairfax, CA 94930. A Notice of Completion, along with copies of the Draft IS/MND, was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on January 16, 2026, for review and comment by relevant State agencies. The State Clearinghouse subsequently assigned State Clearinghouse Number 2026010532.
During the 30-day public review period, two comment letters on the Draft IS/MND were submitted to the Town by property owners adjacent to Canyon Road Bridge. A Final IS/MND was prepared to address the comments received on the Draft IS/MND. The Final IS/MND includes the Draft IS/MND, the comments received, responses to those comments, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Edits to the Draft IS/MND were made in response to comments; however, no significant changes to the project occurred. The Final IS/MND does not describe a project with any new
or substantially more severe impacts than those identified and analyzed in the Draft IS/MND. Therefore, recirculation of the Draft IS/MND was not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5.
To summarize, the Final IS/MND is a CEQA document prepared by the Lead Agency (Town of Fairfax) that must be considered by decision-makers before approving the project and that must reflect the Lead Agency’s independent judgment and analysis. Staff has concluded that all potentially significant impacts can be fully mitigated to a less-than-significant level and that the project qualifies for an MND.
Therefore, preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is not required. If the IS/MND is not adopted, then the Town would need to either revise the environmental document or prepare additional environmental review, which could result in delays to the project schedule and potential impacts to project funding.
Adoption of the IS/MND is a key step toward achieving environmental clearance from Caltrans, which is required for the next phase of funding. Based on the whole record, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment with mitigation incorporated. Therefore, staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the IS/MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and approve the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
CEQA costs are fully the responsibility of the Town, while the remainder of the BPMP project is 88.53% funded by the federal Highway Bridge Program (HBP), administered by Caltrans. The Town is responsible for the remaining 11.47%.
The Town has an existing contract with MGE Engineering to prepare design and environmental review services for this BPMP project and other bridge projects in Town.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution adopting IS/MND and approving the BPMP
B. IS/MND including MMRP
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FAIRFAX ADOPTING THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION (IS/MND) AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
FOR THE PROPOSED BRIDGE PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT (BPMP) AND APPROVING THE BPMP.
WHEREAS, the Town of Fairfax proposes to implement the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP), which includes improvements to the Canyon Road Bridge, Spruce Road Bridge, and Marin Road Bridge to maintain the Town’s bridge infrastructure and extend the service life of these facilities, and is the Lead Agency for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 et seq. and 15070 et seq., which identified potentially significant impacts in the areas of Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources, and recommended mitigation measures to reduce all such impacts to a less-thansignificant level; and WHEREAS, a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was circulated for public review from January 16, 2026 through February 16, 2026, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15105, and a Notice of Completion was submitted to the State Clearinghouse (State Clearinghouse No. 2026010532); and
WHEREAS, the Town received and considered all comments submitted during the public review period, and a Final IS/MND was prepared, including responses to comments and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Town of Fairfax; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed and considered the Final IS/MND, the staff report, all oral and written testimony, and the entire administrative record, and held a duly noticed public hearing on April 15, 2026, at which all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, based on the whole record before the Town Council, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment with mitigation measures incorporated, and the Final IS/MND does not identify any new or substantially more severe impacts than those identified in the Draft IS/MND; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report is not required and recirculation is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5; and WHEREAS, adoption of the IS/MND and MMRP is necessary to advance the project into the next phase, including right-of-way, permitting, and final design, and to maintain eligibility for federal funding through the Highway Bridge Program (HBP);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Fairfax does hereby:
1. Adopt the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (State Clearinghouse No. 2026010532) for the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project.
2. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project, and directs that all mitigation measures shall be implemented and monitored in accordance with the
ATTACHMENT A
MMRP.
3. Find that the IS/MND reflects the independent judgment of the Town of Fairfax and that it has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
4. Approve the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP) as described in the Final IS/MND.
5. Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination (NOD) with the Marin County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse in accordance with CEQA.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Fairfax on this 15th day of April 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST
_____________________________________ _______________________________________
STEPHANIE HELLMAN CHRISTINE FOSTER
MAYOR DEPUTY TOWN CLERK
Final Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Town of Fairfax
142 Bolinas Road
Fairfax, California 94930
Attn: Kristin Arnold
[email protected]
WRA, Inc.
2169 G East Francisco Boulevard
San Rafael, CA 94901
April 2026 WRA #22304
wra
Th
3:
It55
t’mun
y
ta
Environmental
Consultants
22—.-
—ote
7 3
T" MTIPIal s’nse
$
ATTACHMENT B
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 i
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE................................................................................................ 6
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION...........................................................................................................6
2.1 Project Title...................................................................................................................6
2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address ................................................................................6
2.3 Project Location............................................................................................................6
2.3.1 Marin Road Bridge...........................................................................................7
2.3.2 Spruce Road Bridge .........................................................................................7
2.3.3 Canyon Road Bridge ........................................................................................7
2.4 Existing General Plan Designation and Zoning District..............................................7
2.4.1 General Plan Designation ................................................................................7
2.4.2 Zoning District..................................................................................................7
2.5 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting ............................................................................8
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................19
3.1 Project Description .....................................................................................................19
3.1.1 Project Construction Overview ......................................................................19
3.1.2 Marin Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0143) ........................................................20
3.1.3 Spruce Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0141).......................................................21
3.1.4 Canyon Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0146)......................................................22
3.2 Project–Related Approvals, Agreements, and Permits ............................................24
3.2.1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)....................................24
3.2.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).........................................24
3.2.3 United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)..........................................24
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED.........................................................29
4.1 Determination .............................................................................................................29
4.2 Initial Study Checklist.................................................................................................30
4.2.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................31
4.2.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources ............................................................. 35
4.2.3 Air Quality.......................................................................................................37
4.2.4 Biological Resources ......................................................................................45
4.2.5 Cultural Resources .........................................................................................69
4.2.6 Energy.............................................................................................................73
4.2.7 Geology and Soils ..........................................................................................75
4.2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................81
4.2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................... 84 Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 ii
4.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality........................................................................88
4.2.11 Land Use and Planning..................................................................................95
4.2.12 Mineral Resources..........................................................................................98
4.2.13 Noise...............................................................................................................99
4.2.14 Population and Housing ..............................................................................104
4.2.15 Public Services ............................................................................................. 105
4.2.16 Recreation ....................................................................................................107
4.2.17 Transportation.............................................................................................. 108
4.2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources.............................................................................112
4.2.19 Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................................115
4.2.20 Wildfire .........................................................................................................118
4.2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................... 121
5.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS/MND ........................................................125
5.1 Response to Comment Letter A...............................................................................130
5.2 Response to Comment Letter B...............................................................................139
6.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ...................................................143
7.0 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................... 158 List of Tables
Table 1. Project Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan ....................................................41 Table 2. Population Density and Associated Ambient Noise Levels ..............................................101 Table 3. Summary of Projects Considered in the Cumulative Impact Analysis.............................122 Table 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.................................................................144 List of Figures
Figure 1. Location Map .........................................................................................................................9 Figure 2. Marin Road Bridge Project Site...........................................................................................10 Figure 3. Spruce Road Bridge Project Site .........................................................................................11 Figure 4. Canyon Road Bridge Project Site........................................................................................12 Figure 5. Views of the Project Site – Marin Road Bridge BPMP ......................................................13 Figure 6. Views of Surrounding Land Uses – Marin Road Bridge BPMP..........................................14 Figure 7. Views of the Project Site – Spruce Road Bridge BPMP.....................................................15 Figure 8. Views of Surrounding Land Uses - Spruce Road Bridge BPMP.........................................16 Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 iii
Figure 9. Views of the Project Site – Canyon Road Bridge BPMP....................................................17 Figure 10. Views of the Surrounding Land Uses – Canyon Road Bridge BPMP...............................18 Figure 11. Marin Road Bridge Repair Details ....................................................................................25 Figure 12. Spruce Road Bridge Repair Details...................................................................................26 Figure 13. Construction Detour Plans .................................................................................................27 Figure 14. Canyon Road Bridge Repair Details..................................................................................28 List of Appendices
Appendix A. Canyon Road Bridge Arborist Report
Appendix B. Natural Environment Studies
Appendix C. Cultural Resources Reports
Appendix D. Hydrology Studies
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
APE Area of Potential Effects
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BMPs Best Management Practices
BSAs Biological Study Areas
BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAL FIRE California Department of Fire and Forestry
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Clean Air Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CaTNAP Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol
CCC Central California Coastal
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CGS California Geological Survey
CH4 methane
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO2 carbon dioxide
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel scale
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 iv
DOT Department of Transportation
DPM diesel particulate matter
DPS District Population Segment
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
du dwelling unit
ESCP Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
EFH Essential Fish Habitat
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Endangered Species Act
Far Western Far Western Anthropological Research Group Inc.
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FIGR Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
FIRM Federal Insurance Rate Maps
FPD Fairfax Police Department
FO Functionally Obsolete
GHGs Greenhouse Gases
HPSR Historical Property Survey Report
IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
LRA Local Responsibility Area
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCE Marin Clean Energy
MCSTOPPP Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program MLD Most Likely Descendant
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMTCO2e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent MMWD Municipal Water District
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NES Natural Environment Studies
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
N2O nitrous oxide
NOx Nitrogen Oxide
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NSO Northern Spotted Owl
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OHW Ordinary High Water
PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric
PM Particulate matter
PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter
PM10 Coarse Particulate Matter
PRC Public Resources Code
Proposed project Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
ROG reactive organic gases
RSP Rock Slope Protection
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 v
RVFD Ross Valley Fire Department
RVSD Ross Valley Sanitary District
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Boards
SB Senate Bill
SD Structurally Deficient
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SRA State Responsibility Areas
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TACs Toxic Air Contaminants
Town Town of Fairfax
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WDR Waste Discharge Requirement
WRA, Inc. WRA, Inc.
XPI Extended Phase I
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 6 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts is being prepared to conform to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statute and Guidelines (California Code of Regulations 15000 et. seq.). This Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) evaluates the potential environmental impacts which might reasonably be anticipated to result from implementation of the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program (proposed project). The Town of Fairfax (Town) is the Lead Agency as defined under CEQA Guidelines Section 15050.
The purpose of an Initial Study is to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration for the proposed project. A Negative Declaration briefly describes the reason that a proposed project would result in a significant effect on the environment, and the basis of the decision not to prepare an EIR. This Initial Study describes the Town’s efforts to ensure that all potentially significant impacts are reduced to a less-than-significant level with mitigation incorporated, qualifying for a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.
This IS/MND provides the Town and the public with an understanding of the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The purpose of the proposed project includes the physical modifications of three existing bridges in the Town of Fairfax that are proposed to undergo preventive maintenance repairs through Caltrans’ Highway Bridge Program’s Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program (BPMP).
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Project Title
Town of Fairfax Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program
2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address
Town of Fairfax
142 Bolinas Road
Fairfax, California 94930
Kristin Arnold
Public Works Director
(415) 453-0291
[email protected]
2.3 Project Location
The proposed project consists of three existing bridges proposed to undergo preventive maintenance repairs through Caltrans’ BPMP. Two of the bridges, on Marin Road and Spruce Road, are within a few blocks of each other, while the third creek crossing, Canyon Road Bridge, is approximately 2.35 miles southwest of the other two (Figure 1).
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 7 2.3.1 Marin Road Bridge
The Marin Road Bridge is located 0.6 miles north-northwest of the downtown center of the Town of Fairfax (Figure 2). At the site, the bridge spans Fairfax Creek at a location approximately 135 feet west of Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. The Marin Road Bridge spans Fairfax Creek approximately 1,845 creek feet downstream from “Westbrae Dam” bordering Olema Road, and about 735 creek feet upstream from Olema Road Bridge.
2.3.2 Spruce Road Bridge
The Spruce Road Bridge is located 0.25 miles northwest of the downtown center of Fairfax (Figure 3). At the site, the bridge spans Fairfax Creek at the intersection of Spruce Road and Arroyo Road.
2.3.3 Canyon Road Bridge
The Canyon Road Bridge is located 1.3 miles southwest of the downtown center of Fairfax (Figure 4). At the site, the bridge spans San Anselmo Creek at a location about 275 feet south of Cascade Drive. The Canyon Road Bridge spans San Anselmo Creek about 3,280 creek feet downstream from the Fairfax corporate limits near the downstream end of the Cascade Canyon Preserve, and about 2,270 creek feet upstream from the Meadow Way Bridge.
2.4 Existing General Plan Designation and Zoning District
2.4.1 General Plan Designation
Marin Road Bridge:
• Residential 1-6/dwelling units (du)/acre
Spruce Road Bridge:
• Residential 1-6 du/acre
• Residential 7-12 du/acre
Canyon Road Bridge:
• Residential 1-6 du/acre
2.4.2 Zoning District
Marin Road Bridge:
• RD-5.5-7 – Residential
Spruce Road Bridge:
• RS-6 – Single Family Residential
• RM – Multi-Family Residential
Canyon Road Bridge:
• RS-6 – Single Family Residential
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 8 2.5 Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Marin Road Bridge: Existing land uses near the Marin Road Bridge project site consist of singlefamily residential homes, pedestrian facilities and a bus stop. The nearest residences are located less than 100 feet away from the site. The Fairfax Creek channel flows immediately north and south, as well as under the project site (Figures 5 and 6).
Spruce Road Bridge: Existing land uses near the Spruce Road Bridge project site consist of single-family residential homes and a multi-family complex. The nearest residences are located less than 50 feet away from the site. The Fairfax Creek channel flows immediately north and south, as well as under the project site (Figures 7 and 8).
Canyon Road Bridge: Existing land uses near the Canyon Road Bridge project site consist of single-family residential homes. The nearest residences are located less than 100 feet away from the site. San Anselmo Creek flows immediately west and east, as well as under the project site (Figures 9 and 10).
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\22000\22304\GIS\ArcMap\22304Base\22304Base.aprx Layout Name:Figure 1. Location Map Sources: National Geographic, WRA | Prepared By: rhona.mcchesney, 8/27/2025 View Extent
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Figure 1. Location Map
±
Marin Road Bridge
<
Spruce Road Bridge
Canyon Road Bridge
<
<
’ e ■<
Oak
a to
Vallejo* O.
o.
Hercules
Pinole.* . ,e
El Sobrante C. San
v
Mill Valley
e7 $ 2 1
1 I %s%
Bothin Rd ))
C. (
lron Springs Rd 8 6
(
F /ASan O andsco
/ Mil
Ci Ro
A s
A lill Ave
Fairfax
K
t. ) ORo
9p
Deerp, a
'XL oDr Cy? 00) / 1o!
Y
T. 1?
—
7 s —
-0 4
Ccoring Lh
f
2 ascadeO I \
NS
I d
G
) nue
O' )/
wra
[ I ]
Environmental
Consultants
Meadow
Club
Deer
Park
est pve
. A ‘
Meads ,
Petaluma
Scenic:
80 y.‘e
sYa,-r
s
| oper Ln
00illbrae SanN
‘ngs
C
8 ond Rd 1,
An9eia
yss
•Richm
Berkeley At.8 _
y %
o
Bo. - s9ue.
ess
Daly City South San
• Francisco
Pacifica
o.
O
%,
“n.-
V
Oa
San Francisco*
%
0 Laute-
Olema
Rd
Bothin Rd
Marin Rd
Fairfax Creek
Fairfax Creek
Bothin Rd
Marin Rd
Manor Rd
Crescent Cir
Sir Francis Drake Blvd
Fairfax Creek
Manor Rd
Sir Francis Drake Blvd
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\22000\22304\GIS\ArcMap\22304Base\22304Base.aprx Layout Name: Figure 2. Marin Road Bridge Project Site Project Site Boundary (0.23 ac.)
Parcel Boundary
Building Footprint
Streams
Sources: ESRI World Imagery Base Map, WRA | Prepared By: rhona.mcchesney, 8/28/2025 Figure 2.
Marin Road
Bridge Project Site
0 50 100
Feet
±
Fairfax Creek
Marin Road Bridge
Bridge: 27C-0143
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
-
J
$
A C
I
17a, N
d
A
P
S.
\
7 J \i t w. ’ A
-
9 j
B
% . r,
A
y C
S
0 v '
C
$
[ ] 1
\ "
WTO
I
f
C
Environmental
Consultants
121
5 sy
3 A
$9
V
we ou6
% « e
( i
x
k
Azalea Ave
Sequoia R
d
Sequoia Rd
Spruce Rd
Sequoia Rd
Fairfax Creek
Fairfax Creek
Arroyo Rd
Spruce Rd
Spruce Rd
Park Rd
Frustuck Ave
Merwin Ave
Spruce Rd
Spruce Rd
Merwin Ave
Fairfax
Downtown
Commercial
Merwin Ave
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\22000\22304\GIS\ArcMap\22304Base\22304Base.aprx Layout Name: Figure 3. Spruce Road Bridge Project Site Sources: ESRI World Imagery Base Map, WRA | Prepared By: rhona.mcchesney, 8/28/2025 Figure 3.
Spruce Road
Bridge Project Site
0 50 100
Feet
±
Fairfax Creek
Project Site Boundary (0.09 ac.)
Parcel Boundary
Building Footprint
Streams
Spruce Road Bridge
Bridge: 27C-0141
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
TCOUIM
F
T ,A)
4 * y
1 ■
=
• ter
L
2 J Waw-
\
'• J . CO
( . • 3
C
% ]
I:
I
____ J
10 V
4.I 4P
0 L I
y
- Wriu ( y
1 \
\ 0
RR 7
?
\
%
\
(1 )P
<*
J ?
[ i ]
X
<
S L
. Y wra
t Environmental
Consultants
i V
ee
V, ts
k
y
. // "
L ■
/ I
’ A
; F"
“J17 To
%
sr 23 J 1
Canyon
Rd
Canyon Rd
San Anselmo Creek
Cascade Dr
San Anselmo Creek
Canyon Rd
Canyon
Rd
Cascade Dr
San Anselmo Creek
San Anselmo Creek
Cascade Dr
00304124
00304319
00304403
00303206
00303126
00304418
00303112
00303111
00304419
00304404
00304112
00304111
00304125
00303302
00304201 00304314
00304302
00304202
00304315
00304313
00304301
00304420
00304412
19705108
19705113
00303107
00303116
00303110
00304114
00304113
00303301
19707005
00303221
00303222
19705109
00303308
19705111
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\22000\22304\GIS\ArcMap\22304Base\22304Base.aprx Layout Name: Figure 4. Canyon Road Bridge Parcel Map Sources: ESRI World Imagery Base Map, WRA | Prepared By: rhona.mcchesney, 3/12/2026 Canyon Road Bridge
Bridge: 27C-0146
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
Figure 4.
Canyon Road
Bridge Parcel Map
0 50 100
Feet
San Anselmo Creek
Project Site Boundary (0.14 ac.)
Parcel Boundary
Building Footprint
Streams
V. I 4 a
• S
I
4 cyesrtn. t
es
1 S
1 .0
\
an
P.
[ ] I
wra
Environmental
Consultants
. 30 4
r—
2 6
Ps “
,,___ J
21)
ns
. cr N
A
Sera
Figure 5. Views of the Project Site - Marin Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View of the project site looking northwest from Fairfax Creek. View 2. View of the project site looking southwest from Marin Road. View 3. View of the project site looking northeast from Marin Road. View 4. View of the project site looking northeast from Marin Road.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Marin 88 ? "" 27*
"GN755 (‘"P ■ Pe e
J — a
■> .. s e “T
. Wrt
9, 990
Is wes s
11 w
se A/.
■I 5
‘a.50
7e FMAs
t*
R
■ leztii se 2 —
E Y OH
h.
“Y 7
2 wos Fa)
• S.
1 at
- “
=
I
1 1
wra
' llTF
NSS
Environmental
Consultants
2 '
)
fa
. cfS -
. ' 2 s FsC507 7
st
*$4
-a
4. Asn
—janl.cc
“1"
wa’s YaC
“rY
Figure 6. Views of the Surrounding Land Uses - Marin Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View looking northwest from Marin Road. View 2. View looking southeast from Marin Road. View 3. View looking northwest from Marin Road. View 4. View looking southeast from Marin Road.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Marin "7
t
X
/
4s
e wal 1 in —
- |
..
e4
I
1 GWT
/
*sy
I
..
;
5. (% PT2 Has
ta st
A
SAV
1 K
i
t
2 tann
T 7
<
seke
(wrd. Environmental
• Consultants
3?
i.4 :
I
I
cazagszo
ntmg.
Tilem
345d
MANOR
—ikt
",
- — t
5aats
VTR
Figure 7. Views of the Project Site - Spruce Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View of the project site looking southwest from Spruce Road. View 2. View of the project site looking northeast from Spruce Road. View 3. View of the project site looking north from Spruce Road. View 4. View of the project site looking northeast from Spruce Road.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Canyon and Spruce he ■5s
. p ci
SY a AMrL)
te
ys
sertg
3". . sen SLOW
1 ax:
j
2 -
- * ' -
s "
15 (he
saw!
-1 15
4 e
-
. -av
- "
■■■
wra
AT
hEnvironmental
Consultants
"I
J
-rr
' - --
ag
/
Se Th f I
Figure 8. Views of Surrounding Land Uses - Spruce Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View looking southwest from Spruce Road. View 2. View looking northeast from Spruce Road. View 3. View looking southwest from Spruce Road. View 4. View looking northwest from Spruce Road Bridge.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Canyon and Spruce /
.1UPrs)3
X.
-5e
-e t
===
i
■
====--
-
a
AI ‘a
...
7 59
L 7 #. 1 Bet a
- C “t r
ad cue
1 1“ ■
SPt (Vg h )
ta •
A th
t
S
ss
64% wa
1 a
$ vet
warssaels) a
— “
‘2.
» Zes 1 ' ■ I
wra
Environmental
Consultants
l' «
)
: 6 $
Js
• 35
(9
40. 7s M
5 re
c ? . > • wi" thas
sT5Pe.t
-e -an"n
ySC
-"yet AAP! 83
th
ebete oedk au
215
fae
FS
′ ou641 a
-1CT1h
AF
i...
s
s .3.
As
&
iEv
Ah
gng s ) ta
* 22 . . 27 _ $ S
a
--
ar"
Figure 9. Views of the Project Site - Canyon Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View of the project site looking northeast from Canyon Road. View 2. View of the project site looking west from creek bluff. View 3. View of the project site looking southwest from Canyon Road. View 4. View of the project site looking southwest from Canyon Road.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Canyon and Spruce ine
5 NY
— os
\
;e i
2 ko
• 4-
te
- “ .
Tin Ae e sat aas
W g
. P
s
y
1 al.
• 5 :
“I
A
wt mm MmmIm G
t
cil
es 11:. G -
1 .
d “ad
- —e
N s
JS Su —
wra
he’e
-5141
L 'I
Environmental
Consultants
n
sa G
. W.
—
—d
. 1.0 % ) "J. -
°d. se
“sas
Fr
weovnei
Tad
2 d —
, i
-
Figure 10. Views of the Surrounding Land Uses - Canyon Road Bridge BPMP Bridge Preventive Maintenance ProgramTown of Fairfax, California View 1. View looking southwest from Canyon Road Bridge. View 2. View looking southwest from creek bluff. View 3. View looking west from Canyon Road Bridge. View 4. View looking southwest from Cascade Drive.
P:\Projects\22000\22304\3.0_BPMP\Figures\CEQA\Photo Plates Canyon and Spruce MN
k
d BrT"
1,1 — e
2 tn". 41
99 W ' ,i wtet
e
jl Pyl
i
ch2 1 he n 1.0 au olk
213. —PP 5.
“L,
l’st
v A sr i
X Ta
.7
29 1 Mt
S. - 35
e — —
f -s P
ne
ae
br
anta 1.
F
a
■..
■.
A
■■ stw. > S C ' a." ■..1
Le
— ■
aS
(wrd. Environmental
• Consultants
-
[ LIW
—
1o
..
• i
4 gp
■
55 .
"es--
w
eems
wot Me
- -
s
3 ■: je” ‘
, 4 ’ ■ -0
Pat er
‘ t •a
Ph
e.
“set* cas
1 s
wi
*
-
PUP ,
=
Sere
,51e T00tr
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 19 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Project Description
The proposed project consists of three existing bridges proposed to undergo preventive maintenance repairs through the BPMP. The purpose of the BPMP is to maintain the existing inventory of bridges in good or fair condition, correct structural deficiencies in a bridge’s life before requiring costly rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement, extend the service life of existing bridges, and make efficient use of limited resources (California Department of Transportation [CalTrans] 2024). Various improvements and levels of repair are needed for each of the three bridges.
3.1.1 Project Construction Overview
For each bridge project the work in the creek would be completed during the dry season when the local segments of creek are at their lowest flow rates. The work areas would be dewatered by temporarily diverting any potential flows using means such as short dams made with sandbags, and/or longitudinal piping to bypass the work areas. Stagnant water would be pumped out to completely create a dry work area. In compliance with Chapter 8.32 of the Town of Fairfax Municipal Code, construction-phase best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented to prevent pollutant and sediment runoff into nearby waterways. Erosion control BMPs may include, but are not limited to, timely revegetation of graded areas, the use of hydroseed and hydraulic mulches, installation of erosion control blankets, and sediment detention basins, dams, or filters. Pollution prevention BMPs may include designated washout areas or facilities, control of trash and recycled materials, tarping of materials stored on-site, and proper location of and maintenance of temporary sanitary facilities. The Town has the authority to review designs and proposals for construction activities to determine whether adequate BMPs would be installed, implemented, and maintained during construction and once construction is complete.
No tree removal is proposed as part of the project. Limited trimming and cutting of vegetation around the worksites, as well as clearing and grubbing are also expected. For application of methacrylate and polyester concrete, the contractor would be required to conform to the recommendations of a certified industrial hygienist for safe worksite operations. Hours of construction operations would be limited to regular daylight work hours, aside from the exception of at least one nighttime operation at the Canyon Road Bridge site.
Most of the construction equipment needed for project work would be relatively compact, including air compressors, generators, a shot blaster, shotcrete pumps and hoses, concrete saws, concrete chipping guns and drills, and soil drilling equipment. Construction vehicles moving in and out of the construction areas would be a small loader, such as a Bobcat with backhoe or bucket attachments, polyester concrete mix truck, paver, roller, small excavator, a coldplaning machine, snooper lift truck, utility pickup trucks, flatbed trucks, dump trucks, dump trailers, a truck-mounted crane, concrete delivery trucks and a testing van. These vehicles and equipment would not be at all of the sites at the same time and would be staged within the Areas of Potential Effects (APEs) as needed.
Maintenance of the fish ladder at Canyon Road Bridge may require a temporary construction easement on private property extending into the creek. No other new easement or temporary or Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 20 permanent easements or right-of-way would be necessary for project implementation. No utility relocations would be necessary for the work on any of the three bridges. All access to the project sites and staging areas would be via the areas within the APEs. Equipment, large or small, would be lowered onto the creek bed with a truck-mounted crane to avoid ramping from the top to the creek bed for vehicles. Work would take place from the bridge topside as well as in the creek at two locations, as described below. The operations would be done manually, as well as with power equipment. Rocks for riprap would also be lowered one by one onto the needed areas with a crane. Proper signage providing notice of future construction and any road closure would be installed at all three sites on both sides of each bridge.
The three bridges are aggregated into one program for the purposes of CEQA and regulatory permitting. The specifics of the proposed work at each bridge site are covered in the following sections.
3.1.2 Marin Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0143)
Marin Road Bridge is a single span concrete earth-filled closed arch structure, constructed over Fairfax Creek presumably circa 1930. The bridge is on a residential street leading to Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, a major arterial through Fairfax. The structure is approximately 41 feet long and a little over 26 feet wide. The bridge supports two lanes of traffic nearly 10 feet above the creek bed. There are no sidewalks on the bridge, but a separate steel pedestrian/bicycle bridge exists for non-motorized travelers immediately upstream of this bridge (the latter bridge is not included in the BPMP).
Marin Road Bridge is not eligible for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listing. It has a Sufficiency Rating of 68.0 but is flagged as neither Structurally Deficient (SD) nor Functionally Obsolete (FO) in the latest (2014) Caltrans Bridge Inspection Report.
The BPMP repairs for Marin Road Bridge and the method of construction consist of the following components (as shown on Figure 11):
• Repair of the toppling bridge wingwall: The leaning, rotating and separated concrete wingwall on the southeast side (downstream of the bridge) would be repaired in-situ. The existing wingwall is approximately 10 feet long and eight feet high. The wingwall would be repaired by reconnecting it to the existing bridge with steel dowels and rebar. The wingwall would be surfaced with a fresh layer of lightly reinforced air-blown concrete (shotcrete) and stabilized with soil nails pinning it to the soil. Soil nails are steel tension elements placed in holes drilled through the concrete wingwall and the soil behind it for a distance of approximately 15-20 feet, inclined at an angle of 15 degrees. The ends of these tension elements are buried in a bulb of grout pumped into the end of the drilled hole, called bond zone, allowing the bond zone to mobilize the soil through friction. The other end of the tension elements would protrude out of the wingwall surface and buried in the wingwall concrete overlay, anchored with special hardware and tensioned slightly to take the slack out of the line, creating a fastening system that would disallow the future movements of the wingwall.
• Repair of the tattered rock slope protection (RSP) around the above wingwall: The existing rocks making up the scattered riprap would be collected and a new course of rock riprap would be installed, which would be sized for the top anticipated creek flow velocity. The soil volume below the bottom of the wingwall would be excavated along the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 21 front for a width and depth of two feet each to create a trench to place the rock in as a buttress against future scour. On the free edge of the wingwall not connecting with the bridge headwall, a similar type of excavation would occur to place rock and connect to the RSP buttressing at the foot of the wall. This would, in essence, surround the two exposed edges of the wingwall with rock riprap. Excavation at the edge of the wingwall for the RSP would be done manually and with small power equipment. The surface of the rock riprap would be flush with concrete wingwall, the creek bed, and the embankment to not protrude into the waterway and impact water flows or flow capacity. The trenches housing the RSP would be lined with special geotextile fabric to prevent the migration of the finely grained soil particles and erosion of the soil around the rock. • Repair of the structural damage to another wingwalls: This second wingwall is on northwest side (upstream of the bridge) and is positioned vertically. The wingwall connects with the bridge headwall at an angle and is cracked horizontally near the bottom for five to six feet and has dropped five to six inches below the crack due to gravity. The repair work would consist of cleaning the damaged and cracked concrete, patching the crack with special grout to prevent further deterioration of the bridge, and burying some rock below the creek bed surface and in front of the wingwall to prevent further deterioration. The surface of the rock riprap would be flush with the creek bed in order to not protrude into the waterway and impact water flows or flow capacity.
Geotextile lining would be placed around the rock riprap. • Repair of structural concrete spalls in the underside of the bridge: A couple of structurally damaged spots in the concrete underside of the bridge would be repaired manually. After cleaning the rust from the steel rebars and removing the unsound concrete within the spall, a special agent, such as epoxy grout, would be applied and made flush with the concrete surfaces to protect the reinforcement and patch the concrete.
An APE drawing (Figure 2) and a preliminary Bridge General Plan (Figure 11) for the repairs have been developed for this bridge work. The work would be at both the deck and below deck levels and is expected to take as many as ten working days from start to finish. The bridge would remain entirely open to motorized and non-motorized traffic throughout project construction; however, a flag person directing traffic may be necessary at times to ensure safe travel through the site.
3.1.3 Spruce Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0141)
Spruce Road Bridge is a highly skewed, single span concrete T-beam structure over Fairfax Creek, presumed to have been constructed circa 1930. The structure is approximately 22 feet long and 37 feet wide. The bridge supports two lanes of traffic and two five-foot wide sidewalks and concrete railings nearly 12 feet above the creek bed. The bridge is not eligible for NRHP listing. It has a Sufficiency Rating of 63.9 but is not flagged as either Structurally Deficient or Functionally Obsolete in the latest Caltrans Bridge Inspection Report (from 2014 inspections).
The BPMP repairs for Spruce Road Bridge are shown in Figure 12 and consist of the following:
• Sealing of the deck: The asphalt concrete on the bridge deck would be removed with a specialized asphalt grinder. After cleaning the deck and repairing any unsound concrete, work would be followed by the application of a concrete sealant called methacrylate. The sealant would be applied with a mop throughout the deck and sprinkled with a light Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 22 layer of sand while it is still tacky, which would ensure better tire grip along the bridge deck surface. Sealing the deck would be followed by applying a layer of polyester concrete overlay. This mixture would be dumped on the deck from a special polyester concrete mix truck, spread, leveled and broom-finished to proper deck grades by concrete finishers.
• Repair of expansion joints: The rubber bridge expansion joint seals at each end of the bridge would be replaced. The new concrete deck grades at the ends of the bridge would be transitioned to the asphalt surface on the approach roadways within 10 feet of the ends of the bridge.
• Repair of structural concrete spalls in the underside of the bridge: The numerous bridge spalls in the structural members would be cleaned up and patched with special epoxy grout. The work under the bridge would be done using a “snooper” truck lift parked on the deck, eliminating the need for scaffolding or working in the creek.
An APE drawing (Figure 3) and a preliminary Bridge General Plan (Figure 12) for the repairs have been developed for this bridge work. The work would be completed entirely from the bridge deck and street level; no work in the creek would be needed. The work is expected to take as many as ten working days from start to finish. The bridge would be closed off to motorized traffic for a number of hours a few times during this period but would remain open to foot traffic on the sidewalks. Motorized traffic would be detoured via Arroyo Road and Azalea Avenue during the temporary closure, as shown in Figure 13.
3.1.4 Canyon Road Bridge (Br. No. 27C-0146)
Canyon Road Bridge is a single-span precast voided slab concrete superstructure over San Anselmo Creek. The bridge was constructed in 1996 on two abutments remaining from a previous bridge at this location. The structure is approximately 30 feet long and slightly over 15 feet wide and supports a single lane of traffic nearly 15 feet above the creek bed. The bridge has guard railings but does not have any sidewalks. The 2014 and 2022 Caltrans Bridge Inspection Reports indicate that the bridge has a Sufficiency Rating of 72.8. Further, the bridge was and is flagged as Functionally Obsolete in the 2014 Bridge Inspection Report by Caltrans in the latest Bridge Inspection Report (2014) due to its narrow width. However, the narrow width is due to the Town’s decision to construct the new deck for a single lane bridge and the bridge should not be considered as Functionally Obsolete for this reason. The bridge is not eligible for NRHP listing.
There is a concrete fish ladder that begins just upstream of the bridge and ends just downstream of it. The fish ladder consists of a concrete invert covering the creek bed from abutment to abutment, and a depressed rectangular fish ladder structure with steel guides situated in the center. The fish ladder was not included in the original project; however, as part of the regulatory permitting process with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), repairs to the fish ladder were agreed upon and incorporated into the project design.
The Canyon Road Bridge BPMP repairs are shown in Figure 14 and consist of the following:
• Replacing the existing northwest wingwall: The northwest wingwall is currently made up of stacks of solidified concrete sacks. A cluster of old redwood trees behind the wingwall is causing the wingwall to bulge, making the possibility of its collapse a hazard. The stacked concrete sacks would be removed one by one manually and hauled away. The redwood tree cluster would be exposed and protected in place during project Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 23 construction. The new vertical wingwall would be an approximately 15 foot-wide by seven- to eight-foot-tall reinforced concrete wall, located a short distance in front of the redwood cluster and connected to the left edge of the existing bridge abutment. The new wingwall would be stabilized with several soil nails going through the trunks and/or roots of the redwood trees. The new wingwall surface would come to the edge of the concrete fish ladder and would have a vertical expansion joint in it to allow the tree trunk to grow outwardly. An approximately nine-foot segment of the wall would have a footing, protruding three feet away from the face of the wall, the top surface of which would be flush with the creek bed. Excavation at the edge of the creek for the wingwall and its footing would be done manually and with small power equipment lowered from the top of the bridge. The surface of the new wingwall would be flush and in line with the existing abutment wall in order to not protrude into the waterway and impact water flows or flow capacity. The space behind the wingwall housing the redwood tree roots and base would be backfilled with soil. A new cable railing would be installed on top of the wall for fall protection. A two-foot wide by two-foot-deep course of rock riprap with geotextile lining would be placed in front of the foundation of the wall, flush with the creek bed, for protection of the footing from scour.
• Repair of the structural damage to the north abutment: To prevent the further deterioration of the north abutment, approximately two inches of concrete on the surface of the north abutment wall would be removed manually in order to expose the rebar grip and clean the reinforcement. The concrete and dust from chipping and grinding the concrete surface would be captured and hauled away. Once the area is clean, the reinforcement grid in the wall would be covered with a new two-inch layer of special grout and finished smoothly. No repairs or modifications to the south abutment are proposed or anticipated to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future. • Repair of the northeast bridge wingwall: The short existing northeast wingwall on the right side of the north abutment would be removed and replaced with an extended wall to envelope an existing storm drainpipe daylighting adjacent to the bridge. The existing pipe discharge is eroding the creek next to the bridge. The new wingwall would be doweled into the abutment wall and angled into the creek bank, avoiding any intrusion into the current creek channel. The wingwall extension would be fortified with a couple of soil nails into the exiting bank. This wall would also have a short triangular footing in front, the top of which would be flush with the creek bed, joining with the existing invert slab. The downstream edge of the wall would be protected from erosion with a two-foot wide by two-foot-deep course of rock riprap buried into the creek bank and flush with the exposed slope. A new cable railing would be installed on top of the wall for fall protection.
• Repairs to fish ladder: Steel baffles that are dislodged or in danger of becoming dislodged would be reinstalled. Cracks, chips, and gaps in the concrete ladder walls would be filled, or the baffles would be modified to fit the existing conditions to avoid wear and future dislodging. Rails along the ladder would be replaced in-kind with new rails of similar shape and size. In addition, materials causing the debris jam at the entrance of the ladder (wood, rocks, metal, and other material) would be removed. This work would take place within San Anselmo Creek and will require limited work with APN 003-044-03, depending on the fish ladder boundaries to be confirmed during the next phase of the project. If the project would require work outside the public right-of-way, the Town would obtain temporary construction access.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 24 • Sealing the cracks in the bridge deck: The bridge deck would be sealed with methacrylate, similar to Spruce Road Bridge; however, no polyester concrete would be used. Sealing of the deck would require bridge closure for approximately four to five hours, which would be completed at nighttime. In order to ensure the safety of residents during this time, a first-response crew and vehicle from Ross Valley Fire Department would be positioned on the south end of the bridge for any emergency situations.
Secondly, the bridge would be opened for crossing by covering the sealing agent with plywood if an emergency crossing is needed during the short duration of bridge closure.
Prior notifications would be sent to the neighborhood to inform them of the work schedule and details.
• Installation of safety signage and guard railings: Two narrow bridge signs would be installed at each approach to the bridge to enhance safety over the crossing. The existing wooden approach railings at all four corners of the bridge would be replaced with metal beam guard railings.
An APE drawing (Figure 4) and a preliminary Bridge General Plan (Figure 14) for the repairs have been developed for this bridge work. The work would be at both the deck and below deck levels and is expected to take as many as fifteen working days from start to finish.
3.2 Project–Related Approvals, Agreements, and Permits
The information contained in this IS/MND will be used by the Town of Fairfax as it considers whether to approve the proposed project. If the project is approved, the IS/MND would be used by the Town and responsible and trustee agencies in conjunction with various approvals and permits. These actions include, but may not be limited to, the following approvals by the agencies indicated:
3.2.1 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) • Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
3.2.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
• Clean Water Act, Application for Section 401 Water Quality Certification • Notice of Intent under the State Construction General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
3.2.3 United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
• Clean Water Act Section 404 Form 4345, Application for Department of the Army Permit Figure 11. Marin Road Bridge Repair Details
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
Date: December 2015
Source: CIC, Inc.
— TT 7b
Place 10" conc gap closure & finish flush with
(
existing wall prior to placing air blown conc
I =H, Remove rock & debris in separation area between wingwall & bridge --------- EXISt wall Exist wall reinf to remain
Ef
.J - 3‘-0" --------- 1
Exist wingwall
3 3 #5 Cont ---------------
Exist bridge Abut )
Exist arch soffit +
Mt I
r OG Repair spall 1 OG
•—W—
N
2‘ wide riprap in front
of exist wingwall. Fill
LEGEND
Denotes limits of Conc removal
ELEVATION B-B ELEVATION A-A
NOTE:
wra
Environmental
Consultants
Riprap surface on the Side (2‘
deep) to be flush with finished
surface of wall & embankment.
Pre-fabricated steel
pedestrian bridge
Clean the 5‘± long
crack & fill with grout
Remove protruding conc
debris in front of wingwall
(approx. 3 cubic ft.) -----------
Drill & bond one row of #5
max into exist headwall ---------
The contractor shall verify all controlling field dimensions before ordering or fabricating any material.
any soil cavity under
the wingwall with rock
and grout
Soil nail, tot 2
midway at top or
bottom
Exist 11‘± X 11‘± wall to be
reconnected to bridge head wall &
finished with 5" of air-blown conc.
1‘-6"
Remove
conc
D
)
De
)
De J
II
hme
variesg 12
Figure 12. Spruce Road Bridge Repair Details
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
Date: December 2015
Source: CIC, Inc.
Deck
------ New polyester concrete overlay
Exist reinf
(702
Jt Seal Type A (MR = 1”)
O O
BB or EB
1/8” X 6" cont hard
p of ( t ist \ t 24* 5
Top board. Place Top of 4” exist below AC deck
Base (depth not known)
N
B6-21 SECTION THRU ABUTMENT - JT SEALS DETAILS
NOTE:
wra
Environmental
Consultants
Exist concrete
deck surface -
Face of
Barrier
Sawcut vertical edge
1/2” min depth (Typ)
Denotes Limits
of Cone removal
0 to
O
o
O
Y C
O o
The contractor shall verify all
controlling field dimensions before
ordering or fabricating any material.
3/4” expanded
polystyrene---------
-Top of AC Transition
Top of Approach AC (4”
deep assumed)
w
o H
CXI'
Approximate deck surface after
removing spalled or unsound
concrete and cleaning
C
o
O
o
E
Q
C
s
O
C
Fill void with polyester concrete
material if "d" < 3”; rapid setting
concrete patch to bottom of
overlay if ”d” > 3”.
UNSOUND CONC REPAIR DETAIL
No Scale
Figure 13. Construction Detour Plans
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program Town of Fairfax, California Date: December 2015
Source: CIC, Inc.
o
NOTES Olema Rd
1. Locations of construction area signs as shown are
Q
approximate. exact locations will be determined by the
Engineer. TTC shall be in accordance of the latest
C edition of the ca MUTCD. 0
o%
2. Sign dimensions are shown in inches.
A 3)% MA Ca 3. SCac Q C 4. %A
5. Sign codes are California MUTCD, unless otherwise noted.
D
B “Cao0.
0 C
B
DXH
DETOUR PLAN
MARIN RD. CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS CANYON RD. CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS
NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE Z G
LEGEND
O
Project Location
F
Sign OY
Sign Number
Traffic Detour
A
O- 2
pzaleee Q) Q.
Construction Area Signs
GC
0 Q
SIGN MESSAGE Q) F O
R11 - 3 18x24 Road Closed — Local Traffic Only2
0 C O- R7-1L 12x18 No Parking Anytime 4
S%0
2 R7-1R 12x18 No Parking Anytime3
O'
W20-1 24x24 Road Work
7 W20-2 24x24 Detour Ahead3
(G
M4-8 12x24 Detour3
0 W1-6 8x24
4 A
36x36 Road Closed 10 P.M. 4 A.M. on (Date)2 Spruce Rd DXE 9 A
Y
1 o0
9 Permanent Signs
O W5-3 30x30 One Lane Bridge I I2
O
J * MUTCD code
SPRUCE ROAD DETOUR PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS
wra
Environmental
Consultants
SIGN
CODE
NO. OF
SIGNS
PANEL
SIZE
PROJECT
LOCATION
DE
Regulatory signs shall have black lettering on white
background.
PROJECT
LOCATION
%o
Spruce Rd. Bridge sidewalk will remain open during
construction.
DE
6. See Canyon Road Bridge General Plan sheet traffic
handling during deck sealing operations.
HD
1. Spruce Avenue closed between Azalea Drive &
Arroya Road. See detour plan on this sheet.
Use Azalea Drive via Arroya Rd.
A) o
9 S °o
2(G
Q o
%
()
< Q%o 0
7. For permanent sign locations at Canyon Rd. Bridge see Canyon Road Bridge General Plan.
' %
(D)
%
ao wo"
pzale@
1 4
. o
O %&
SIGN
ID@@©©©©©©
%%
00 9o
O%0
coAQ
%
2 o
<%
Canyon Ro
%
4. "se.
a
%
Q—%
toO
%
Figure 14. Canyon Road Bridge Repair Details
Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program
Town of Fairfax, California
Date: December 2015
Source: CIC, Inc.
%,
Approx ROW B. A
C
Soil nail, Typ
D
E
7 Back of footing heel
Back of wall Remove stub wall, Typ /
/
Note: . For sections A-A thru E-E see
"Wingwall Repair Details No. 3 Sheet /
Back of wall
z 1777777777777 LO
Face of Exist Abut (Refinish) IExtend Exist invert slab %2" wideX 3" deep groove I under Cantilever wall
VOC
Ftg Key-—
4 A
B PLAN - NORTH ABUTMENT c J. Approx ROW 0
E 12-6” Form top of wall around tree
(
the exact shape and location. Additional #4 reinf grid
#5 Pu bent tot
E
2 each
side @ cut-out, typ. /
Soil nail 2 mats of#4@ 12
anchor, Typ Bars 0000000000000000 0 00Q level 1/7
Typ 6
-Z 1:3, Typ I DCOs &
DCOs
CO
O
O) DCOs -A O
( —5 Drainage behind walls — DCOs
77 4 r-3” Y7 77Z44 each side #5_ DCo
Creek bed X - - y
2’-0”± ■I 222722222227 -------- -------7--------- O
Exist horiz reinf (assumed spaced (
Remove Portion of 2‘± wide x E
NOTE:
6”± de Conc slab as shown 2Z I
2-0”
F
15’ ± measured along LOL
DEVELOPED ELEVATION NORTH ABUT
* Remove to a depth of 10‘ »
wra
Top of exist conc invert
One dowel into invert
Environmental
Consultants
Wall LOL =
face of wall
Exist redwood tree
clusters to remain
Exist Reinf. Preserve and
embed into new wall, Typ
Bond
breaker
max both ways,
not all shown
Exist metal
sheathing
Approx, edges of
exist invert slab
■Wall LOL =
face of wall
Footing of wall Type 6A (Mod) (Reinf not shown.)
Extend to invert slab and under cantilever wall —
Trunk of
tree cluster.
Soil nail
anchor, Typ
1/2” Exp Jt
material &
waterstop
1/2” X 3” deep
groove full height
Additional 4 each #4 x 4‘-6"
reinf front & back at pipe
Pipe NPS
1-1/4” std
Exist 18"± 0 Conc pipe
to remain
Drill & bond #5 __ ___
@ 18" max, Typ both
sides of abutment
Bottom of exist abutment
(depth unknown)
2‘± wide x 12"± thick
stub wall (remove)-------
NOTE:
For Section F-F See "Wingwall Repair Details" No.4" Sheet Top of ftg
(level) wall LOL
2‘-0"
Typ/
Denotes limits of conc
removal
Exist Conc retaining
wall to remain----------------
Cable Railing, Typ
both sides
The contractor shall verify all controlling field
dimensions before ordering or fabricating any
material.
4’-6”, Typ
measured a ong LOL
Drill & bond (Epoxy Cartridge)
#5 X 2’-0” @ 12 max into
invert slab---------------------------"
. 3’-0”± r
12”± stub wall
V‘A
Note:
The alignment of the cantilever and Type 6A
(Mod) wall, as well as the top of the wall
and cable railing may be adjusted by the
Engineer upon removal of Conc sacks
1/2" Exp Jt material
between walls —
1-6”
Remove 1/2" of Conc. cover and
refinish exposed Abut surface
Methacrylate
4-o-/ 7/
g’-o” ±_________ _
Reinf Conc Ret Wall 6A (Mod)
gnar. the engineer to determine
/ Conc sacks to
be removed not
. shown —A ,
@ 15"±) to be preserved &
incorporated in new walls, Typ
3" drainage opening for 4"
pvc pipe behind the walls
13’-9”±
6-0”
Cantilever wall
TV
ir
(~50ll liv
anchc:
k
/ / Back of cantilever wall’
! / & invert slab extension
/ Waterstop------ s _—
(R
8 O
A
Wall Type 6A (Mod) /
Ftg heel ---------7
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 29 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Public Services
Agricultural Resources Hazards and Hazardous Materials Recreation Air Quality Hydrology and Water Quality Transportation
Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Tribal Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems Energy Noise Wildfire
Geology and Soils Population and Housing Mandatory Findings of Significance
4.1 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the project MAY have a “Potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
_________________________________________ __________________ Signature Date
Name and Title: Kristin Arnold, Public Works Director
□
□
X
X
X
□
X
□
□
X
□
□
X
□
□
□
□
X
□
□
X
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 30 4.2 Initial Study Checklist
This section describes the existing environmental conditions in and near the project sites and evaluates environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The environmental checklist, as recommended in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, was used to identify environmental impacts that could occur if the proposed project is implemented.
Each of the environmental categories was fully evaluated, and one of the following four determinations was made for each checklist question:
“No Impact” means that no impact to the resource would occur as a result of implementing the project.
“Less than Significant Impact” means that implementation of the project would not result in a substantial and/or adverse change to the resource, and no mitigation measures are required.
“Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” means that the incorporation of one or more mitigation measures is necessary to reduce the impact from potentially significant to less than significant.
“Potentially Significant Impact” means that there is either substantial evidence that a project-related effect may be significant, or, due to a lack of existing information, could have the potential to be significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 31 4.2.1 Aesthetics
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the Project
is in an urbanized area, would the Project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light
or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project sites consist of three existing bridges proposed to undergo preventive maintenance repairs through the BPMP. Two of the bridges, on Marin Road and Spruce Road, are within a few blocks of each other, while the third creek crossing, Canyon Road Bridge, is approximately 2.35 miles away from the other two (Figure 1). All three project sites are located within Marin County, which does not have any officially designated state or county scenic highways (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2018).
Marin Road Bridge
The Marin Road Bridge is about 0.6 miles north-northwest of the downtown center of Fairfax.
The bridge spans Fairfax Creek at a location about 135 feet west of Sir Francis Drake Blvd.
Motorists and pedestrians along portions of Marin Road, Bothin Road, and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard have views of the Marin Road Bridge site. Views in all directions from public areas adjacent to the project site include vegetation within and along the creek, single-family residential homes, pedestrian facilities and a bus stop. The Fairfax Creek channel flows immediately north and south, as well as under the project site.
Spruce Road Bridge
The Spruce Road Bridge is about 0.25 miles northwest of the downtown center of Fairfax. The bridge spans Fairfax Creek at the intersection of Spruce Road and Arroyo Road. Motorists and Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 32 pedestrians along portions of Arroyo Road and Spruce Road have views of the Spruce Road Bridge site. Views looking all directions from public viewing areas adjacent to the project site include vegetation within and along the creek, single-family residential homes and a multifamily complex. The Fairfax Creek channel flows immediately north and south, as well as under the project site.
Canyon Road Bridge
Canyon Road Bridge is located approximately 1.3 miles southwest of the downtown center of Fairfax. The bridge spans San Anselmo Creek at a location about 275 feet south of Cascade Drive. Motorists and pedestrians along portions of Canyon Road have views of the Canyon Road Bridge site. Views looking in all directions from the project site consist of vegetation within and along the creek and single-family residential homes. San Anselmo Creek flows immediately west and east, as well as under the project area.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 33 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less-than-Significant Impact
A scenic vista is defined as a vantage point with a broad and expansive view of a significant landscape feature (e.g., a mountain range, the Bay, lake, or coastline) or of a significant historical or architectural feature. The three project sites are within developed areas of the Town of Fairfax. The project sites are generally surrounded by residential uses and are only visible from nearby residences and local roadways. During construction, views of the project sites would temporarily be impacted by the presence of construction equipment and materials on-site.
However, the project sites are not visible from any scenic vistas and are not considered scenic resources by any local policy or ordinance. Therefore, this temporary placement of construction equipment and materials on-site would not constitute an adverse effect on a scenic vista. Once construction is finished, all materials and equipment would be removed from the sites and views of the site would remain similar to pre-project conditions. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The impact would be less than significant. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact
There are no officially designated or eligible state scenic highways within the vicinity of the project sites (Caltrans 2018). The nearest eligible state scenic highway is U.S. Route 101, located approximately seven miles from the Town of Fairfax. Therefore, the project would not damage any scenic resources within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less-than-Significant Impact
During the construction phase, views of the material stored in the project sites, construction equipment, and stockpiled soil would be available for brief periods. The proposed project includes repairs to three existing bridges in Fairfax. For the Marin Road Bridge, these repairs include reconnecting, resurfacing, and repairing cracks in the wingwalls, replacing rock slope protection, and patching damaged concrete. For the Spruce Road Bridge, these repairs include sealing the deck with a concrete polyester overlay, replacing expansion joints, and patching soffit spalls. For the Canyon Road Bridge, these repairs include replacing the existing concrete stack wingwall with a reinforced concrete wingwall, reinforcing the north abutment, replacement and extension of the northeast wingwall, and sealing cracks on the deck. Therefore, there are no new structural changes proposed to the existing bridges, rather repairs and replacements of existing features that would maintain the visual character of the existing bridges. Views of the project sites would be similar to existing conditions, and impacts would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 34 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The project would not create a new permanent source of light or glare. The proposed project would involve preventive maintenance repairs of three existing bridges and does not propose new lighting structures to be added. Construction activities would be limited to regular daylight work hours, with the exception of one nighttime operation at Canyon Road Bridge. This nighttime operation would include a single night of construction work consisting of four hours of active work from 8 pm to 12 am followed by four to six hours of inactive curing time for the bridge deck seals. The active work period would require the use of lighting equipment, while the inactive work would not. This nighttime lighting from approximately 8 pm to 12 am could cause glare, potentially affecting residents in the immediate vicinity. To reduce glare from lighting used during nighttime construction activities, Caltrans would require project contractors to direct lighting onto the immediate area under construction only and to avoid shining lights towards residences.
Therefore, impacts related to light and glare would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 35 4.2.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project sites do not contain any farmland or forestry land and are not designated for agricultural or forestry uses or Prime, Statewide, or Locally Important Farmland (California Department of Conservation 2025). The proposed project is located in a semi-developed area and follows existing roads, easements, and rights-of-way. Surrounding land for all three project sites is developed with residential and open space uses.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact
According to the 2010 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program from the State Department of Conservation, the project sites are located in areas that are designated as urban and built-up Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 36 land and the proposed project would, therefore, not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide importance to a non-agricultural use. No impact on would occur. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact
The project sites are not zoned for agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract.
Therefore, no conflicts are anticipated. No impact would occur. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland(as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact
The project sites are not on any land zoned for forest land, timberland or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, the project would have no impact. d) Result in a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact
The project sites are not located on forest land. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact
The proposed project involves the construction and maintenance of existing infrastructure within already developed areas that do not include any farmland. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the conversion of forest land or farmland to a non-forest use or a non-agricultural use and would thus have no impact on forestry or agricultural resources.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 37 4.2.3 Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations:
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is in non-attainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) affecting a substantial
number of people?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project sites are located in the Town of Fairfax, which is in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB). The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the regional agency tasked with managing air quality in the region. The California Air Resources Board (CARB), a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), oversees regional air district activities and regulates air quality at the State level. The BAAQMD has published the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines that are used in this assessment to evaluate air quality impacts of the Project (BAAQMD 2022). The 2017 Clean Air Plan (CAP) is the most current air quality management plan developed and adopted by BAAQMD.
Ambient Air Quality and Climate
The Bay Area has a Mediterranean climate characterized by wet winters and dry summers.
During the summer, a high-pressure cell centered over the northeastern Pacific Ocean results in stable meteorological conditions and a steady northwesterly wind flow that generally keeps storms from affecting the California coast. During the winter, the Pacific high-pressure cell weakens, resulting in increased precipitation and the occurrence of storms. The highest air pollutant concentrations in the Bay Area generally occur during inversions, when a surface layer of cooler air becomes trapped beneath a layer of warmer air. An inversion reduces the amount of vertical mixing and dilution of air pollutants in the cooler air near the surface.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 38 Air Pollutants of Concern
The CARB and U.S. EPA focus on the following air pollutants as regional indicators of ambient air quality:
• Ozone
• Coarse particulate matter (PM10)
• Fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
• Nitrogen dioxide
• Carbon monoxide
• Sulfur dioxide
• Lead
Because these are the most prevalent air pollutants known to be harmful to human health based on extensive criteria documents, they are referred to as “criteria air pollutants.” In the SFBAAB, the primary criteria air pollutants of concern are ground-level ozone formed through reactions of oxides of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG), PM10, and PM2.5. Regional air pollutants, such as ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, can be formed and/or transported over long distances and affect ambient air quality far from the emissions source. The magnitude and location of specific health effects from exposure to increased ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 concentrations are the result of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout the SFBAAB, as opposed to a single project.
Localized air pollutants generally dissipate with distance from the emission source and can pose a health risk to nearby populations. Toxic air contaminants (TACs), such as diesel particulate matter (DPM), are considered localized pollutants. PM2.5 is also considered a localized air pollutant, in addition to being considered a regional air pollutant. Air dispersion models can be used to reliably quantify the health risks to nearby receptors associated with emissions of localized air pollutants from an individual project.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal and State Regulations
The U.S. EPA is responsible for implementing the programs established under the Federal Clean Air Act, such as establishing and reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and judging the adequacy of State Implementation Plans to attain the NAAQS. A State Implementation Plan must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs. If a state fails to enforce its implementation of approved regulations, or if the EPA determines that a State Implementation Plan is inadequate, the EPA is required to prepare and enforce a Federal Implementation Plan to promulgate comprehensive control measures for a given State Implementation Plan.
The CARB is responsible for establishing and reviewing the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), developing and managing the California State Implementation Plans, identifying TACs, and overseeing the activities of regional air quality management districts. In California, mobile emissions sources (e.g., construction equipment, trucks, and automobiles) are regulated by CARB and stationary emissions sources (e.g., industrial facilities) are regulated by the regional air quality management districts.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 39 In accordance with the Federal Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act, areas in California are classified as either in attainment, maintenance (i.e., former nonattainment), or nonattainment of the NAAQS and CAAQS for each criteria air pollutant. To assess the regional attainment status, the BAAQMD collects ambient air quality data from over 30 monitoring sites within the SFBAAB (BAAQMD 2017a). Based on current monitoring data, the SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10 (CAAQS only), and PM2.5, and is designated an attainment or unclassified area for all other pollutants. The BAAQMD is primarily responsible for ensuring that the NAAQS and CAAQS are attained and maintained in the SFBAAB. The BAAQMD fulfills this responsibility by adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, and monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions.
BAAQMD Screening Criteria
The BAAQMD has established screening criteria to determine whether individual projects could result in potentially significant criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions, which are described in Section 4 of the BAAQMD 2022 CEQA Guidelines (BAAQMD 2022). Preliminary screening for construction and operational criteria provides lead agencies with a conservative indication of whether a project would result in the generation of criteria air pollutants or precursors that exceed the BAAQMD thresholds significance. If all screening criteria for criteria air pollutants and precursors are met by a proposed project, then the lead agency need not perform a detailed assessment of the project’s criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions.
Table 4-1 of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines contains single land use construction and operational criteria air pollutant and precursor screening levels for various land use categories. For operational emissions, it is assumed that projects would result in a less-than-significant impact related to criteria air pollutants and precursor emissions if: 1) the project size is at or below the operational screening level size for the applicable land use category (contained in Table 4-1 of the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines); 2) operational activities would not include stationary engines and industrial sources subject to BAAQMD rules and regulations; and 3) operational activities would not overlap with construction activities. For construction emissions, it is assumed that projects would result in a less-than-significant impact related to criteria air pollutants and precursors if: 1) the project size is below the applicable screening level shown in Table 4-1; 2) all BAAQMD-recommended BMPs are included in the project design and implemented during construction, 3) construction-related activities would not overlap with operational activities; and 4) construction-related activities would not include demolition, simultaneous occurrence of two or more construction phases, extensive site preparation, extensive material transport, or stationary sources subject to BAAQMD rules and regulations.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less-than-Significant Impact
The BAAQMD’s 2017 CAP is the applicable air quality plan for projects located in the SFBAAB (BAAQMD 2017b). Consistency may be determined by evaluating whether the project supports the primary goals of the 2017 CAP, including applicable control measures contained within the plan, and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any of the control measures.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 40 The primary goals of the 2017 CAP are the attainment of ambient air quality standards and reduction of population exposure to air pollutants for the protection of public health in the Bay Area. Because the project would not result in any significant and unavoidable air quality impacts related to emissions, ambient concentrations, or public exposures (see discussions below), the project would support the primary goals of the 2017 CAP.
The control measures from the 2017 CAP, which aim to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gases (GHGs) from stationary, area, and mobile sources, are organized into nine categories. As described in Table 1, the project would be consistent with the applicable control measures from the 2017 CAP. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, and the impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 41 Table 1. Project Consistency with BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan
CONTROL
MEASURES PROJECT CONSISTENCY
Stationary
Sources
Not applicable. The stationary source measures, which are designed to reduce emissions from stationary sources, are incorporated into rules adopted by the BAAQMD and then enforced by the BAAQMD’s Permit and Inspection programs.
Because the project would not include new stationary sources, the stationary source control measures are not applicable to the project.
Transportation
Not applicable. The transportation control measures are designed to reduce vehicle trips, use, miles traveled, idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing vehicle emissions. Operation of the project would not generate any additional vehicle trips compared to the existing conditions. Therefore, the transportation control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Energy
Not applicable. The energy control measures are designed to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by decreasing the amount of electricity consumed in the Bay Area, as well as decreasing the carbon intensity of the electricity used by switching to less GHG-intensive fuel sources for electricity generation. Since these measures apply to electrical utility providers and local government agencies (and not individual projects), the energy control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Buildings
Not applicable. The BAAQMD has authority to regulate emissions from certain sources in buildings such as boilers and water heaters but has limited authority to regulate buildings themselves. Therefore, the building control measures focus on working with local governments that have authority over local building codes to facilitate adoption of best GHG control practices and policies. Since the project does not include any building construction, the building control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Agriculture
Not applicable. The agriculture control measures are designed primarily to reduce emissions of methane. Since the project does not include any agricultural activities, the agriculture control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Natural and
Working Lands
Not applicable. The control measures for the natural and working lands sector focus on increasing carbon sequestration on rangelands and wetlands, as well as encouraging local governments to adopt ordinances that promote urban tree plantings. Since the project does not include the disturbance of any rangelands or wetlands, the natural and working lands control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Waste
Management
Consistent. The waste management measures focus on reducing or capturing methane emissions from landfills and composting facilities, diverting organic materials away from landfills, and increasing waste diversion rates through efforts to reduce, reuse, and recycle. The project would comply with local requirements for waste management. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the waste management control measures of the 2017 CAP.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 42 CONTROL
MEASURES PROJECT CONSISTENCY
Water
Consistent. The water control measures to reduce emissions from the water sector will reduce emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by encouraging water conservation, limiting GHG emissions from publicly owned treatment works, and promoting the use of biogas recovery systems. The project would implement BMPs for water quality protection and would not result in a long-term increase in water use.
Therefore, the project would be consistent with the water control measures of the 2017 CAP.
Super GHGs
Not applicable. The super-GHG control measures are designed to facilitate the adoption of best GHG control practices and policies through the BAAQMD and local government agencies. Since these measures do not apply to individual projects, the super-GHG control measures of the 2017 CAP are not applicable to the project.
Source: BAAQMD, 2017b
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The project sites are located within the SFBAAB which is under the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD.
The SFBAAB is designated as a nonattainment area for ozone and PM2.5 under both NAAQS and CAAQS (BAAQMD 2017a). The SFBAAB is also designated as nonattainment for PM10 under CAAQS, but not NAAQS (BAAQMD 2017b). The BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines provide screening criteria for determining if an individual project could result in significant construction-related impact relative to criteria pollutants and precursor emissions. Criteria air pollutants and precursors include reactive organic gases, nitrogen oxides, PM10, PM2.5, and carbon monoxide. In accordance with the BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD 2022), construction activities would have a less-than-significant impact on air quality if the following screening criteria are met:
1. The project site is below the applicable screening level size shown in Table 4-1 of the BAAQMD 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines;
2. All best management practices are included in the project design and implementation during construction; and
3. Construction-related activities would not include any of the following:
• Demolition;
• Simultaneous occurrence of more than two construction phases; • Extensive site preparation; or
• Extensive material transport (e.g., soil import and export requiring a considerable amount of haul truck activity); or
• Stationary resources (e.g., backup generators) subject to Air District rules and regulations.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 43 Relative to screening criteria, the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines do not include specific screening level size for infrastructure and habitat enhancement projects; however, a general comparison can be made to other similar land uses. For example, detailed air quality assessments are not required for construction of projects such as single-family residential developments comprised of less than 254 dwelling units, city parks that are less than 10 acres in size, industrial facilities that are less than 452,000 square feet, and construction of office and commercial buildings that are less than 452,000 square feet (BAAQMD 2022). In comparison, project construction activities would not involve a larger fleet of earthmoving equipment or substantial off-hauling than traditional land use projects would, would not include the construction of buildings, and the total disturbance area at each project site would be less than one acre, which is well below the screening criteria for other types of land use projects. In addition, project construction would be short in duration, lasting less than 20 days at each project site.
Project-related construction activities would not involve the simultaneous occurrence of more than two construction phases or require construction of more than one land-use type.
Construction would not involve extensive site preparation or material transport. The project would result in a short-term increase in fugitive dust emissions from vehicles accessing the sites during construction which would include PM10 and PM2.5. The BAAQMD does not have a quantitative threshold of significance for fugitive dust PM10 and PM2.5 emissions; however, the BAAQMD considers implementation of dust control measures during construction sufficient to reduce air quality impacts from fugitive dust to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would be implemented, which includes BAAQMD-recommended measures for fugitive dust control, in order to avoid significant impacts associated with fugitive dust. Measures would include actions such as covering exposed soils, limiting vehicle speeds on unpaved roadways, and watering exposed surfaces daily. Implementation of this measure would ensure that construction activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria air pollutants for which the region is in nonattainment. The impact of project construction would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Operation of the project would not result in any increase in emissions. No impact would occur from project operation.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less-than-Significant Impact
The primary sensitive receptors in the vicinity are residents, which may include children, elderly people, or people with respiratory illnesses. Sensitive receptors are located in close proximity to several locations along the construction area. The main pollutant of concern for this threshold is DPM, which is emitted from construction equipment and heavy-duty truck traffic. Construction activities at the project site would take approximately 60 working days and no prolonged or intense construction activity would occur. Construction equipment and heavy-duty truck operation associated with construction activities generate TACs in the form of diesel exhaust and fugitive dust. There are sensitive receptors (i.e., residences) located within 100 feet of the project site. However, due to the short-term nature of construction activities, any increase in DPM and TAC emissions within the project sites would be temporary. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) does not recommend assessing cancer risk for projects lasting less than two months at the maximally exposed individual resident (OEHHA 2015). Therefore, a Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 44 detailed Health Risk Assessment was not prepared for this project, and the impact is assumed to be less than significant.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less-than-Significant Impact
BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines identify the following as potential sources of objectionable odors:
wastewater treatment plants, landfills, confined animal facilities, composting stations, food manufacturing plants, refineries, and chemical plants. The proposed project does not involve construction of any of those types of facilities. Construction activities would involve the use of diesel-powered equipment that emits exhaust gases and particulate matter, which can have objectionable odors. However, construction equipment is mobile (dispersing and diluting pollutants over a wider area than if they were fixed in place). Similar to emissions leading to odors, the project would not result in other emissions affecting a substantial number of people.
Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Fugitive Dust Control Measures The project shall implement BMPs as recommended by the BAAQMD 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, which include the following measures:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]).
Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with the manufacturers’ specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 45 4.2.4 Biological Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special-status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Three separate Natural Environment Studies (NESs) were conducted on each bridge included in the Fairfax BPMP Project. All three bridges, Marin Road, Spruce Road and Canyon Road were determined to need preventive maintenance work. The NESs prepared identify the biological Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 46 resources that are present at each project site. Each study is included in Appendix B for reference and discussed below:
Assessment Methodology
A similar methodology was used for each NES. WRA, Inc. (WRA) and Kelly Biological Consulting jointly prepared the studies using a combination of database searches and on-site surveys.
Database searches were conducted prior to on-site surveys to determine which special-status plant and wildlife species have been documented to occur in the vicinity of the project site.
The studies included a biological resources assessment, special-status plant surveys, and a delineation of Section 404 jurisdictional areas within the proposed Biological Study Areas (BSAs) for inclusion in the BPMP. The BSAs were examined on foot to determine (1) vegetation communities present, (2) if existing conditions provide suitable habitat for any special-status plant or wildlife species that have a potential to occur within the vicinity of the project site, and (3) the presence of potential jurisdictional wetlands and “other waters” within the project site.
Marin Road Bridge
Biological Study Area
The BSA is located on and around the Marin Road Bridge over Fairfax Creek in Fairfax. Marin Road is a local residential road. The study covers the areas where the proposed project-related direct or indirect actions such as ground-disturbing, construction, staging, or access activities would occur and goes beyond that to ensure that key biological issues are addressed. Marin Road is a local road in a suburban developed area. The adjacent land use is residential (single family homes). The area of study extends up and downstream from the bridge along the stream corridor covering the primary natural area.
Site elevations range from approximately 100 to 200 feet NAVD88. The bridge is located on the San Rafael USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map at latitude W37.993453, longitude N122.594695.
Biological Communities
Ruderal Disturbed/Developed: The majority of the project site is Ruderal Disturbed/Developed habitat and includes pavement (Marin Road and driveways), gravel and dirt roadsides, structures (homes and outbuildings), backyards, and landscaping or bare areas. In the areas that are not landscaped, the vegetation is predominately non-native species commonly found in the region, such as English ivy (Hedera helix), big leaf periwinkle (Vinca major), and non-native grasses and forbs.
Riparian Woodland: An open canopy riparian woodland loosely similar to Box-Elder Forest (Acer Negundo Forest Alliance) (G5, S2.2) follows a narrow route through the project site. The BoxElder Forest’s G5, S2.2 ranking indicates that it is a natural community of special concern (sensitive) at the state level, though more common in other regions. Within this habitat in the project site, the overstory species include box elder and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). Dense box elder shrubs have colonized the bank that is north of the bridge. The herbaceous/vine layer is comprised mainly of English ivy and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and scattered grasses and forbs including panic veldtgrass (Ehrharta erecta) and miner’s lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata).
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 47 Perennial Stream (“Other Waters”): Fairfax Creek is a perennial creek. Flows vary with the rainfall patterns of a given season. It is supported by a local watershed, generally, the western part of Fairfax and adjacent open space lands. The creek substrate is a mix of small gravel to larger cobble and rock. Indicators of the ordinary high water (OHW) mark include the slope change at the bed and earthen bank junction and wrack at the edge of the creek bed. The channel width at the OHW mark was used to determine the stream (“other waters”) boundary.
The creek is not included on the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers published by the U.S.
Department of the Interior. There are no wetlands in the project site. The bridge has a concrete headwall and sidewalls, as well as wingwalls on the upstream and downstream banks. Just upstream of the bridge there is a concrete retaining wall along the base of the northwest bank.
Unvegetated Bank: Under the bridge there is a small area above OHW mark, on the northeastern part of the bank that is unvegetated. This area is comprised of exposed bedrock, cobble, and dirt.
Wildlife Species
The BSA is situated within riparian and suburban habitat, and wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity include California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), green heron (Butorides virescens), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), and fox squirrel (Sciurus niger). The project site is located upstream of a total fish passage barrier at Bolinas Avenue. Fairfax Creek is not considered anadromous but does support non-anadromous native fish species.
Special-Status Species
Based on pre-survey database searches, it was determined that 69 special-status plant species and 95 special-status wildlife species have been documented in or have a range that occurs in the San Rafael, Bolinas, San Geronimo, Novato, Petaluma Point, San Quentin, San Francisco North, or Point Bonita 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles. Of these species, 21 special-status plant species and nine special-status wildlife species have documented occurrences within 5 kilometers (3 miles) of the BSA.
Special-Status Plant Species
Due to a lack of appropriate habitat elements (such as coastal salt marsh) and the presence of residential development in the surrounding landscape, the BSA has the potential to support only five of the previously identified special-status plant species:
• Napa false indigo (Amorpha californica var. napensis, CNPS 1B.2). Upland habitat within the project site could support this species. However, it may be too mesic in some areas and too disturbed other areas. This shrub species, which is easily identifiable, was not observed during the field surveys.
• Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis, CNPS 1B.2). The upland portion of the Riparian Woodland habitat within the project site could support this species. However, it may be too mesic in some areas and too disturbed other areas. This shrub species, which is easily identifiable, was not observed during the field surveys. • Marin checker lily (Fritillaria lanceolata var. tristulis, CNPS 1B.1). Though not coastal, there is riparian habitat within the project site. No Fritillaria (a perennial bulbiferous herb) were observed during the field surveys, which were conducted during the flowering period.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 48 • Thin-lobed horkelia (Horkelia tenuiloba, CNPS 1B.2, BLMS). Limited poor quality, disturbed habitat present. No Horkelia were observed during the field surveys, which were conducted during the flowering period.
• Tamalpais oak (Quercus parvula var. tamalpaisensis, CNPS 1B.3). Though uplands in the project site provide potential habitat, this species is a woody shrub, which would have been identifiable during the site visits. No shrub oaks were observed during the field surveys.
Although the project site at the Marin Road bridge contains potentially suitable habitat for the above species, no species were observed at the site during botanical surveys conducted during the appropriate flowering season. Given these surveys were conducted at an appropriate time of year and no special-status plant species were observed, it is unlikely that special-status plant species are present.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
Fairfax Creek within the Marin Road project site is listed as essential fish habitat (EFH) for Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha); however, neither species is considered present because the BSA is outside of both species’ current or known ranges.
Steelhead are prevented from entering Fairfax Creek because of a total barrier to anadromy located just upstream of the confluence with San Anselmo Creek.
Of the 95 special-status wildlife species documented to occur in the vicinity, five species have potential to occur within the project site. The remaining 90 species identified in are unlikely to occur within the project site because of existing conditions within and surrounding the project site. Roadways, residential development, creek channelization, and various anthropogenic disturbances reduce the amount of available breeding, rearing, and foraging habitat for most special-status species. Several habitat types or habitat conditions which are required to support special-status wildlife species are also absent from the project site.
Based on the habitat conditions present and documented range and occurrence information for special-status wildlife species, it was determined that the project contains potential habitat for five other special-status or protected wildlife species including: Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin), purple martin (Progne subis), olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), and Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii). The project site also has potential to support non-special-status nesting birds. Special-status species with potential to occur in the BSA are discussed below:
• Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Allen’s hummingbird, common in many portions of its range, is a summer resident along the majority of California’s coast and a year-round resident in portions of coastal southern California and the Channel Islands. Breeding occurs in association with the coastal fog belt, and typical habitats used include coastal scrub, riparian, woodland and forest edges, and eucalyptus and cypress groves. It feeds on nectar, as well as insects and spiders.
• Purple martin (Progne subis, CDFW Species of Special Concern). The purple martin is an uncommon summer resident in California, occurring in woodlands and low-elevation hardwood and coniferous forest. It usually feeds on insects captured in flight 100-200 feet above ground. The purple martin nests in cavities often located in tall, isolated trees or snags in open forest or woodland.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 49 • Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi, CDFW Species of Special Concern, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). This species if found within the coniferous forest biome, most often associated with forest openings, forest edges near natural openings (e.g., meadows, canyons, or rivers) or human-made openings (e.g., harvest units), or open to semi-open forest stands (Altman and Sallabanks 2000).
• Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). This relatively common species is year-round resident throughout much of California including most of the coastal slope, the Central Valley and the western Sierra Nevada foothills. Its primary habitat is woodland dominated by oaks. Local populations have adapted to woodlands of pines and/or junipers in some areas (Cicero 2000). The oak titmouse nests in tree cavities, usually natural cavities or those excavated by woodpeckers, though they may partially excavate their own (Cicero 2000). Seeds and arboreal invertebrates make up the birds’ diet.
• Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Nuttall’s Woodpecker, common in much of its range, is a year-round resident throughout most of California west of the Sierra Nevada. Typical habitat is oak or mixed woodland, and riparian areas (Lowther 2000). Nesting occurs in tree cavities, principally those of oaks and larger riparian trees. Nuttall’s woodpecker also occurs in older residential settings and orchards where trees provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat. This species forages on a variety of arboreal invertebrates.
Spruce Road Bridge
Biological Study Area
The BSA is located on and around the Spruce Road Bridge over Fairfax Creek in Fairfax. Spruce Road is a local residential road. The BSA covers the areas where the proposed project-related direct or indirect actions such as ground-disturbing, construction, staging, or access activities would occur and goes beyond that to ensure that key biological issues are addressed. Spruce Road is a local road in a suburban developed area. The adjacent land use is residential (single family homes). The BSA extends up and downstream from the bridge along the stream corridor covering the primary natural area.
Site elevations range from approximately 100 to 200 feet NAVD88. The bridge is located on the San Rafael USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map at latitude W37.987790, longitude N122.593195.
Biological Communities
Ruderal Disturbed/Developed: The Ruderal Disturbed/Developed portion of the study area includes pavement (Spruce Road and driveways), gravel and dirt roadsides, structures (homes and outbuildings), backyards, and landscaping or bare areas. In the areas that are not landscaped, the vegetation is predominately non-native species commonly found in the region, such as privet (Ligustrum japonicum), English ivy (Hedera helix), goosegrass (Galium aparine), cut leaf geranium (Geranium dissectum), and non-native grasses.
Riparian Woodland: An open canopy woodland loosely similar to California Bay Forest Alliance (Umbellaria californica Alliance) follows a narrow path through the project site. This habitat is somewhat common in the northern California Coast region in moist areas. Within the project site, the overstory species include native species such as California bay, white alder (Alnus rhombifolia) and sycamore (Platanus racemosa), as well as non-natives such as black acacia Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 50 (Acacia melanoxylon), cherry plum (Prunus cerasifera) and firethorn (Pyracantha sp.). The herbaceous/vine layer is comprised mainly of English ivy and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), with some California man-root (Marah fabacea) and scattered grasses and forbs including panic veldtgrass (Ehrharta erecta) and miner’s lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata).
Perennial Stream (“Other Waters”): Fairfax Creek is a perennial creek. Flows vary with the rainfall patterns of a given season. It is supported by a local watershed, generally, the western part of the Town of Fairfax and adjacent open space lands. The creek substrate is a mix of small gravel to larger cobble and rock. Indicators of the OHW mark include the slope change at the bed and earthen bank junction and wrack at the edge of the creek bed. The channel width at the OHW mark was used to determine the stream (“other waters”) boundary. The creek is not included on the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers published by the U.S. Department of the Interior. There are no wetlands in the project site. The banks under the bridge are concrete.
Just upstream of the bridge on the northwest side is a concrete retaining wall along the base of the bank. The other banks are earthen.
Special-Status Species
Based on pre-survey database searches, it was determined 77 special-status plant species and 91 special-status wildlife species have been documented in or have a range that occurs in the San Rafael, Bolinas, San Geronimo, Novato, Petaluma Point, San Quentin, San Francisco North, or Point Bonita 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles. Of these species, 22 special-status plant species and three special-status wildlife species have documented occurrences within 8 kilometers (5 miles) of the BSA.
Special-Status Plant Species
Due to a lack of appropriate habitat elements and the presence of residential development in the surrounding landscape, the BSA has the potential to support only two of the previously identified special-status plant species.
• Sonoma alopecurus (Alopecurus aequalis var. sonomensis, FE, CNPS 1B.1). All known occurrences of this species in the vicinity of the Spruce Road Bridge are associated with coastal freshwater marsh and swamp, and riparian scrub. The site contains limited, poor quality habitat for this species.
• Minute pocket moss (Fissidens pauperculus, USFSS, CNPS 2B.2). Though not coniferous forest, mesic substrates within the Spruce Road Bridge site have limited potential to support this species.
Although the Spruce Road Bridge’s surroundings contain potentially suitable habitat, no occurrences of either species were documented during site visits. Given site visits occurred during the appropriate blooming season, this indicates these species likely do not occur within the site.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
Fairfax Creek within the BSA is listed as EFH for coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha); however, neither species is considered present because the site is outside of both species current or known ranges. A total barrier to anadromy in Fairfax Creek is located just upstream of the confluence with San Anselmo Creek and prevents steelhead from entering Fairfax Creek. Steelhead are not considered present within Fairfax Creek or the BSA because of this barrier.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 51 Three special-status species of birds could potentially nest within the BSA. A brief discussion on these species is provided below. In addition to the special-status bird species, non-specialstatus birds have the potential to nest within the project site. Most native birds in the United States, including non-status species, are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918. Under this legislation, destroying active nests, eggs, or young is illegal. • Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Allen’s hummingbird is found in a wide variety of habitats that provide nectar-producing flowers.
The species is considered a common breeder throughout much of the San Francisco Bay area.
• Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). This relatively common species is year-round resident throughout much of California including most of the coastal slope, the Central Valley and the western Sierra Nevada foothills. Its primary habitat is woodland dominated by oaks. Local populations have adapted to woodlands of pines and/or junipers in some areas. The oak titmouse nests in tree cavities, usually natural cavities or those excavated by woodpeckers, though they may partially excavate their own. Seeds and arboreal invertebrates make up the birds’ diet. • Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Nuttall’s woodpecker typically reside in lowland woodlands throughout California, west of the Sierra Nevada. This species is associated with intact oak and riparian woodlands, rarely in conifers, and is a primary cavity nester.
Canyon Road Bridge
Biological Study Area
The BSA is located on and around the Canyon Road Bridge over San Anselmo Creek in Fairfax.
Canyon Road is a local residential road. The project site covers the areas where the proposed project-related direct or indirect actions such as ground-disturbing, construction, staging, or access activities would occur and goes beyond that to ensure that key biological issues are addressed. Canyon Road is a local road in a suburban developed area. The adjacent land use is residential (single family homes). The BSA extends up and downstream from the bridge along the stream corridor covering the primary natural area.
Site elevations range from approximately 100 to 200 feet NAVD88. The bridge is located on the San Rafael USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map at latitude W37.975162, longitude N122.606451.
Biological Communities
Riparian Redwood Forest Association: The project site consists of mature semi-closed canopy forest similar to Redwood Forest Alliance more specifically a subset of that know as the Redwood Forest Association (Sequoia sempervirens-Acer macrophyllum-Umbellaria californica Association. This habitat is somewhat common in the northern California Coast region in moist areas. Within the project site, the overstory species include native tree species such as redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and California bay (Umbellularia californica). The understory is sparse. There are few shrubs. The herbaceous/vine layer is comprised mainly of English ivy (Hedera helix) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), with some California polypody (Polypodium californicum), and scattered grasses and forbs including panic veldtgrass (Ehrharta erecta) and white ramping fumitory (Fumaria capreolata).
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 52 Intermittent Stream (“Other Waters”): At this location, San Anselmo Creek is an intermittent creek with flows that vary with the rainfall patterns of a given season. The watershed that supports it is local, generally the western part of the Town of Fairfax and adjacent open space lands. Flows throughout the year range from the edges of the creek bed to minimal to absent flows but with a few remnant small pools. In addition to slope change at the bed and bank junction, wrack observed at the edge of the creek bed was used as an indication of OHW mark.
The creek substrate under the bridge (and immediately downstream of the bridge) consists of concrete and a metal fish ladder. The remaining areas upstream and downstream are a mix of small gravel to larger cobble. Downstream of the fish ladder are numerous chunks of concrete.
The channel width at the OHW mark was used to determine the intermittent stream (“other waters”) boundary. The creek is not included on the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers published by the U.S. Department of the Interior. There are no wetlands in the project site. The banks under the bridge are concrete, just upstream of the bridge on the northwest side is a concrete sack retaining wall.
Ruderal Disturbed/Developed: The Ruderal Disturbed/Developed portion of the project site includes pavement (Canyon Road and driveways), the gravel and bare dirt roadsides, structures (homes and outbuildings), backyards, and landscaping or bare areas. In the areas that are not landscaped, the vegetation is predominately non-native species commonly found in the region, such as privet (Ligustrum japonicum), English ivy (Hedera helix), goosegrass (Galium aparine), cut leaf geranium (Geranium dissectum), and non-native grasses.
Wildlife Species: The BSA is situated within riparian redwood forest, and wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity include Stellar’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), western gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), and chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufescens). Additionally, the portion of San Anselmo Creek within the project site is located above two partial fish passage barriers at Saunders Avenue and a flood control channel where Corte Madera Creek feeds into a larger slough. San Anselmo Creek is still considered anadromous because the barriers only deter passage during low flow portions of the year. Central California Coastal (CCC) steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is considered present within the watershed.
Special-Status Species
Based on pre-survey database searches, it was determined 77 special-status plant species and 90 special-status wildlife species have been documented in or have a range that occurs in the San Rafael, Bolinas, San Geronimo, Novato, Petaluma Point, San Quentin, San Francisco North, or Point Bonita 7.5-minute USGS quadrangles. Of these species, 22 special-status plant species and seven special-status wildlife species have documented occurrences within 8 kilometers (5 miles) of the BSA.
Special-Status Plant Species
Due to a lack of appropriate habitat elements and the presence of residential development in the surrounding landscape, the BSA has potential to support only six of the previously identified special-status plant species. Key points regarding those species are summarized here:
• Napa false indigo (Amorpha californica var. napensis, CNPS 1B.2). Woodland habitat within the project site could support this species. However, this shrub species, which is easily identifiable, was not observed during the field surveys.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 53 • Seaside bittercress (Cardamine angulata, CNPS 2B.1). This perennial species was not observed during the field surveys, which were conducted during the flowering period. The closest recorded occurrence of this species is a 1915 observation near the Town of Lagunitas, over 5 miles away.
• Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis, CNPS 1B.2). Woodland habitat within the project site could support this species. However, this woody perennial species, which is typically over 3 feet tall was not observed during the field surveys. • Minute pocket moss (Fissidens pauperculus, USFSS, CNPS 1B.2). Mesic substrates within the project site may have the potential to support this species. This species was not observed during the field surveys; though, a common member of the same genus was found (Fissidens crispus).
• Marin checker lily (Fritillaria lanceolata var. tristulis, CNPS 1B.1). Though not coastal, there is riparian habitat within the project site. No Fritillaria (a perennial bulbiferous herb) were observed during the field surveys, which were conducted during the flowering period.
• Tamalpais oak (Quercus parvula var. tamalpaisensis, CNPS 1B.3). Though, the project site provides potential habitat, this species is a woody shrub, which would have been identifiable during the site visits. No shrubby oaks were observed during the field surveys.
Protocol-level surveys for special-status plant species were conducted during the appropriate blooming season. No special-status plant species were observed. It is therefore unlikely that there are special-status plant species present within the project site.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
The BSA is designated Critical Habitat for steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and the species is presumed present within this section of San Anselmo Creek. The BSA is also listed as designated Critical Habitat for Coho salmon (O. kisutch), although this species is considered extirpated from the tributaries and waters of San Francisco Bay. Additionally, the project site contains EFH for Pacific salmonids. Based on habitat and conditions within the project site and documented occurrences nearby, the project site has potential to support CCC steelhead. • Steelhead – Central California Coast DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Federal Threatened).
San Anselmo Creek is designated as critical habitat for the central California coastal DPS of this species. Though two barriers to anadromy exist downstream of the BSA, the species is considered present within the creek.
• Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina, Federal Threatened, State Threatened, CDFW Species of Special Concern). The project Site and immediately surrounding area are low-density residential developments; however, riparian redwood forest community is located nearby. While indicators of NSO nesting were not identified during site visits, this species has been documented to nest in dense forest 800 feet south of the project site, within the potential area of acoustic impacts.
• Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Allen’s hummingbird, common in many portions of its range, is a summer resident along the majority of California’s coast and a year-round resident in portions of coastal southern California and the Channel Islands. Breeding occurs in association with the coastal fog belt, and typical habitats used include coastal scrub, riparian, woodland and forest Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 54 edges, and eucalyptus and cypress groves. It feeds on nectar, as well as insects and spiders.
• Purple martin (Progne subis, CDFW Species of Special Concern). The purple martin is an uncommon summer resident in California, occurring in woodlands and low-elevation hardwood and coniferous forest. It usually feeds on insects captured in flight 100-200 feet above ground. The purple martin nests in cavities often located in tall, isolated trees or snags in open forest or woodland.
• Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi, CDFW Species of Special Concern, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). This species if found within the coniferous forest biome, most often associated with forest openings, forest edges near natural openings (e.g., meadows, canyons, or rivers) or human-made openings (e.g., harvest units), or open to semi-open forest stands.
• Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). This relatively common species is year-round resident throughout much of California including most of the coastal slope, the Central Valley and the western Sierra Nevada foothills. Its primary habitat is woodland dominated by oaks. Local populations have adapted to woodlands of pines and/or junipers in some areas. The oak titmouse nests in tree cavities, usually natural cavities or those excavated by woodpeckers, though they may partially excavate their own. Seeds and arboreal invertebrates make up the birds’ diet. • Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii, USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern). Nuttall’s Woodpecker, common in much of its range, is a year-round resident throughout most of California west of the Sierra Nevada. Typical habitat is oak or mixed woodland, and riparian areas. Nesting occurs in tree cavities, principally those of oaks and larger riparian trees. Nuttall’s woodpecker also occurs in older residential settings and orchards where trees provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat. This species forages on a variety of arboreal invertebrates.
In addition to the above species, the project site has potential habitat for non-special status nesting birds, which are protected under the MBTA.
REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Regulations
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, was enacted to provide a means to identify and protect endangered and threatened species. Under the Section 9 of the ESA, it is unlawful to take any listed species. “Take” is defined as harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting a listed species. “Harass” is defined as an intentional or negligent act or omission, which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns, which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. “Harm” is defined as an act which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife and may include significant habitat modification or degradation which actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding, or sheltering.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 55 Actions that may result in “take” of a federal-listed species are subject to USFWS or National Marine Fisheries Service permit issuance and monitoring. Section 7 of ESA requires federal agencies to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat for such species. Any action authorized, funded, or carried out by a federal agency or designated proxy (e.g., Caltrans) which has potential to affect listed species requires consultation with the USFWS or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under Section 7 of the ESA.
Clean Water Act (CWA)
The CWA provides guidance for the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. Section 404 identifies the Corps jurisdiction over fill materials in essentially all water bodies, including wetlands. All federal agencies are required to avoid impacts to wetlands whenever there is a practicable alternative. Section 404 established a permit program administered by USACE regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the US (including wetlands). Section 401of the CWA requires that an applicant for a federal license or permit that allows activities resulting in a discharge to Waters of the U.S., obtain a state certification that the discharge complies with other provisions of CWA. The RWQCB administers the certification program in California. The guidelines allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system only if there is no practicable alternative that would have less adverse impacts.
Executive Order 11990 – Protection of Wetlands
This order established a national policy to avoid adverse impacts to wetlands whenever there is a practicable alternative. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) promulgated DOT Order 5660.1A in 1978 to comply with this direction. On federally funded projects, impacts to wetlands must be identified. Alternatives that avoid wetlands must be considered. If wetland impacts cannot be avoided, then all practicable measures to minimize harm must be included. This must be documented in a specific Wetlands Only Practicable Alternative Finding. An additional requirement is to provide early public involvement in projects affecting wetlands. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides technical assistance and reviews environmental documents for compliance.
State Regulations
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
This regulatory law is becoming more prominent on projects involving impacts to isolated Waters of the State (non-404/401 waters). The RWQCB is increasingly requiring Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) permits for impacts to Waters of the State.
Streams, Lakes, and Riparian Habitat in California
Streams and lakes, as habitat for fish and wildlife species, are subject to the jurisdiction of the CDFW under Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code. Alterations to, or work within or adjacent to streambeds or lakes generally require a 1600 series Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The term “stream”, which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the CCR as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life [including] watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation” (14 CCR 1.72). In addition, the term “stream” can include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 56 flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream-dependent terrestrial wildlife. “Riparian” is defined as “on, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream.” Riparian vegetation is defined as “vegetation which occurs in and/or adjacent to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself.” Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW.
Special-Status Species
Special-status species include those plants and wildlife species that have been formally listed, are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing under the federal Endangered Species Act or California Endangered Species Act. These acts afford protection to both listed and proposed species. In addition, California Department of Fish and Wildlife Species of Special Concern, which are species that face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends continue, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Birds of Conservation Concern, and CDFW special-status invertebrates are all considered special-status species.
Although CDFW Species of Special Concern generally have no special legal status, they are given special consideration under the CEQA. In addition to regulations for special-status species, most birds in the United States, including non-status species, are protected by the MBTA of 1918.
Under this legislation, destroying active nests, eggs, or young is illegal. Plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare and Endangered Plant Inventory with California Rare Plant Rank of 1 or 2 are also considered special-status plant species and must be considered under CEQA. Rank 3 and Rank 4 species are afforded little or no protection under CEQA.
Essential Fish Habitat
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 was established to conserve and manage fishery resources found off the coast, as well as anadromous species and Continental Shelf fishery resources of the United States, by exercising (A) sovereign rights for the purposes of exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing all fish within the exclusive economic zone established by Presidential Proclamation 5030, dated March 10, 1983, and (B) exclusive fishery management authority beyond the exclusive economic zone over such anadromous species, Continental Shelf fishery resources, and fishery resources in special areas.
California Endangered Species Act
CDFW is responsible for administering California Endangered Species Act (CESA, CDFG Code §§2050, et seq.), which prohibits take of species that have been listed, or are considered for listing (candidate species) as threatened or endangered species within the State of California.
CESA allows for incidental take of state listed species through issuance of an Incidental Take Permit, or through a Consistency Determination in coordination with a Biological Opinion issued by the USFWS (CDFW Code Section 2081). In contrast with federal law, the definition of “take” under CESA involves actual harm to one or more members of a listed species and does not extend to modification of habitat not involving direct take.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
This treaty with Canada, Mexico and Japan makes it unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, or kill migratory birds. The law applies to the removal of nests (such as swallow nests on bridges) occupied by migratory birds during the breeding season. California Fish and Game Code (Sec 3500) also prohibits the destruction of any nest, egg, or nestling.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 57 Other Sensitive Biological Communities
Other sensitive biological communities not discussed above include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive are those identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW. CDFW ranks sensitive communities as "threatened" or "very threatened" and keeps records of their occurrences in its California Natural Diversity Database. Sensitive plant communities are also identified by CDFW. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5 with those alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S) as 1 through 3 considered sensitive. Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or those identified by the CDFW or USFWS must be considered and evaluated under CEQA (CCR Title 14, Div. 6, Chap. 3, Appendix G). Specific habitats may also be identified as sensitive in city or county general plans or ordinances.
Local Regulations
Tree Protection Ordinance
In 1973, the Town of Fairfax approved Ordinance No. 387 for trees. The purpose of the ordinance is to preserve the wide variety of local native trees and to protect the benefits they provide the citizens. Chapter 8.36.020 of the Town Code defines "altering" and "tree." A Tree Permit is required for removal or significant trimming of any tree, which has a circumference of 24 inches or more measured at 24 inches above the ground. In effect, this is a little less than an 8-inch diameter tree trunk.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? Marin Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Implementation of the Marin Road Bridge project would cause temporary impacts to Fairfax Creek by means of trenching within the creek bed during construction. Fairfax Creek is designated as EFH for Pacific Salmonids including Coho and Chinook salmon; however, Coho salmon are considered extirpated from San Francisco Bay and its tributaries and Fairfax Creek is outside of the known range for Chinook salmon (Appendix B). Although the site does not currently support the fish species mentioned above, there is potential for the species to return in the future. Therefore, if no mitigation measures are taken, the project would cause a potentially significant impact to special-status fish species.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would be implemented at Marin Road Bridge to protect special-status fish from harm during project implementation and minimize impacts to EFH. BIO-2 requires that project work in the channel be conducted during the dry season, and if water is present during construction activities, in-channel work must be isolated from flowing water. BIO-2 requires project work to comply with the standards and requirements of the Biological Opinion issued for the project by NMFS, including, but not limited to the implementation of a fish salvage plan. This measure also requires that the creek banks be restored to pre-project conditions following the Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 58 completion of construction work. Implementation of BIO-1 would reduce potential direct and indirect impacts to special-status fish by avoiding the take of individual fish and minimizing impacts to fish habitat. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
The Marin Road Bridge site also contains habitat to support special-status bird species, including Allen’s hummingbird, purple martin, olive-sided flycatcher, oak titmouse, Nuttall’s woodpecker, and other non-special-status nesting birds, which are protected under the MBTA. The NES for the project found no potential habitat for special status bat species. During construction, there is potential for disturbance related to construction noise that could result in impacts to nesting birds, which is a potentially significant impact under CEQA.
To minimize potential impacts to protected bird species, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would be implemented at the Marin Road Bridge Site. BIO-2 requires that pre-construction nesting bird surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine whether active nests are present. If active nests are found, a no-disturbance buffer shall be established around the nest in which ground-disturbing activities shall be avoided.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would ensure that project work at the Marin Road Bridge site would not have a substantial direct or indirect impact on special-status birds or nonspecial status nesting birds by avoiding work within the vicinity of active nests. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Floristic surveys for special-status plants with potential to occur within the Marin Road Bridge BSA were conducted during the appropriate flowering season. No special-status plant species were observed at the Marin Road Bridge site; therefore, the species are presumed absent. Project implementation at the Marin Road Bridge site would have no impact on special-status plant species.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The Spruce Road Bridge site contains habitat to support special-status bird species, including Allen’s hummingbird, oak titmouse, and Nuttall’s woodpecker, and other non-special-status nesting birds protected under the MBTA. The NES for the project found no potential habitat for special status bat species. During construction, there is potential for disturbance related to construction noise that could result in impacts to nesting birds, which is a potentially significant impact under CEQA.
To minimize potential impacts to protected bird species, Mitigation Measure BIO-2, as described above, would be implemented at the Spruce Road Bridge site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would ensure that project work at the Spruce Road Bridge site would not have a substantial direct or indirect impact on special-status birds or non-special status nesting birds by avoiding work within the vicinity of active nests. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Implementation of project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not require in-water work or work within the bed and banks of Fairfax Creek. Therefore, no impact to special-status fish species or EFH would occur at the Spruce Road Bridge site. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 59 Floristic surveys for special-status plants with potential to occur within the Spruce Road Bridge BSA were conducted during the appropriate flowering season. No special-status plant species were observed at the Spruce Road Bridge site; therefore, the species are presumed absent.
Project implementation at the Spruce Road Bridge site would have no impact on special-status plant species.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Implementation of the Canyon Road Bridge project would cause temporary impacts to the San Anselmo Creek by means of dewatering and trenching during construction, which would temporarily impact CCC steelhead. If no mitigation measures are taken, the project would cause a potentially significant impact to special-status fish species. Mitigation Measure BIO-1, as described above, would be implemented at Canyon Road Bridge to protect special-status fish from harm during project implementation and minimize impacts to EFH. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce potential impacts to special-status fish species at the Canyon Road Bridge site to a less-than-significant level because it would prevent direct take of individual fish and substantially minimize impacts to EFH.
The Canyon Road Bridge site also contains habitat to support NSO and nesting birds, including Allen’s hummingbird, purple martin, olive-sided flycatcher, oak titmouse Nuttall’s woodpecker, and other non-special-status nesting birds. The NES for the project found no potential habitat for special status bat species. During construction, there is potential for disturbance related to construction noise and nighttime lighting that could result in impacts to NSO and nesting birds, which is a potentially significant impact under CEQA.
To minimize potential impacts to protected bird species, Mitigation Measure BIO-2, as described above, would be implemented at the Canyon Road Bridge site. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would be implemented at the Canyon Road Bridge site, which includes measures to avoid and reduce potential impacts to NSO. BIO-3 requires that protocol-level surveys in accordance with the USFWS standards must be implemented prior to the start of construction work. If protocol-level surveys indicate that NSOs are nesting within the potential acoustic impact distance to be determined in consultation with the USFWS, project work may not commence until the end of the nesting season, i.e., September 1. If protocol-level surveys determine that NSO are not nesting or not nesting within the potential acoustic impact zone during the year of the surveys, project work shall commence June 1. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 would ensure that project work at the Canyon Road Bridge site would not have a substantial direct or indirect impact on special-status birds or non-special status nesting birds by avoiding work within the vicinity of active nests. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Floristic surveys for special-status plants with potential to occur within the Canyon Road Bridge BSA were conducted during the appropriate flowering season. No special-status plant species were observed at the Canyon road Bridge site; therefore, the species are presumed absent.
Project implementation at the Canyon Road Bridge site would have no impact on special-status plant species.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 60 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS?
Marin Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Sensitive natural communities at the Marin Road Bridge site include Riparian Redwood Forest and Perennial Stream. Although Riparian Redwood Forest is present in the Marin Road Bridge BSA, this community would be entirely avoided by project work; therefore, no temporary or permanent impacts to Riparian Redwood Forest at the Marin Road Bridge site would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.
Project construction work at Marin Road Bridge would result in approximately 0.06-acre (2,613 square feet) of temporary direct impacts to Perennial Stream habitat of Fairfax Creek. To reduce and minimize impacts to Perennial Stream habitat, Mitigation Measure BIO-5 would be implemented. BIO-5 contains measures to protect Fairfax Creek from sediment and pollutant runoff from project construction. Measures include but are not limited to implementation of an Accidental Spill Prevention and Cleanup Plan, placing spill control absorbent material underneath stationary equipment, using a nontoxic drilling mud and slurry seal, washing equipment outside of the creek channel, and ensuring that all trash is deposited in covered or closed trash containers. Pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 404 and 401, work below the ordinary high water mark of Fairfax Creek is also subject to USACE and RWQCB jurisdiction. The RWQCB also has jurisdiction over such work under the Porter Cologne Act. Approval by regulatory agencies (e.g., USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and NMFS) would be required for all work within potential jurisdictional areas, and the project would be required to adhere to any requirements of the final permits. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-5 and compliance with regulatory permits, project work at Marin Road Bridge would not result in a substantial adverse effect on Perennial Creek. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Sensitive natural communities at the Spruce Road Bridge site include Riparian Redwood Forest and Perennial Stream. Although Riparian Redwood Forest is present in the Spruce Road Bridge BSA, this community would be entirely avoided by project work; therefore, no temporary or permanent impacts to Riparian Redwood Forest at the Spruce Road Bridge site would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.
Project construction work at Spruce Road Bridge would not require any work within Fairfax Creek, therefore, no temporary or permanent impacts to Perennial Stream would result from project work. Therefore, project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not have a substantial adverse effect on Perennial Stream habitat. The impact would be less than significant.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Sensitive natural communities at the Canyon Road Bridge site include Riparian Redwood Forest and Intermittent Stream. Project construction work at Canyon Road Bridge would result in Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 61 temporary direct impacts to Riparian Redwood Forest, as tree trimming could potentially be required to gain necessary access during construction and permanent impacts are anticipated to occur when the wing wall footings at this site are replaced. Riparian Redwood Forest is a sensitive natural community at the state level; therefore, temporary and permanent impacts to Riparian Redwood Forest are a potentially significant impact under CEQA.
To reduce potential impacts to Riparian Redwood Forest, Mitigation Measure BIO-4 would be implemented at the Canyon Road Bridge site. BIO-4 requires that the project implement all recommendations of the arborist report prepared for the project in order to protect existing redwoods near the wingwall proposed to be replaced. Silt fencing or another sediment trapping method shall also be installed down gradient of the work site in order to minimize off-site transport of sediments, and exclusion fencing shall be installed along the limits of clearing and grubbing to prevent encroachment into undisturbed habitats. With implementation of BIO-4, project work at the Canyon Road Bridge site would not have a substantial adverse effect on Riparian Redwood Forest habitat. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Project construction work at Canyon Road Bridge would result in approximately 0.22-acre (2,613 square feet) of temporary direct impacts to Intermittent Stream habitat of San Anselmo Creek. To reduce and minimize impacts to Intermittent Stream habitat, Mitigation Measure BIO-5 would be implemented. BIO-5 contains measures to protect the creek from sediment and pollutant runoff from project construction. Measures include but are not limited to implementation of an Accidental Spill Prevention and Cleanup Plan, placing spill control absorbent material underneath stationary equipment, using a nontoxic drilling mud and slurry seal, washing equipment outside of the creek channel, and ensuring that all trash is deposited in covered or closed trash containers. Pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 404 and 401, work below the ordinary high water mark of Fairfax Creek is also subject to USACE and RWQCB jurisdiction. The REWQCB also has jurisdiction over such work under the Porter Cologne Act.
Approval by regulatory agencies (e.g., USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and NMFS) would be required for all work within potential jurisdictional areas, and the project would be required to adhere to any requirements of the final permits. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-5 and compliance with regulatory permits, project work at Canyon Road Bridge would not result in a substantial adverse effect on Intermittent Creek. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact
No state or federally protected wetlands are present at any of the three project sites (Appendix B). Therefore, project implementation would have no impact on any state or federally protected wetlands.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 62 Marin Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The Marin Road Bridge is currently situated upstream from a total barrier to anadromy, as the box culvert at Center Boulevard blocks fish passage into the BSA. This passage may be replaced or removed in the future, which would allow the annual steelhead run to return to Fairfax Creek.
Should this occur, project work at Marin Road Bridge would potentially interfere with the use of wildlife migratory corridors, which is a potentially significant impact. As described in Section 3.1, Project Description, work in the creek would be conducted during the dry season when these segments of the creek are at their lowest flow rates. The work areas would be dewatered by temporarily diverting any potential flows using means such as short dams made with sandbags, and/or longitudinal piping to bypass the work areas. Stagnant water would be pumped out to create a completely dry work area. In addition, Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-5, as described above in Threshold a) and c), would be implemented. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-5 include measures to avoid and minimize impacts to fish species and fish habitat within the creek. Implementation of these measures would ensure that potential impacts to fish migratory corridors would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, project work at Marin Road Bridge would not interfere substantially with the movement of fish or wildlife species. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
The Spruce Road Bridge BSA contains EFH for Coho salmon and Chinook salmon; however, neither species is considered present because the site is outside of both species current or known ranges. A total barrier to anadromy in Fairfax Creek is located just upstream of the confluence with San Anselmo Creek and prevents steelhead from entering Fairfax Creek. Steelhead are not considered present within Fairfax Creek or the BSA because of this barrier. In addition, project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not contain any in-water work or work within the bed or banks of Fairfax Creek. Therefore, project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not interfere substantially with the movement of fish or wildlife species. The impact would be less than significant.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The Canyon Road Bridge project impact footprint contains steelhead spawning migration habitat within San Anselmo Creek. Project activities have been designed to preserve flow and passage of the creek, and in-water work which would impact the intermittent stream would avoid the migratory season, As described in Section 3.1, Project Description, work in the creek would be conducted during the dry season when these segments of the creek are at their lowest flow rates. The work areas would be dewatered by temporarily diverting any potential flows using means such as short dams made with sandbags, and/or longitudinal piping to bypass the work areas. Stagnant water would be pumped out to create a completely dry work area. In addition, Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-5, as described above in Threshold a) and c), would be implemented. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-5 include measures to avoid and minimize impacts to fish species and fish habitat within the creek. Implementation of these measures would ensure that potential impacts to fish migratory corridors would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level. Therefore, project work at Canyon Road Bridge would not interfere substantially Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 63 with the movement of fish or wildlife species. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Marin Road Bridge and Spruce Road Bridge
No Impact
Project work at Marin Road Bridge would not require tree removal. Project work at Spruce Road Bridge would all occur from the bridge deck, and no ground-disturbing activities are required.
Therefore, project work at Marin Road Bridge and Spruce Road Bridge would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No impact would occur.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Project work at Canyon Road Bridge would not require the removal of any trees; however, the replacement of the northwest wingwall of the bridge would require soil nails to be drilled into the roots of an existing cluster of redwood trees adjacent to the bridge. An Arborist Report for the proposed work at Canyon Road Bridge has been prepared (Appendix A) which evaluates the impact of project work on the existing redwood trees. Based on the observation of the exposed roots of toppled and eroded redwood trees, the qualified arborist determined that the drilling of holes in order to install the soil nail walls is not likely to significantly impact the health or stability of the redwood trees; however, it is impossible to know with absolute certainty that, if roots are severed by drilling, whether a sizable amount of root system loss would occur. Thus, Mitigation Measure BIO-4, as described above in Threshold b), would be implemented. This measure requires that a Certified Arborist inspect the health of the redwood trees impacted by project work at a 30-, 60- and 90-day interval post drilling, and one year after drilling. If the Certified Arborist has concerns of the survival of the trees, the Town of Fairfax would be notified and appropriate rectification actions taken. With implementation of this measure, the proposed project would not conflict with any other local ordinances or policies. The impact would be less than significant.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact
No state, regional, or federal habitat conservation plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans have been adopted for any of the project sites. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved conservation plan. No impact would occur.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 64 MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-Status Fish and Essential Fish Habitat (Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge)
The following measures shall be implemented at Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge to avoid and minimize potential project impacts to steelhead, critical habitat for steelhead and Coho Salmon, and EFH.
• The project shall follow the standards and requirements of the Biological Opinion issued for the project by NMFS to ensure that the project will not result in permanent adverse effects to steelhead, critical habitat, or EFH.
• Work within the channel shall be conducted during the dry season (June 1 through October 15) to avoid disrupting the adult steelhead migration cycle. Work outside of this period shall require consultation with NMFS.
• If water is present during project activities, in-channel work shall be conducted in isolation from flowing water. Prior to the start of construction activities, the work area shall be isolated, and flowing water should be diverted around the isolated area. • As described in the project’s Biological Opinion, a fish salvage plan shall be developed and approved by NMFS prior to the onset of any in-channel work if water is present. The plan shall include proposed methods for dewatering, expected location and duration of dewatering activities, and methods for conducting fish salvage during dewatering activities. Consistent with the requirements of the project’s Biological Opinion, fish would be captured by a qualified fisheries biologist using one or more of the following methods:
electrofishing, dip net, seine, throw net, block net, minnow trap. Collected fish would be immediately returned to the stream at suitable locations in San Anselmo Creek downstream or upstream of the dewatered areas as determined by qualified biologists and approved by NMFS.
• Concrete, dust, and other debris from concrete removal activities shall be captured and removed from the work site so as not to enter the creek channel. • The creek banks shall be restored to pre-project conditions following the completion of work.
• The existing fish ladder shall be left in place and repaired. avoided by project activities.
Where disturbed, the creek channel shall be restored to the pre-project grade using native cobble, gravel, and soils in appropriate ratios to mimic pre-project conditions.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Bird Species
Although potential nesting habitat for nesting birds would not be lost as a result of the proposed project, construction could disturb active nests. The following measures shall be implemented at the Marin Road Bridge, Spruce Road Bridge, and Canyon Road Bridge sites to avoid and minimize potential impacts to special-status and non-special-status nesting birds:
• If proposed project activities begin between February 15 and August 31, pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal to determine whether active nests containing eggs, chicks, or young are present in the project site. Pre-construction surveys for active nests shall be Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 65 conducted no more than 14 days prior to ground disturbing or vegetation removal activities.
• If active nests containing eggs, chicks, or young are not observed during pre-construction surveys, construction shall proceed.
• If active nests containing eggs, chicks, or young are observed, ground-disturbing activities shall be avoided within a 25- to 100-foot exclusion zone for passerine birds and a 200- to 500-foot exclusion zone for raptors and special-status species. Exclusion size shall be dependent upon species and nest location. Appropriate exclusion distances shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on the species present and location of the nest relative to construction activities (e.g., the nest is sufficiently shielded from construction to avoid disturbance). Construction within this buffer shall be prohibited until the qualified biologist determines that the nest is no longer active. If an active nest is found after the completion of the pre-construction surveys or after construction begins, all construction activities shall stop until a qualified biologist has evaluated the nest and determined an appropriate buffer to be placed around the nest. If avoidance of a buffer zone is not feasible, CDFW and/or the USFWS shall be contacted to coordinate an appropriate course of action.
• No surveys shall be required if project activities begin during the non-nesting season, September 1 and February 14.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: NSO (Canyon Road Bridge)
Although the Canyon Road Bridge does not contain habitat suitable for nesting NSO, NSO that nest in forest adjacent to the project sites may be affected by noise from proposed project activities during nesting. The following measures shall be implemented at the Canyon Road Bridge site to avoid and minimize potential project impacts to NSO:
• Final avoidance and minimization measures shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS to ensure project design including avoidance and minimization measures do not result in adverse effects to NSO.
• Work within the project site will be conducted outside the nesting season (September 1 through January 31) to avoid disrupting nesting NSO within and adjacent to the project site. Work outside of this period during the nesting season shall require protocol-level surveys and consultation with the USFWS and CDFW.
• If work within the project site must occur during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), protocol-level surveys in accordance with the USFWS Protocol for Surveying Proposed Management Activities that may Impact Northern Spotted Owls (2012). For “disturbance only” projects (see Project Impacts section below), six surveys shall be required during the nesting season of the project site and the surrounding 0.25-mile area (survey area).
• If protocol-level surveys indicate that NSOs are nesting within the potential acoustic impact distance to be determined in consultation with the USFWS, project work may not commence until the end of the nesting season, i.e., September 1. • If protocol-level surveys determine that NSO are not nesting or not nesting within the potential acoustic impact zone during the year of the surveys, project work shall commence June 1. June 1 is the earliest date non-nesting status can be confirmed.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 66 • If project work begins in the non-nesting season and is to continue into the nesting season, project work shall cease January 31 and shall not recommence until protocollevel surveys as described above determine the nesting status of the survey area.
Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Riparian Habitat (Canyon Road Bridge) The following measures shall be implemented at the Canyon Road Bridge site to avoid and reduce impacts to riparian habitat:
• A Certified Arborist shall visit the Canyon Road Bridge site after the soil nail drilling has occurred at a 30-, 60-, and 90-day interval, followed by a site visit one year later. The Certified Arborist shall examine the health of the trees that were impacted by project work and raise any concerns to the Town of Fairfax.
• Temporarily impacted areas in this habitat shall be revegetated with native, non-invasive plants suitable for the soil and site conditions.
• Silt fencing or other approved sediment trapping shall be installed down gradient of the work site to minimize off-site transport of sediments.
• Exclusion fencing shall be installed along the limits of clearing and grubbing to prevent encroachment into undisturbed habitats.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Mechanical Equipment in the Creek Bed (Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge)
The following measures shall be implemented at Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge to avoid and/or minimize and restore potential impacts to creek habitat resulting from the use of mechanical equipment in the creek bed.
• The primary construction shall be completed during the dry season, between April 15 and October 15.
• Final grading in the creek bed shall conform to the existing creek channel both downstream and upstream (except in the areas of permanent fill), and existing bed materials shall be replaced with similar sized materials. • Regulatory approval shall be obtained for all work within potential jurisdictional areas, including approval from the USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and NMFS. All work within these areas shall conform to any conditions imposed by the regulating agencies. • Prior to any clearing, grubbing, pruning, or groundbreaking activity, the limits of construction shall be fenced with temporary high-visibility construction fencing to protect environmentally sensitive areas, to prevent any equipment from unnecessarily extending the work area or entering the wetted channel. In addition, silt fencing shall be installed at the base of the construction fencing, or where appropriate, to prevent debris from entering the creek. All fencing shall be removed upon project completion. • Prior to construction, the contractor shall be required to prepare an Accidental Spill Prevention and Cleanup Plan. This plan shall include required spill control absorbent material, for use beneath stationary equipment, to be present on-site and available at all times.
• To minimize fluid leaks during operation, refueling, and maintenance of stationary equipment spill control absorbent material shall be in place underneath this equipment at Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 67 all times to capture potential leaks. All refueling and maintenance of equipment, other than stationary equipment, shall occur outside the creek’s top-of-bank. Any hazardous chemical spills will be cleaned immediately.
• All stockpiling of construction materials, equipment, and supplies, including storage of chemicals, refueling and maintenance, shall occur outside the creek channel. No equipment shall be washed where runoff could enter the creek. • No motorized equipment shall be left within the channel (top of bank to top of bank) overnight unless a container or similar method is securely placed beneath the equipment to catch any fluid leakage. All contained fluids shall be disposed of in a permitted manner.
• The contractor shall be required to use a drilling mud and slurry seal that is nontoxic to aquatic life if there are drilling activities related to construction of the proposed project.
All drilling muds and fluid shall be contained on-site in tanks and disposed of in a permitted manner. Fluids from saw cutting and other activities shall be collected and not allowed to flow into the creek.
• No equipment, including concrete trucks, shall be washed within the channel of the creek, or where wash water could flow into the channel. Prior to proposed project construction, the contractor shall establish a concrete washout area for concrete trucks in a location where wash water will not enter the creek or adjacent areas. The washout area shall follow the practices outlined in the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual (page 107-108, July 1999) or more recent guidelines. Substitution of the designated concrete washout area or methods shall require prior approval of the Town of Fairfax.
• All water that comes in contact with wet concrete shall be pumped directly into tanks and disposed of at a permitted location.
• If work is to occur on the roadway and bridge approaches during the period October 15 to April 15, all drainage inlets within the project site shall be protected from receiving polluted storm water through the use of filters such as fabrics, gravel bags, straw wattles, or other appropriate BMPs.
• Water encountered during construction of the bridge foundations or footings shall be managed in accordance with an approved dewatering plan. • All workers shall ensure that food scraps, paper wrappers, food containers, cans, bottles, and other trash from the project site are deposited in covered or closed trash containers.
The trash containers shall not be left open and unattended overnight. • The Town of Fairfax shall require that all disturbed areas in the stream channel be regraded to match the surrounding topography by October 15. Seed and certified weed-free straw shall be placed on disturbed areas in the proposed project site (with the exception of the lower creek banks, creek bed, and areas below the OHW mark). A jute mesh type or equivalent matting shall be placed over the straw, installed per the manufacturer’s instructions. This matting shall have no plastic incorporated into it. Substitution of materials or erosion control methods shall require prior approval of the Town of Fairfax. • After construction, the proposed project site shall be inspected following the first heavy rain, during the middle of the rainy season and at the end of the rainy season. During Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 68 each visit areas of significant erosion or erosion control device failure shall be noted and appropriate remedial actions taken.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 69 4.2.5 Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The APE for all three bridges consists of the existing bridges, adjacent surface area(s) necessary for access and staging, and below deck areas within the creeks for the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge. The Spruce Road Bridge does not include work to be done below the surface of the bridge deck. Refer to Figures 2 to 4 for the APE maps of each project site.
Far Western Anthropological Research Group Inc. (Far Western) was retained to prepare the following cultural resources services for the proposed bridge maintenance project: 1) Records Search; 2) Historical Property Survey Report (HPSR); and 3) Archeological Survey Report (Appendix C). A brief summary of the results of these services is provided below.
Records Search
• No cultural resources are located within 0.25 miles of the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge APEs.
• No cultural resources are located within the Spruce Road APE, but one cultural site (CAMRN-490) is located within 0.25 miles of the APE. • No sacred Native American sites were identified in a search of the Sacred Lands file by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).
Historical Property Survey Reports
A previous historic property report evaluated 12 bridges through the Corte Madera Creek watershed, but did not include Marin Road Bridge (27C0143), Spruce Road Bridge (27C0141), or the Canyon Road Bridge (27C0146) as at that time they were not yet 50 years of age. The APE for the bridge maintenance projects includes only the bridges –Marin Road Bridge (27C0143), Spruce Road Bridge (27C0141), and Canyon Road Bridge (27C0146). The bridges were previously determined to be ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places or as historical resources under CEQA, and are recorded as ineligible bridges in the Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 70 Inventory. Far Western conducted an archaeological survey of all visible ground surfaces in the creek bed, bank and around each of the bridges. No cultural materials were observed.
Archeological Surveys
Marin Road Bridge
No resources were identified either in the archival records search or the pedestrian survey. The project APE is within areas of highest sensitivity for buried archaeological deposits. The entire APE is mapped within Latest Holocene alluvium likely to have capped earlier stable landforms.
Furthermore, the proximity to a water course increases the likelihood that the area may have been used prehistorically. Any impacts along the banks of Fairfax Creek would be shallow with excavation only up to two feet in depth and therefore, no sub-surface investigation was required.
However, based on the archaeological site sensitivity assessment, Caltrans requested that an Extended Phase I (XPI) study be conducted for the Marin Road Bridge site because Marin Road Bridge has several project elements which require ground disturbance. As such, Far Western prepared an XPI proposal to conduct testing via hand-auguring within the Marin Road Bridge APE. The proposed testing was designed to determine the presence or absence of archaeological deposits within the APE. The testing plan was executed on July 12, 2023, under the supervision of Far Western Principal Investigator Cassidy DeBaker. A total of five hand auger bores were excavated as part of this investigation. No cultural deposits, intact or otherwise, were encountered during this testing.
Spruce Road Bridge
No resources were identified either in the archival records search or the pedestrian survey. The project APE is within areas of highest sensitivity for buried archaeological deposits. The entire APE is mapped within Latest Holocene alluvium likely to have capped earlier stable landforms.
Furthermore, the proximity to a water course increases the likelihood that the area may have been used prehistorically. Any project impacts, however, would be limited to paved surfaces on the bridge deck and adjacent road surface. As a result, no sub-surface investigation is recommended.
Canyon Road Bridge
No resources were identified either in the archival records search or the pedestrian survey. The project APE is within areas of lowest sensitivity for buried archaeological deposits. The entire APE is mapped within Pre-Quaternary alluvium and therefore predates human arrival in the area.
As a result, no sub-surface investigation or further cultural studies are recommended.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
Less-than-Significant Impact
No historic properties/cultural resources listed, determined, or potentially eligible for inclusion on the NRHP (36 CFR Part 800.4) and/or California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) (California Public Resources Code Section 5024.1) were identified within or immediately adjacent to the proposed projects’ APEs. All three bridges are listed as ineligible in the Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Inventory. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 71 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated There are no known archeological resources within any of the three bridges APEs; however, as the Marin Road Bridge includes excavation within the creek bed, there is a potential for the project to uncover such materials during construction. While no cultural deposits, intact or otherwise, were encountered during the XPI testing at Marin Road Bridge, the possibility of adversely affecting any accidentally unearthed resources during construction is considered a potentially significant impact but can be mitigated to a less than significant level via implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated None of the project sites have been used as a formal cemetery, nor is there evidence that human remains are within the project area. However, the potential to uncover human remains is still present which is considered a potentially significant impact. Adherence to Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would reduce the possibility of disturbing accidentally discovered human remains to a less than significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 – Unknown Cultural Resources
If any archaeological or paleontological deposits are encountered, all soil-disturbing work shall be halted at the location of any discovery until a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist evaluates the significance of the find(s) and prepares a recommendation for further action. If the cultural materials are determined to be significant, a qualified cultural resources professional shall develop an appropriate treatment plan in consultation with the Town. The plan could include avoidance and preservation measures to preserve the materials in place; scientific collection and analysis; preparation of a professional report in accordance with current professional standards; and professional museum curation of collected cultural materials and resource documentation.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2 – Human Remains
In the event of post-review discoveries of human remains, the project shall implement the following procedures:
• The treatment of human remains and of associated or unassociated funerary objects discovered during any soil-disturbing activity within the project shall comply with applicable State laws. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and PRC Section 5097.94, in the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The Marin County Coroner shall be immediately notified and shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 72 • In the event of the coroner's determination that the human remains are Native American, notification of the NAHC, is required who shall appoint a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) (PRC Section 5097.98). The archaeological consultant, project sponsor, and MLD shall make all reasonable efforts to develop an agreement for the treatment, with appropriate dignity, of human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)). The agreement should take into consideration the appropriate excavation, removal, recordation, analysis, custodianship, curation, and final disposition of the human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects.
California Public Resources Code allows 48 hours to reach agreement on these matters. If the MLD and the other parties do not agree on the reburial method, the project shall follow PRC Section 5097.98(b) which states that "the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall reinter the human remains and items associated with Native American burials with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance."
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 73 4.2.6 Energy
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project construction
or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Electricity in the Town is provided by Marin Clean Energy (MCE) and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). MCE is a public, not-for-profit electricity provider that serves as the default electricity provider for most businesses and residents and offers various renewable energy options. PG&E provides the transmission and distribution of electricity, btu residents are primarily served by MCE for the electricity itself. Customers may opt out of MCE services and elect PG&E as their electricity provider if they choose. PG&E also provides natural gas service.
REGULATORY SETTING
Town of Fairfax Climate Action Plan
The Town of Fairfax Climate Action Plan aims to achieve zero GHG emissions by 2030 through the implementation of various measures, including requiring all new construction to be allelectric and improving energy efficiency and electrification in existing buildings. The plan contains strategies related to building electrification, renewable energy, transportation, energy efficiency, water conservation, and waste reduction. The Town’s Climate Action Plan sets a more aggressive target than the state target for GHG emissions reductions, aiming for a 100% GHG emissions reduction by the year 2030 (from a 2005 baseline).
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction of the project would use energy resources to power equipment and move workers and supplies to and from the site. Energy resources would also be required for the small quantity of extra vehicle miles traveled (VMT) traveled by cars using detours during bridge closures.
Machinery idling would be limited per California law, minimizing the use of energy resources for equipment. Detours would be short and lead to a small, temporary increase in VMT that would require minimal energy resources. This impact would be temporary during project construction Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 74 and would be similar to the amount of energy needed for similar types of construction projects.
Equipment and fuel would not be used wastefully during construction due to the added expense associated with renting, maintaining, and fueling equipment. In addition, detours would be as short as possible in order to minimize inconvenience to drivers. As such, energy and fuel would not be wasted or used inefficiently by construction equipment and vehicles. Energy needed for project construction would not be an unnecessary consumption of energy resources because the proposed bridge repairs are necessary for safety, and would not result in a long-term increase in energy use.
Following construction, energy use would be comparable to baseline levels. Operation of the bridges would not change and capacity would not be expanded, so energy consumption by cars using the bridge would be roughly the same as pre-project conditions. As there would be a temporary, minimal increase in energy use during construction and energy use would return to baseline levels during operation, the project would result in less than significant impacts related to the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less-than-Significant Impact
The Town of Fairfax’s Climate Action Plan contains strategies for the Town to meet its goal of zero GHG emissions by 2030. The plan does not provide mandatory policies for construction projects but contains high-level strategies for the Town to implement to reduce GHG emissions.
Eighteen recommended actions for businesses, residents, and government entities to improve energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy resources are included in the plan, some of which pertain to transportation. Strategies related to transportation include encouraging the use of zero emission vehicles, encouraging alternative modes of transportation (i.e., biking, walking, carpooling, public transit), implementing transportation system improvements to reduce vehicle idling, and encouraging smart growth development.
The project would include improvements to three bridges within the Town that are necessary for public safety. The project would not expand the capacity of any of the bridges and would not have an impact on the existing vehicle fleet. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any policies of the Town’s Climate Action Plan related to transportation. The project would not introduce any new permanent source of energy use. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Because the Town’s Climate Action Plan sets a more aggressive target for GHG reduction than statewide initiatives, the project would also not conflict with any state plan for energy efficiency or renewable energy.
The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 75 4.2.7 Geology and Soils
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code,
creating substantial direct or indirect risks
to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 76 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Soils
The predominant geologic units underlying the Town of Fairfax are bedrock and alluvium. All bedrock units are considered part of the Franciscan Complex, and comprised of metamorphosed rock, which is considered to have low to moderate slope stability relative to earthquake sharking, particularly on steep slopes. The alluvium is primarily loose and soft sediments and debris deposited along streambeds within the last 10,000 years. These deposits are typically those that are the most susceptible to seismic shaking, liquefaction, and differential settlement. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS 2019), the following soils are present at the project sites:
Marin Road and Spruce Road
• Xerorthents – urban land complex, 0 to 9 percent slopes Canyon Road
• Tacaloma-McMullin – urban land complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes Seismicity
The San Francisco Bay area is one of the most seismically active areas in the country. While seismologists cannot predict earthquake events, the U.S. Geological Survey’s Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (2003) estimates there is a 62 percent chance of at least one magnitude 6.7 earthquake occurring in the Bay Area region between 2003 and 2032. As seen with damage in San Francisco and Oakland due to the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake that was centered about 50 miles south, significant damage can occur at considerable distances. Higher levels of shaking and damage would be expected for earthquakes occurring at closer distances.
The faults considered capable of generating significant earthquakes in the area are generally associated with the well-defined areas of crustal movement, which trend northwesterly. Faults considered active by the State of California and located closest to the site include the San Andreas Fault (6.2 miles west of the site) and Hayward Fault (13.8 miles east of the site). The project sites are not located within a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault rupture zone (California Geological Survey [CGS] 2025).
Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading
Soil liquefaction is a condition where saturated granular soils near the ground surface undergo a substantial loss of strength during seismic events. Loose, water-saturated soils are transformed from a solid to a liquid state during ground shaking. Liquefaction can result in significant deformations and ground rupture or sand boils. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained sands that lie close to the ground surface. Lateral spreading is a type of ground failure related to liquefaction. It consists of the horizontal displacement of flat-lying alluvial material toward an open area, such as a steep bank of a stream channel. Data from the County of Marin indicates that the project sites are located in a moderate to low liquefaction hazard zones (County of Marin 2025).
Landslide
None of the project sites are mapped in a Marin County landslide hazard area (County of Marin 2025). The Marin Road Bridge and Spruce Road Bridge sites are located in flat areas and are not Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 77 located near existing landslides. There are mapped landslide hazard areas and steep slopes approximately 250 feet south of the Canyon Road Bridge site (County of Marin 2025).
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a-i) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? No Impact
The project sites are not included in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS 2025). There are no other active fault traces within the vicinity of the project sites (County of Marin 2025).
Because the project is not located near a known fault, the project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault.
No impact would occur.
a-ii) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Strong seismic ground shaking? Less-than-Significant Impact
Seismic activity associated with faults outside of the immediate vicinity of the project sites could cause ground shaking at the project sites and could create a risk for construction workers if an earthquake happens during construction. Occasional ground shaking is common in the Bay Area, and construction workers would take the necessary precautions to maintain worker safety in the event of an earthquake. The project would include rehabilitation of existing bridges which would not directly or indirectly cause effects associated with seismic ground shaking. The project would not include construction of any new buildings or structures which could collapse in a sizeable earthquake event. Therefore, impacts associated with seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
a-iii) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less-than-Significant Impact
As discussed in the Environmental Setting section above, the project sites are within an area of moderate to low liquefaction susceptibility. Liquefaction primarily occurs in loose, saturated, cohesionless soils that lose their strength and become incapable of supporting the weight of overlying soils or structures when subject to earthquake stresses. Construction of the project would take place during the dry season; therefore, it is extremely unlikely that the conditions for liquefaction to occur would be present on-site during construction. The project would implement repairs to three existing bridges to ensure their structure integrity and make them more resilient to seismic and geologic hazards. The project would not construct any new structures that would introduce risk of loss, injury, or death involving liquefaction. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 78 a-iv) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Landslides?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The term landslide includes a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Gravity acting on an over-steepened slope is the primary reason for a landslide. Slope material that becomes saturated with water may develop a debris flow or mud flow. The resulting slurry of rock and mud may pick up trees, houses, and cars, thus blocking bridges and tributaries causing flooding along its path. None of the project sites are mapped in a Marin County landslide hazard area (County of Marin 2025). There are mapped landslide hazard areas and steep slopes approximately 250 feet south of the Canyon Road Bridge sit, which could potentially impact operations at the site (County of Marin 2025).
However, the purpose of the project is to implement preventative maintenance improvements at the three bridge sites that would make them less susceptible to geologic and seismic hazards, including landslides. The project would not construct any new structures or implement improvements that would exacerbate the risk of landslides. Therefore, the project would not cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides.
The impact would be less than significant.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated During construction, project activities such as stockpiling, grading, excavation, and earthdisturbing activities would result in loose and disturbed soils on the project site. Loose and disturbed soils are more prone to erosion and loss of topsoil by wind and water. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the project would be required to implement construction-phase BMPs for erosion control and pollutant runoff in order to comply with Chapter 8.32 of the Town of Fairfax Municipal Code. Erosion control BMPs may include, but are not limited to, timely revegetation of graded areas, the use of hydroseed and hydraulic mulches, installation of erosion control blankets, and sediment detention basins, dams, or filters. The Town has the authority to review designs and proposals for construction activities to determine whether adequate BMPs will be installed, implemented, and maintained during construction and once construction is complete. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-5, as described in Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources, would be implemented at the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge sites, which requires measures to protect stream habitat. As part of this measure, the Town shall require that all disturbed areas in the stream channel be re-graded to match the surrounding topography by October 15 (before the rainy season). Seed and certified weed-free straw shall be placed on disturbed areas in the project site (with the exception of the lower creek banks, creek bed, and areas below the OHW mark), and a jute mesh type or equivalent matting shall be placed over the straw, installed per the manufacturer’s instructions. Implementation of the required construction-phase BMPs and Mitigation Measure BIO-5 would ensure that project work at Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge would not result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil. All disturbed areas would be either covered with RSP, reseeded, or covered with jute mesh or matting, which would prevent loss of topsoil in the long term. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 79 Spruce Road Bridge
No Impact
Project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not require any ground-disturbing activities. All project work would take place from the bridge deck. Therefore, project work at this site would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. No impact would occur. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less-than-Significant Impact
As described above in Threshold a), the project sites are not in any mapped landslide hazard area. Liquefaction potential at the project sites is considered to be moderate to low. The project is not located on unstable soil or geologic units. The project has been designed in accordance with the recommendations of a Geotechnical Consultation memorandum prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group in 2014 (Miller Pacific Engineering Group 2014). The report assessed existing on-site geological conditions at the three bridges and provided recommendations for implementing the project work. Recommendations are primarily related to construction methods and specifications for the repair work, such as the length of soil nails and amount of lateral active pressures to be applied. With these recommendations being accounted for in the project design, construction of the project would not cause any soils or geologic units to become unstable. The impact would be less than significant.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No Impact
The potential for geologic and soil hazards from unstable or expansive soils in the project sites are considered low to nil based on data from the County of Marin (County of Marin 2025).
Therefore, the project would not be located on an expansive soil, thus creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. No impact would occur. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact
The project does not involve construction of septic tanks or wastewater disposal systems. No impact would occur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Marin Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated There are no known paleontological resources within the Marin Road Bridge APE. Project work at the Marin Road Bridge would include excavation within the creek bed, there is potential for the project to uncover such materials during construction. The project would implement Mitigation Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 80 Measure CUL-1, as described in Section 4.2.1, Cultural Resources, which requires that if cultural or paleontological resources are found during construction, all work in the vicinity of the find would stop until the find can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist.
Implementation of this measure would ensure that project work at the Marin Road Bridge site would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Spruce Road Bridge
No Impact
Project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not include any ground-disturbing activities.
Therefore, there is no potential for the project to impact any paleontological resources. No impact would occur.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated There are no known paleontological resources within the Canyon Road Bridge APE. Project work at the Canyon Road Bridge would include excavation work, there is potential for the project to uncover such materials during construction. The project would implement Mitigation Measure CUL-1, as described in Section 4.2.1, Cultural Resources, which requires that if cultural or paleontological resources are found during construction, all work in the vicinity of the find would stop until the find can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist.
Implementation of this measure would ensure that project work at the Canyon Road Bridge site would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 81 4.2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Unlike emissions of criteria and toxic air pollutants, which have local or regional impacts, emissions of GHGs that contribute to global warming or global climate change have a broader, global impact. Global warming is a process whereby GHGs accumulating in the atmosphere contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere. The principal GHGs contributing to global warming are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated compounds. These gases allow visible and ultraviolet light from the sun to pass through the atmosphere, but they prevent heat from escaping back out into space.
Among the potential implications of global warming are rising sea levels, and adverse impacts to water supply, water quality, agriculture, forestry, and habitats. In addition, global warming may increase electricity demand for cooling, decrease the availability of hydroelectric power, and affect regional air quality and public health. Like most criteria and toxic air pollutants, much of the GHG production comes from motor vehicles. GHG emissions can be reduced to some degree by improved coordination of land use and transportation planning on the city, county, and subregional level, and other measures to reduce automobile use.
REGULATORY SETTING
State Regulations
Global Warming Solutions Act
Assembly Bill (AB) 32, adopted in 2006, established the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 which requires the State to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2016, Senate Bill (SB) 32 was signed into law, amending the California Global Warming Solution Action. SB 32 and Executive Order B-30-15 require the CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. CARB updated its Climate Change Scoping Plan in December of 2017 to express the 2030 statewide target in terms of million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). Based on the emissions reductions directed by SB 32, the annual 2030 statewide target emissions level for California is 260 MMTCO2e.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 82 Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan
The 2017 CAP is the most recently adopted air quality plan in the Bay Area. The CAP focuses on two related BAAQMD goals: protecting public health and protecting the climate. To protect the climate, the CAP includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-GHGs that are potent climate pollutants in the near-term, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.
BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area. The guidelines include information on legal requirements, BAAQMD rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The BAAQMD has adopted thresholds of significance that were designed to establish the level at which GHG emissions would cause significant environmental impacts under CEQA. The thresholds are included in the 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD 2022).
The project would produce GHG emissions from temporary construction-related activities, including operation of heavy equipment, use of trucks, and worker trips to and from the project sites. The proposed project would not result in an increase in generation of GHG emissions after construction is complete. GHG emissions from project operation would be limited to vehicular trips and equipment emissions during occasional maintenance activities, which would be similar to pre-project conditions.
The BAAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction GHG emissions. The BAAQMD’s approach to developing thresholds of significance for GHG impacts is to use a “fair share” approach to determine whether an individual project’s GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project would contribute its “fair share” of what is needed to achieve statewide long-term GHG reduction goals, the impact of the project’s GHG emission would be less than significant. The BAAQMD has identified required design elements that land use projects must incorporate into project plans in order for the operational impact of their project to be considered less than significant. There are no design elements required for transportation infrastructure projects, and therefore the project must only be consistent with the local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) (BAAQMD 2022).
The proposed project includes the repairs and maintenance to three existing bridges and would not expand the capacity of the bridge or add traffic controls (i.e., new stop signs or signalization). Traffic volumes are expected to be the same as existing conditions for all three bridges, and therefore, operation of the project would not result in an increase in GHG emissions.
As described below in Threshold b), the project is consistent with the local GHG reduction Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 83 strategy. Therefore, the project would not generate GHG emission which would have a significant impact on the environment. The impact would be less than significant. b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact
The Town’s Climate Action Plan was adopted on July 7, 2021, by the Fairfax Town Council (Town of Fairfax 2021). The purpose of the Plan is to outline strategies to reduce local GHG emission throughout the year 2030. Based on data collected by local governments in transportation, energy, off-road equipment, water and wastewater, and waste sectors, the majority of community GHG emission come from vehicle trips generated by residents and businesses. From 2005 to 2018, the Town had achieved a 25 percent reduction in GHG emissions, which is well below the State and locally adopted target for Fairfax, which is 15 percent below 2005 emissions by 2020. Strategies related to transportation in the Climate Action Plan include increasing electric vehicle use; increasing opportunities for bicycling, walking, carpooling, and public transit; implementing the Safe Routes to School Program; encouraging smart growth development; transitioning to renewable diesel fuels for the Town’s fleet; and implementing transportation network improvements to minimize idling times. The project would not conflict with any strategies identified in the Climate Action Plan. The project would generate some GHG emissions during construction; however, these impacts would be temporary and would be similar to the emissions generated by other similar types of construction projects. The project would not result in a permanent increase in GHG emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 84 4.2.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A material is considered hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a federal, state, or local agency or if it has characteristics defined as hazardous by such an agency.
A hazardous material is defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations as follows:
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 85 A substance or combination of substances which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may either (1) cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed of or otherwise managed. (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 66261.10) Chemical and physical properties cause a substance to be considered hazardous. Such properties include toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, and reactivity (as defined in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20-66261.24). The release of hazardous materials into the environment could potentially contaminate soils, surface water, and groundwater supplies. Under Government Code Section 65962.5, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a list of hazardous substance sites. This list, referred to as the “Cortese List,” includes CALSITE hazardous material sites, sites with leaking underground storage tanks, and landfills with evidence of groundwater contamination.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less-than-Significant Impact
Small amounts of hazardous materials would be used during construction activities for equipment maintenance (e.g., fuel and solvents). Use of hazardous materials would be limited to the construction phase and would comply with applicable local, state, and federal standards associated with the handling and storage of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials would not be stored or used, such as for equipment maintenance, where they could affect nearby residences. Standard construction measures would be implemented to contain any accidental spills of oil and other hazardous materials, and the contractor would be required to ensure that adequate materials are on hand to clean up any accidental spill that may occur. Spills would be cleaned up immediately, and all wastes and used spill control materials would be properly disposed of at approved disposal facilities. With implementation of these standard measures and development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (as discussed in Section
4.9 of this report), impacts associated with the use or accidental spill of hazardous materials would be less than significant. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4 as described in Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources would further reduce this less than significant impact.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The repairs to the existing bridges would include the use of hazardous materials during the construction phase of the project such as fuels for construction vehicles. The handling and storage of these materials would be subject to all applicable local, state, and federal regulations.
No upset or accident conditions can be reasonably expected to occur under these circumstances.
As the proposed project would restore the bridges to their existing functions, the operation of the bridges would not result in the generation or use of hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 86 would be less than significant. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-4 (Mechanical Equipment in the Creek Bed) in Section 4.4 of this report would further reduce this less than significant impact.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less-than-Significant Impact
There are two schools in the vicinity of the project sites. The Manor Elementary School is located approximately ¼ mile north of the Marin Road Bridge. The St Rita’s Parochial School is located approximately ¼ mile east of the Spruce Road Bridge. Small amounts of hazardous materials would be used during construction activities for equipment maintenance (e.g., fuel and solvents).
Use of hazardous materials would be limited to the construction phase and would comply with applicable local, state, and federal standards associated with the handling and storage of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials would not be stored or used, such as for equipment maintenance, where they could affect nearby schools. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact
The project sites are not included on the list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; therefore, no impact would occur under this criterion. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact
The project sites are not within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport.
Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. No impact would occur.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less-than-Significant Impact
Emergency access to or evacuation from surrounding areas would not be restricted during the construction phase of the Marin Road Bridge as the bridge would remain entirely open to motorized and non-motorized traffic during the approximate ten working days. The project description includes the use of a flag person directing traffic at the Marin Road Bridge when necessary. The BPMP work for Spruce Road Bridge is also expected to require approximately ten working days from start to finish. The Spruce Road Bridge would be closed to motorized traffic for a number of hours a few times during this period but would remain open to foot traffic on the sidewalks. The project description includes detours for motorized traffic around the neighborhood during the temporary closures of this bridge (Figure 13). The BPMP work for Canyon Road Bridge would require approximately fifteen working days from start to finish. As described in the project description, since the Canyon Road Bridge is a one-lane bridge and would be closed at Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 87 night for the sealing of its deck for a few hours, two measures to meet the needs of the residents would be implemented. First, a first-response crew and vehicle from the Ross Valley Fire Department would be positioned on the south end of the bridge for any emergency situations.
Secondly, the bridge would be opened for crossing by covering the sealing agent with plywood if an emergency crossing would be needed during the short duration of bridge closure. Prior notifications would be sent to the neighborhood. With these accommodations required as a part of the project description impacts would be less than significant. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The project sites are located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) for fire hazard severity. As discussed further in Section 4.2.20, Wildfire, portions of the project sites are within a Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). The project would implement repairs to existing bridges; it would not create any new inhabitable structures that would increase wildfire risk or expose people or structures either directly or indirectly to wildfire risk. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 88 4.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site; ii)substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site;
iii) create or contribute runoff water that
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project sites are within the 28-square mile Corte Madera Creek Watershed which extends from Mt. Tamalpais and White’s Hill through the communities of Fairfax, Sleepy Hollow, San Anselmo, Ross, Kentfield, Greenbrae, Larkspur, and Corte Madera to San Francisco Bay. The watershed includes approximately 44 miles of stream channels. Ross Creek drains the northern slope of Mt. Tamalpais and San Anselmo Creek and its tributaries drain the northwestern portion of the watershed. The two channels join to form Corte Madera Creek, which continues through Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 89 more than a mile of concrete-lined channel past the confluences of Larkspur and Tamalpais Creeks and into the salt marsh at the mouth.
Protection of water quality in California is primarily the responsibility of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and, on a regional basis, the nine California RWQCBs. Water quality within the project sites are primarily under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The Town of Fairfax is responsible for overseeing the requirements of its water quality codes and ordinances.
Location Hydraulic Study Reports were prepared for Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge in by GeomorphDesign (Appendix D). The Spruce Road Bridge project site was excluded from a detailed Hydraulic Study analysis because the project work at the Spruce Road Bridge site would not occur below the surface of the bridge deck.
Marin Road Bridge
The Marin Road Bridge spans Fairfax Creek approximately 1,845 feet downstream from “Westbrae Dam” bordering Olema Road, and about 735 feet upstream from Olema Road Bridge.
According to the March 17, 2014, updated Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM Panel 451), the 1 percent annual chance flood is contained within the channel area of Fairfax Creek in the reaches immediately upstream and downstream from Marin Road Bridge.
Spruce Road Bridge
Spruce Road Bridge spans Fairfax Creek at the intersection of Spruce Road and Arroyo Road. The Spruce Road Bridge site includes portions of a Zone AE flood zone, which means that the area is subject to inundation by the one percent annual chance flood event (FEMA 2025).
Canyon Road Bridge
The Canyon Road Bridge spans San Anselmo creek approximately 3,280 feet downstream from the Fairfax Town limits near the downstream end of the Cascade Canyon Preserve, and about 2,270 creek feet upstream from the Meadow Way Bridge. According to the March 17, 2014, updated FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM Panel 451), the 0.2 percent and 1 percent annual chance floods are entirely contained within the San Anselmo Creek channel in the reaches immediately upstream and downstream from Canyon Road Bridge.
REGULATORY SETTING
Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin The Basin Plan sets narrative and numerical water quality objectives for the San Francisco Bay Region. Numerical objectives typically describe pollutant concentration, physical and chemical conditions of water, and the toxicity of water to aquatic organisms. The Basin Plan establishes beneficial uses for select water bodies within the planning area. Beneficial uses for Fairfax Creek include:
• Cold freshwater habitat,
• Fish spawning,
• Wildlife habitat,
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 90 • Warm freshwater habitat,
• Water contact recreation, and
• Noncontact water recreation (San Francisco Bay RWQCB 2017).
Fairfax Creek is a tributary to San Anselmo Creek. San Anselmo Creek does not have designated beneficial uses by the Basin Plan; however, San Anselmo Creek joins with Sleepy Hollow Creek to form Corte Madera Creek. Beneficial uses of Corte Madera Creek include:
• Commercial and sport fishing,
• Cold freshwater habitat,
• Fish migration,
• Preservation of rare and endangered species,
• Fish spawning,
• Warm freshwater habitat,
• Wildlife habitat,
• Water contact recreation,
• Noncontact water recreation, and
• Navigation (San Francisco Bay RWQCB 2017).
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less-than-Significant Impact
Project construction work at all three sites would require the use of hazardous materials generally associated with construction such as vehicle fuels, lubricants, and solvents.
Construction work at the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge sites would also include ground-disturbing activities that would result in loose and disturbed soils and sediments. The primary risk to water quality from project implementation would be from construction-related sediment and other pollutants entering waterways via stormwater runoff.
The proposed project would be required to obtain a Section 404 permit from the Corps, a Section 1602 permit from CDFW, and a Section 401 Certification from the RWQCB. Mandatory compliance with all measures listed in each permit would be required for project approval. The project is required to comply with terms of the Marin County’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP), which facilitates compliance with the SWRCB’s General Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. The MS4 permit is a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued to MS4 operators to regulate their stormwater discharges into public waters. Any project that includes soil disturbance during construction that has the potential to become a discharge must submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) for approval by the relevant municipality prior to the issuance of certain permits. The purpose of the ESCP is to identify potential pollutant sources that may affect stormwater runoff and document BMPs that will be implemented in order to prevent construction site pollutants from leaving the site and entering the storm drain system. An ESCP would be required for all Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 91 three bridge sites, which must be submitted to the Town for approval prior to issuance of Town permits. In addition, as stated in Section 3.0, Project Description, the project would be required to implement construction-phase BMPs for erosion control and pollutant runoff to comply with Chapter 8.32 of the Town of Fairfax Municipal Code. Erosion control BMPs may include, but are not limited to, timely revegetation of graded areas, the use of hydroseed and hydraulic mulches, installation of erosion control blankets, and sediment detention basins, dams, or filters. Pollutant control BMPs may include but are not limited to the use of designated washout areas or facilities, control of trash and recycled materials, tarping of materials stored on-site, and proper location of and maintenance of temporary sanitary facilities. The Town has the authority to review designs and proposals for construction activities to determine whether adequate BMPs will be installed, implemented, and maintained during construction and once construction is complete. Therefore, with compliance with permit conditions, the MCSTOPPP, and the Town of Fairfax Municipal Code, the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The impact would be less than significant. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No Impact
The project would not use groundwater during construction or operation. Water in Fairfax is supplied by the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), which does not use groundwater as part of its water supply (MMWD 2017). The project would implement repairs to three existing bridges and would not result in a substantial increase in impervious surface area that would inhibit groundwater recharge. Therefore, the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. No impact would occur.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The proposed repairs to the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge would require excavation within the creek bed, which has the potential to result in erosion and siltation impacts to Fairfax Creek. As described above in Threshold a), the project would be required to implement construction-phase BMPs for erosion control and pollutant runoff to comply with Chapter 8.32 of the Town of Fairfax Municipal Code and submit an ESCP in compliance with MCSTOPPP. In addition, Mitigation Measure BIO-5, as described in Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources, would be implemented at the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge sites, which requires measures to protect stream habitat. As part of this measure, the Town shall require that all disturbed areas in the stream channel be re-graded to match the surrounding topography by October 15 (before the rainy season). Seed and certified weed-free straw shall be placed on disturbed areas in the project site (with the exception of the lower creek banks, creek bed, and areas below the OHW mark), and a jute mesh type or equivalent matting shall be placed over the straw, installed per the manufacturer’s instructions. Implementation of the required construction-phase BMPs and Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 92 Mitigation Measure BIO-5 would ensure that project work at Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge would not significantly alter drainage patterns in a way that would result in substantial erosion on- or off-site. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not include any work within the bed or banks of Fairfax Creek. Minor ground-disturbance would be necessary for the repair of expansion joint seals at each end of the bridge and to transition the new concrete deck grades at the ends of the bridge to the asphalt surface on the approach roadways. This work would not substantially alter drainage patterns as the conditions after project implementation would be similar to existing conditions. No substantial increase in impervious surface area would occur. Therefore, project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not substantially alter drainage patterns in a way that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact would be less than significant.
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
(iii) create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows? Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge? Less-than-Significant Impact
Project work at Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge would include activities that may slightly alter local drainage patterns. A Location Hydraulic Study Report was prepared for both the Marin Road Bridge and Canyon Road Bridge work, which are included in Appendix C. The studies evaluated the potential effects of the BPMP improvements on flood water surface elevation and channel bed scour.
Work that may alter drainage patterns at Marin Road Bridge would include repairing the upstream and downstream wingwalls in place and repairing RSP around the repaired-in-place downstream wingwall. The Hydraulic Study recommended flood flow capacity protection measures which have been incorporated into project design. These measures include removing existing encroached large concrete debris from the culvert barrel at the outlet corner to enlarge the hydraulic opening, removing existing large broken concrete rubble debris from the channel bed, removing an existing mature alder rooted on the gravel bar downstream of the culvert, and removing exposed bedrock materials larger than 90 millimeters in diameter from the creek bed.
The Hydraulic Study also contains recommendations for foundation depths for scour protection, which were incorporated into project design. By incorporating these measures into project design, proposed work at Marin Road Bridge would increase the hydraulic capacity of the project area and would not result in flooding, obstruction of flood flows, and would not result in stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 93 Work that may alter drainage patterns at Canyon Road Bridge includes replacing the northwest and northeast bridge wingwalls. The Hydraulic Study concluded that implementation of the proposed work at the Canyon Road Bridge site would have a beneficial impact on flood capacity.
The proposed repair to the left bank wingwall would increase the effective width of the bridge opening by about one foot, which would create a smoother transition between the upstream curved vertical concrete retaining wall and the vertical concrete abutment wall. In addition, the proposed repair to the left bank immediately downstream of the bridge outlet would further increase the flood flow capacity of the bridge by providing a smoother hydraulic transition in the expansion zone downstream of the bridge opening. Therefore, the proposed work at Canyon Road Bridge would increase the hydraulic capacity of the project area and would not result in flooding, obstruction of flood flows, and would not result in stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure. The impact would be less than significant.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
The only ground-disturbing activities at Spruce Road Bridge would be the transition of the new concrete deck grades at the ends of the bridge to the asphalt surface on the approach roadways within 10 feet of the ends of the bridge. This would not create any additional impervious surface area or an impact on drainage patterns. Therefore, the proposed work would not substantially alter drainage patterns in a way that would result in flooding, obstruction of flood flows, or cause increased stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure. The impact would be less than significant.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Construction of the project would involve the use of pollutants and hazardous substances which could risk release due to project inundation. The Marin Road Bridge and Spruce Road Bridge site are within FEMA Zone AE, which means that the area is subject to inundation by the one percent annual chance flood event. The Canyon Road Bridge site also involves work in San Anselmo Creek, which contains the 0.2 percent and 1 percent annual chance flood event. Therefore, if the project sites were to become inundated during construction, the project could risk pollutant release into waterways.
As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, project construction work at all three sites would occur during the dry season. Therefore, it is unlikely that the project sites would be inundated while construction work is occurring. However, the as described above in Threshold a), the project would be required to comply with permit conditions related to water quality protection, comply with the MCSTOPPP, and implement and ESCP in compliance with the Town of Fairfax Municipal Cod. With implementation of these measures, the project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 94 e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The project sites are not within a groundwater basin (California Department of Water Resources 2025). Therefore, there is no sustainable groundwater management plan applicable to the project sites. As discussed above in Threshold b), the project would not involve the use of groundwater.
No impact related to groundwater would occur.
The applicable water quality control plan for the region is the RWQCB’s Basin Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin. The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives for surface and groundwaters of the State. As stated in Section 3.0, Project Description, the project would be required to obtain a Section 401 Water Quality Certification permit and Notice of Intent under the State Construction General NPDES Permit from the RWQCB. These permits are implemented to ensure compliance with water quality objectives identified in the Basin Plan. The project would be required to implement any measures included in the final permits; therefore, the project would not conflict with the applicable water quality control plan. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 95 4.2.11 Land Use and Planning
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Town of Fairfax General Plan provides policies and implementation strategies for management of the resources and land uses in the Town, and the Town Codes provide restrictions and requirements to protect resources and comply with local, state, and federal laws. No habitat conservation plans have been adopted for the project area.
REGULATORY SETTING
Town of Fairfax General Plan
The Town of Fairfax General Plan contains the following policies that are relevant to the proposed project:
Land Use Element
• Policy LU-4.2: To the extent feasible natural features including the existing grade, mature trees, and vegetation shall be preserved with development or redevelopment. • Policy LU-4.1.3: New and renewed development shall comply with all regulations encompassed in the California and Uniform Building Codes intended to reduce potential damage and threats to the public’s health, safety, and welfare in the event of an earthquake.
Circulation Element
• Policy C-2.2: Maintain the street, sidewalk and pathway network through a regular maintenance program.
Conservation Element
• Policy CON-2.1.2: All planning decisions shall require application of existing air quality guidelines and best practices to minimize air quality impact. • Policy CON-3.1.1: Maintain floodwater capacity and promote creek restoration. • Policy CON-3.1.2: The Town of Fairfax shall protect and restore riparian habitat and ensure natural channel process in the San Anselmo Creek and Fairfax Creek watersheds.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 96 • Policy CON-5.2.1: Maintain and restore native vegetation where appropriate for habitat value, aesthetics, reference habitat, and riparian cover. • Policy CON-6.1.2: Protect special-status species and resident and migrant wildlife, and their habitats, within the Fairfax Planning Area (also see Goal CON-3 and Policy CON5.2.1). • Policy CON-6.2.1: Restore habitats for anadromous fish. • Policy CON-8.2.1: Protect, maintain, rehabilitate, and enhance historical and cultural resources within the Fairfax Planning Area.
Safety Element
• Policy S-1.1: Require that new development be designed and sited to minimize risks from seismic events, including ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides. • Policy S-1.2: For new development within seismic and geologic hazard zones, including existing landslide areas, areas of high and moderate liquefaction risk, and areas of greater ground shaking amplification, require that project proponents submit geotechnical investigation reports prepared by qualified professionals and demonstration that the project conforms to all mitigation measures recommended by the reports prior to approval.
• Policy S-1.4: Ensure that structures intended for human occupancy are designed and constructed to retain their structural integrity when subjected to seismic activity, in accordance with the California Building Code.
• Policy S-1.10: Require new development in the 100-year and 500-year flood hazard zones to comply with applicable provisions for flood hazard control in the Town Code. • Policy S-1.23: Consistent with State regulations, require proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to reduce the likelihood of leakage, explosions, or fire, and to properly contain potential spills from leaving the site. • Policy S-2.1: Consider climate impacts, risk, and uncertainty in designing and evaluating capital improvement projects and adjust infrastructure design standards and project locations to address asset- and site-specific vulnerabilities. • Policy S-3.3: To facilitate the orderly evacuation of residential areas, maintain minimum standards for roadway design, maintenance, and vegetation management.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact
The project involves maintenance of existing bridges within the Town of Fairfax. Upon completion of construction the project sites would remain the same as existing conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would not divide a community and no impact would occur. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 97 Less-than-Significant Impact
A proposed project would have a significant impact if it were to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The proposed project is subject to several policies of the Town’s General Plan, as described above.
Policies LU-4.1.2 and S-1.10 require that all new and renewed development must comply with all federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to development in flood zones, and comply with applicable provisions for flood hazard control in the Town Code. In addition, Policy S-2.1 requires the Town to consider climate impacts, risks, and uncertainty in designing and evaluating capital improvement projects to address site-specific vulnerabilities. As discussed in Section 4.2.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would involve construction work in some flood hazard zones; however, the project would not place any new habitable structures within a flood hazard zone. The project would rehabilitate existing bridges to improve their structural integrity, which will make them less susceptible to flood hazards. The project would improve flood flow capacity of the respective creeks where project work would occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with these policies.
Policies S-1.1, S-1.2, and S-1.4 require new development to be sited to minimize seismic hazard risks, require projects to submit a geotechnical report to demonstrate the project complies with all geotechnical recommendations, and ensure that new structures conform to the requirements of the California Building Code to ensure seismic integrity. As discussed in Section 4.2.7, Geology and Soils, a geotechnical report was prepared for the project, and the project would implement recommendations of the report.
Policies LU-4.2, CON-3.1.1, CON-3.1.2, CON-5.2.1, CON-6.1.2, and CON-6.2.1 pertain to protection of biological resources in the Town, such as special-status species, riparian habitats, native vegetation, and wildlife corridors. As discussed in Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources, the project would implement mitigation measures to protect biological resources that have the potential to be impacted by the project, including special-status wildlife species, nesting birds, wildlife corridors, and stream habitat. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce temporary impacts to biological resources to a less-than-significant level. The project would not have a permanent adverse effect on biological resources. Therefore, project would not conflict with policies of the General Plan related to the protection of biological resources.
Policy S-3.3 requires that minimum standards for roadway design be adhered to in order to facilitate orderly evacuation. Policy C-2.2 requires regular maintenance of the street, sidewalk and pathway network. The project would improve the circulation system by implementing preventative maintenance repairs to three bridges. The project would comply with all roadway design standards when implementing bridge repairs. Therefore, the project would not conflict with policies of the General Plan related to circulation.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 98 4.2.12 Mineral Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
There are only two mines within Marin County listed on the Office of Mine Reclamation’s website, which include the Redwood/Silviera Quarry and Dutra Minerals. The project sites are located within the Town of Fairfax and there are no known mineral resources within the vicinity of the project areas.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact
The project sites are not located within the vicinity of either of the two mines within Marin County and no other known mineral resources areas are near the project site. Furthermore, the development of the proposed project would not preclude future excavation of oil or minerals should such resources be found. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact
The project sites are not in or adjacent to any important mineral resource areas. There are no known mineral resources on the project sites as delineated in the Town of Fairfax General Plan 2010-2030. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact on mineral resources.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 99 4.2.13 Noise
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-thanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Sound is technically described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The standard unit of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound level at all frequencies, a special frequencydependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by discriminating against frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.
Noise, on the other hand, is typically defined as unwanted sound. A typical noise environment consists of a base of steady “background” noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. These can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to virtually continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a major highway.
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people. Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise upon people is largely dependent upon the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. Those that are applicable to this analysis are as follows:
• Leq – An Leq, or equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 100
exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night. • Lmax – The maximum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of time. • Lmin – The minimum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of time. • CNEL – The Community Noise Equivalent Level is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5 dBA “weighting” during the hours of 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. and a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24 hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by median noise levels during the day, night, or over a 24-hour period. For residential uses, environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60–70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2003). Noise levels greater than 85 dBA can cause temporary or permanent hearing loss. Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet suburban residential streets with noise levels around 40 dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep. Examples of moderate level noise environments are urban residential or semi-commercial areas (typically 55–60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with more noisy urban residential or residential-commercial areas (60–75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial areas (65–80 dBA).
It is widely accepted that in the community noise environment the average healthy ear can barely perceive CNEL noise level changes of 3 dBA. CNEL changes from 3 to 5 dBA may be noticed by some individuals who are extremely sensitive to changes in noise. A 5 dBA CNEL increase is readily noticeable, while the human ear perceives a 10 dBA CNEL increase as a doubling of sound.
Noise levels from a particular source generally decline as distance to the receptor increases.
Other factors, such as the weather and reflecting or barriers, also help intensify or reduce the noise level at any given location. A commonly used rule of thumb for roadway noise is that for every doubling of distance from the source, the noise level is reduced by about 3 dBA at acoustically “hard” locations (i.e., the area between the noise source and the receptor is nearly complete asphalt, concrete, hard-packed soil, or other solid materials) and 4.5 dBA at acoustically “soft” locations (i.e., the area between the source and receptor is normal earth or has vegetation, including grass). Noise from stationary or point sources is reduced by about 6 to
7.5 dBA for every doubling of distance at acoustically hard and soft locations, respectively. Noise levels are also generally reduced by 1 dBA for each 1,000 feet of distance due to air absorption.
Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures – generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The normal noise attenuation within residential structures with open windows is about 17 dBA, while the noise attenuation with closed windows is about 25 dBA (Highway Research Board 1971).
Under the Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (CaTNAP) 1998, projects that are not Type I only require an evaluation of predicted construction noise. The project is not a Type I project as defined in 23 CFR 772.5(h); “construction on new location or the physical alteration of an existing Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 101
highway, which significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. The proposed BPMP project is to rehabilitate three existing bridges within the Town of Fairfax.
The project would take place within existing right-of-way in residential neighborhoods. The nearest residential properties to the project are situated within 25 feet of the APEs of each of the three BPMP bridges. Noise sources that contribute to ambient noise levels in and adjacent to the project site include traffic from local streets and noise from residential activities. Table 2 summarizes typical ambient noise levels based on population density. The vicinity of the project area is most similar to that of “quite suburban residential or small town” setting with an expected typical noise level of 45-50 dBA.
Table 2. Population Density and Associated Ambient Noise Levels LAND USE dBA, Ldn
Rural suburban 40-50
Quiet suburban residential or small town 45-50
Normal suburban residential urban 50-55
Normal urban residential 60
Noise urban residential 65
Very noisy urban residential 70
Downton, major metropolis 75-80
Under flight path at major airport, 0.5 to 1
mile from runway
78-85
Adjoining freeway or near a major airport 80-90
Source: Cowan 1984, Hoover and Keith 1996
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Generally, noise levels at construction sites can vary from 55 dBA to a maximum of nearly 80 dBA when heavy equipment is used. During construction of the project, noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate area of construction. Construction noise is regulated by Caltrans Standard Specifications Sections 7-1.01I “Sound Control Requirements,” and 14-8.02 “Noise Control,” which state that noise levels generated during construction shall comply with applicable local, state, and federal regulations, and that all equipment shall be fitted with adequate mufflers according to the manufacturers’ specifications.
No significant noise impacts from construction are anticipated because construction would be conducted in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications Sections 7-1.01I and 14-8.02, as well as applicable Town noise standards. The only exception would be that deck sealing work for Canyon Road Bridge which would occur over one night, with the noise-generating activity limited to the late evening hours.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 102
Construction noise of the project would range from 10 to 15 days for a given bridge. Noisegenerating activities would be intermittent, and noise levels would vary depending on the type of construction activity. The loudest construction activities are likely to be engine noise from construction vehicles. Construction vehicles moving in and out of the construction area would be a small loader, such as a Bobcat with backhoe or bucket attachments, polyester concrete mix truck, paver, roller, small excavator, a coldplaning machine, snooper lift truck, utility pickup trucks, flatbed trucks, dump trucks, dump trailers, a crane, concrete delivery trucks and a testing van. These vehicles and equipment would not all be on-site at the same time but would move in and out and be staged within each APE as needed.
Most of the construction equipment to be used at the three sites would be relatively compact and quiet, including air compressors, generators, a shot blaster, shotcrete pumps and hoses, concrete saws, concrete chipping guns and drills, and soil drilling equipment. However, when considering the type of construction necessary to complete this type of work, the majority of construction activities would be on the lower side of the estimate as the activities necessary to rehabilitate the bridges would not require large amounts of heavy (and noisy) equipment. No pile driving would be required for any of the bridges. With the exception of Canyon Road Bridge deck sealing work, no other nighttime construction would be required for the other two BPMP bridges.
The Town of Fairfax General Plan requires appropriate standard controls to be implemented to control noise from construction projects (Policy N-3.1.4). To comply with requirements of the General Plan, Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 would be implemented. NOISE-1 requires adherence to the Town’s Standard Controls for noise from construction projects. Implementation of this measure would ensure that the project would not generate a substantial increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less-than-Significant Impact
Groundborne vibration is typically associated with blasting operations, the use of pile drivers, and large-scale demolition activities, none of which are anticipated for the construction or operation of the proposed project. As such, no excessive groundborne vibrations would be generated by the proposed project and impacts would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact
The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip or public use airport, or the jurisdiction of an airport land use plan. Therefore, no impacts associated with the exposure of people living or working in areas with aviation present to excessive noise would occur.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 103
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure NOISE–1: Construction Noise
The Town of Fairfax General Plan identifies two policy goals to reduce the potential for impacts associated with construction or maintenance operations:
Policy N-3.1.4: Implement appropriate standard controls (e.g., some or all of Stand Controls A-H) for all construction projects.
Policy N-3.1.5: Consider CEQA review for construction projects lasting more than 18 months, and submittal of detailed construction noise management plans.
The Town of Fairfax has developed a list of Standard Controls to comply with Policy N-3.1.4.
The project shall comply with the following measures:
1. With the exception of deck sealing work on Canyon Road Bridge that would occur over one night, limit construction to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no noise-generating construction on Sundays or Holidays.
2. Control noise from construction workers’ radios to the point where they are not audible at existing residences that border the project site.
3. Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
4. Utilize quite models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
5. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area.
6. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.
7. Notify residents adjacent to the project sites of the construction schedule in writing.
8. Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad mufflers) and institute reasonable measure warranted to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site.
In addition, the project shall follow the standard construction noise requirements regulated by Caltrans Sections 7-1.01I and 14-8.02 of the Standard Specifications which states the following:
1. Do not exceed 86 dBA at 50 feet from the job site activities from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m.
2. Equip any internal combustion engines with the manufacturer-recommended muffler.
Do not operate an internal combustion engine on the job site without the appropriate muffler.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 104
4.2.14 Population and Housing
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project sites are located in a residential neighborhood community of the Town of Fairfax. The General Plan land use designations surrounding the project site include low density residential and medium density residential. Land uses near Marin Road Bridge include Fairfax Creek and low density residential development. Land uses near Spruce Road Bridge include Fairfax Creek and medium density residential development. Land uses near Canyon Road Bridge include San Anselmo Creek and low-density residential development.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact
The proposed project would involve maintenance to three existing bridges. No residential development, permanent employment opportunities, or additional infrastructure would result from project implementation. Therefore, no unplanned population growth would directly or indirectly result from the project. No impact would occur. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact
The proposed project would not involve the demolition or removal of any residential development. No people or housing would be displaced, so no construction of replacement housing would be required. No impact would occur.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 105
4.2.15 Public Services
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Ross Valley Fire Department (RVFD) currently provides fire protection and emergency response services to the communities of Ross, San Anselmo, Sleepy Hollow and Fairfax. The RVFD operates four fire stations. RVFD Station 21 provides fire protection and paramedic services to the project site. Station 21 is located at 10 Park Road. All three project sites are within approximately one mile of the station.
The Town of Fairfax Police Department (FPD) provides police protection services to the project sites. The FPD employs 11 full-time Police Officers, two Reserve Police Officers, four full time Police Dispatchers, one Community Services Technician and four part time Police Dispatchers.
The FPD station is located at 44 Bolinas Road. All three project sites are within approximately one mile of the station.
There are two schools in the immediate vicinity of the project sites. The Manor Elementary School is located approximately one quarter mile north of the Marin Road Bridge. The Saint Rita’s Parochial School is located approximately one quarter mile east of the Spruce Road Bridge.
The recreational parks within the general vicinity of the project site include the Contratti Park Baseball Field and Cascade Canyon Open Space Preserve.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 106
The project would not rely on the addition or alteration of any public services. No residential or commercial construction is proposed by the project. The project would not increase population in the Town that could result in additional demands for public services and therefore would not require the construction of new public service facilities or the expansion of existing public service facilities. As such, the project would not result in significant physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities. • Fire Protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact
The RVFD would continue to provide fire protection services to the project sites upon development. As discussed in T Section 4.2.14, Population and Housing, the project would not include construction of any residential structures or result in an increase in residential population.
It is not anticipated that the project would necessitate the expansion of existing or construction of new fire protection facilities. Therefore, project impacts related to fire protection services would be less than significant.
• Police Protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact
During construction, a minor demand for additional FPD services may occur during the project’s construction phase. Such services include, but may not be limited to, consultation during plan check, routine surveillance of the construction site by regular patrol units, potential investigations of theft of or vandalism to construction equipment and materials, and enforcement of local speed limits near the construction site. It is not anticipated that the project would necessitate the expansion of existing or construction of new police protection facilities. Therefore, project impacts related to police protection services would be less than significant. • Schools?
No Impact
As discussed in Section 4.2.14, Population and Housing, the project would not include construction of any residential structures. The project would not result in an increase of population that would require additional school facilities. No impact would occur. • Parks?
No Impact
As discussed in Section 4.2.14, Population and Housing, the project would not include construction of any residential structures. The project would not result in an increase of population that would require additional park facilities. No impact would occur. • Other Public Facilities?
No Impact
As discussed in Impact 4.14 (a), the project would not include construction of any residential structures. As the project would not induce population growth, the project would not create a need for other public facilities including public libraries, public hospitals and medical centers, and community centers. No impact would occur.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 107
4.2.16 Recreation
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The recreational parks within the general vicinity of the project site include the Contratti Park Baseball Field and Cascade Canyon Open Space Preserve.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
No Impact
The proposed project would not involve any additional housing or businesses that could increase the use of recreational facilities in the project area. The project would involve maintenance to three existing bridges. Physical deterioration of the recreational facilities would not be affected by the project. No impact would occur.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact
The project would not involve any additional housing or businesses that could increase residents and/or employees within the project sites. The proposed project would not affect recreational facilities or increase the use of nearby recreational facilities. The project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The purpose of the project is to rehabilitate existing bridges and therefore would have no impact on recreation.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 108
4.2.17 Transportation
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed project includes repairs to three existing bridges within the Town of Fairfax. Major Streets Classifications provides classification of major streets in Fairfax (arterial and local).
Arterials carry regional trips and traffic between areas of the Town while providing access to major traffic generators. Collector streets link neighborhoods to arterial streets and carry through traffic for short segments in residential and commercial areas, while local streets provide direct access to parcels and residences. Many streets in the Town Center serve both collector and local street functions. All two-way roadways are two-lane, though on many streets, especially on the hillsides, it is impossible to pass oncoming traffic at the narrowest points. Spruce Road is classified as “Local” within the General Plan. Marin Road and Canyon Road are minor roads within the Town that do not meet the standards for classification. The intersections approaching Marin Road and Spruce Road are unsignalized intersections controlled by stop signs.
REGULATORY SETTING
Town of Fairfax General Plan
The Town of Fairfax General Plan contains the following relevant policies related to transportation:
• Policy C-2.2: Maintain the street, sidewalk and pathway network through a regular maintenance program.
• Policy C-3.1: Since many local streets in Fairfax do not have sidewalks, ensure that speed limits are set to reduce danger to children and other pedestrians. • Policy C-3.2: Upgrade local streets to optimal traffic engineering standards only when there is a demonstrated public safety need to do so.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 109
• Policy C-3.4: Avoid major increases in street capacity unless necessary to remedy severe traffic congestion or critical neighborhood traffic problems or where necessary for emergency vehicle access. Where capacity is increased, balance the needs of motor vehicles with those of pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Policy C-5.1: Improve and maintain the existing network of sidewalks and bike paths, bike lanes, pavement markings (cross walks, shared lane markings).
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less-than-Significant Impact
The Town’s General Plan contains policies related to transportation and circulation. Specifically, policies C-2.2, C-3.1, C-3.2, C-3.4, and C-5.1 are relevant to the proposed project. The project includes maintenance and rehabilitation repairs to three existing bridges; therefore, the project supports Policy C-2.2 and C-3.2. The project would not change any speed limits within the project sites or expand the capacity of the roadway; therefore, the project would not conflict with Policy C-3.1 or C-3.4. The existing pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure present within the project sites would be maintained; therefore, the project would not conflict with Policy C-5.1.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system. The impact would be less than significant. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less-than-Significant Impact
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) describes criteria for analyzing transportation impacts based on VMT. The Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018) states the if a project would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel, the lead agency should conduct an analysis assessing the amount of vehicle travel the project will induce. Project types that are identified to likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel are those that include the addition of through lanes on existing or new highways, including general purpose lanes, HOV lanes, peak period lanes, auxiliary lanes, or lanes through grade-separated interchanges.
The Technical Advisory identifies a wide variety of projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis. Among these projects include:
• Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways, roadways, bridges, culverts, tunnels, transit systems, and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity.
• Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 110
• Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes.
• Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices. • Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in number of traffic lanes.
• Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity. • Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way.
The proposed project aligns with several types of projects described above. The project is a bridge rehabilitation project designed to improve the conditions of the existing transportation system without increasing additional motor vehicle capacity. Three existing bridges would be rehabilitated, which would not result in a net increase in traffic lanes, but would improve safety for crossing vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Therefore, the project would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and a detailed travel analysis is not required. The project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b); the impact would be less than significant.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less-than-Significant Impact
A significant impact may occur if a project were to include a new roadway design, introduce a new land use or permanent project features into an area with specific transportation requirements and characteristics that have not been previously experienced in that area, or if project access or other features were designed in such a way as to create hazardous conditions.
The project would not involve new road construction or activities that could increase hazards due to a permanent design feature or incompatible uses. The proposed project would repair existing bridges and operation of the proposed project would return to existing conditions. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Marin Road Bridge
No Impact
As described in Section 3.0 Project Description, Marin Road Bridge would remain entirely open to motorized and non-motorized traffic during the approximate ten working days needed for project construction. Therefore, emergency vehicles would be able to pass through the project site at all times. No impact to emergency access would occur.
Spruce Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction work for Spruce Road Bridge would require approximately ten working days to complete. The Spruce Road Bridge would be closed to motorized traffic for a number of hours a few times during this period. As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, vehicle traffic would be detoured via Arroyo Road and Azalea Drive. This detour (as shown in Figure 13) would not Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 111
result in inadequate emergency access to any residences, businesses, or other land uses. The impact would be less than significant.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction work at Canyon Road Bridge would require approximately fifteen working days from start to finish. One night of work at Canyon Road Bridge would require the bridge to be closed for approximately four to five hours to complete the deck sealing work. As described in Section
3.0, Project Description, a first-response crew and vehicle from RVFD would be positioned on the south end of the bridge for any emergency situations. In addition, if an emergency crossing is needed, the bridge would be opened for crossing by covering the sealing agent with plywood.
Prior notifications would be sent to the neighborhood to inform them of the work schedule and details. Therefore, project work at Canyon Road Bridge would not result in inadequate emergency access. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 112
4.2.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1?
In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
A description of the environmental setting related to tribal cultural resources can be found in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources.
REGULATORY SETTING
Tribal Cultural Resources Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52)
AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) required an update of the CEQA Guidelines to include questions related to impacts to tribal cultural resources. AB 52 establishes a consultation process with all California Native American Tribes on the Native American Heritage Commission List, Federal and Non-Federal Recognized Tribes. AB 52 also establishes a new class of resources:
Tribal Cultural Resources. Key components of AB 52 include consideration of Tribal Cultural Values in determination of project impacts and mitigation and required Tribal notice and meaningful consultation.
PRC Section 21080.3.2(b) states that consultation ends when either 1) parties agree to mitigation measures or avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource, or 2) a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached.
State of California Public Resources Code
Section 21074 of the PRC defines historical resources related to tribal cultural resources.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 113
a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
a. Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
A. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources.
B. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape.
c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).
Section 5020.1(k) defines “Local register of historical resources” as a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution.
Section 5024.1 is the establishment of the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register).
Native American Consultation
The NAHC provided a list of Native American individuals that expressed interest or ties to Marin County. Letters were sent to each of these individuals soliciting their comment. The Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (FIGR) replied in a letter stating that “the tribe requests a meeting with representatives of the ‘lead agency’ for this project and any federal agencies involved in the permitting and/or funding process”. As a part of the XPI study described in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, FIGR requested a field meeting at the Marin Road Bridge site. The field meeting took place on January 11, 2023, and was attended by representatives from Far Western, the Town of Fairfax, California Infrastructure Consultancy, Inc, and FIGR. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the details of the proposed project activities at Marin Road Bridge and Far Western’s archaeological testing approach. FIGR did not express any specific concerns with either the project activities or proposed archaeological testing and confirmed that tribal monitors would be present for the archaeological testing. The proposed testing was designed to determine the presence or absence of archaeological deposits within the APE. The testing plan was executed on July 12, 2023, under the supervision of Far Western. A total of five hand auger bores were excavated as part of this investigation. No cultural deposits, intact or otherwise, were encountered during this testing. Also, no known tribal cultural resources were identified by FIGR.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 114
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated There are no known tribal cultural resources listed within the project sites. As described in Section 4.2.5, Cultural Resources, there is potential for unknown cultural resources, which may include tribal cultural resources, to be discovered during earth-disturbing construction activities such as excavation and grading. As such, the project would implement Mitigation Measure CUL1 to ensure that any accidentally discovered cultural resources would be treated with proper care. With implementation of this measure, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 115
4.2.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Water
Water supply to the project sites is provided by MMWD. Approximately 75 percent of the MMWD’s supply comes from rainfall in the Mt. Tamalpais Watershed and hills of west Marin County. The MMWD maintains seven reservoirs and an extensive distribution system featuring 908 miles of pipes, 130 storage tanks, and 97 pump stations (MMWD 2023). The MMWD’s water supply is supplemented by the Sonoma County Water Agency, whose supply comes from the Russian River System in Sonoma County.
Wastewater
Wastewater services in the Town are provided by Ross Valley Sanitary district (RVSD). The RVSD operates and maintains approximately 200 miles of collection sewer lines and 19 pump stations Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 116
which collect, pump, and transport approximately four million gallons of wastewater per day.
Wastewater is treated at the Central Marin Sanitation Agency located in San Rafael.
Solid Waste
The Marin Sanitary Service provides waste disposal services for the site. According to the Marin Countywide Plan, there are two permitted landfills operate in the county. The Redwood Landfill would most likely to service the project’s solid waste disposal needs.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact
The project would not require the relocation, expansion, or construction of any water, wastewater treatment, storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. The project would improve existing bridges and does not involve any public utility components. Thus, the construction or relocation of utilities would not result in significant environmental effects, and no impact would occur.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? Less-than-Significant Impact
During construction, the project would require the use of water for construction activities such as watering soil stockpiles and exposed areas. The water needed for construction activities would be comparable to the water demand for similar types of construction projects and would not substantially increase existing demand for water within the Town. As described in Section 4.2.14, Population and Housing, the project would not construct new housing or provide services which would encourage or support growth within the Town. Therefore, the project would not result in any increase of potable water demand. The project would rehabilitate three existing bridges, which would not increase the demand for water during future normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The project would have no operational impact on water supply. The impact would be less than significant.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact
Construction of the project would not generate additional wastewater and would not impact wastewater infrastructure. As described in Section 4.2.14, Population and Housing, the project would not construct new housing or support population growth. Therefore, implementation of the project would not directly or indirectly impact wastewater services. The project would not require any determination from the wastewater treatment provider. Therefore, no impact related to wastewater would occur.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 117
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less-than-Significant Impact
The project would generate a small quantity of solid waste during construction, but all generated waste would be properly disposed or recycled in an approved landfill or disposal facility with capacity to receive the waste. Non-hazardous waste would be disposed of at the Redwood Landfill, a certified landfill that serves the Town. Redwood Landfill is anticipated to have capacity through 2025, so the project’s solid waste would be insufficient to exceed remaining capacity. Further, Zero Waste Marin encourages disposal at certified facilities to assure that materials are recycled to the greatest extent feasible. By recycling at Redwood Landfill, the project would maximize its potential for recycling, in keeping with local waste reduction efforts.
The minimal quantity of hazardous creosote-contaminated timber and soils would be disposed of at an appropriate facility permitted to handle hazardous materials. As the project would only temporarily generate solid waste, quantities would not overwhelm existing local infrastructure, and the project would not conflict with local waste reduction statutes, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less-than-Significant Impact
Marin County has a goal of zero waste by 2025. The joint powers authority overseeing zero waste efforts, Zero Waste Marin, encourages disposal at a certified facility during construction and demolition to comply with state waste reduction requirements. The project would dispose of solid waste at Redwood Landfill, a certified landfill. The project would therefore comply with local and state requirements for solid waste reduction. Therefore, the project would comply with all federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 118
4.2.20 Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas
or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage changes?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Pursuant to Government Code Section 51175-89, the California Department of Fire and Forestry (CAL FIRE) recommends FHSZs throughout the state. These are mapped taking relevant factors such as fuels, terrain, and weather into account. FHSZs are described based on their potential to cause building ignition. Areas assessed for fire hazards throughout the state are categorized as LRAs and state responsibility areas (SRA) depending on the entity responsible for fire protection.
The RVFD currently provides fire protection and emergency response services to the communities of Ross, San Anselmo, Sleepy Hollow and Fairfax. The RVFD operates four fire stations. RVFD Station 21, located at 10 Park Road, provides fire protection and paramedic services to the project sites. RVFD Station 21 is located approximately one-half mile south of Marin Road Bridge, one-quarter mile south of Spruce Road Bridge, and one mile east of Canyon Road Bridge.
Marin Road
The Marin Road Bridge site is within a High FHSZ within the LRA (CAL FIRE 2024). Areas approximately .1 miles east of the site are in a Moderate FHSZ and surrounding areas to the west are in the High FHSZ. The nearest Very High FHSZ is approximately one half mile west of the project site. The Marin Road Bridge is on a dedicated evacuation route for residents to evacuate towards Sir Francis Drake Boulevard (RVFD, Town of Fairfax 2025).
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 119
Spruce Road
The Spruce Road Bridge site is within a High FHSZ within the LRA (CAL FIRE 2024). Areas approximately .1 miles east of the site are in a Moderate FHSZ and surrounding areas to the west are in the High FHSZ. The nearest Very High FHSZ is approximately one-half mile west of the project site. Spruce Road Bridge is not located along a designated evacuation route (RVFD, Town of Fairfax 2025).
Canyon Road
The Canyon Road Bridge site is within a Moderate FHSZ in the LRA (CAL FIRE 2024). Areas surrounding the site to the east and west are in the Moderate FHSZ in the LRA and SRA. Areas approximately 0.3 miles south of the site are within a High FHSZ in the SRA. The nearest Very High FHSZ is approximately 0.30 miles north of the project site.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Marin Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
The Marin Road Bridge is located along a designated evacuation route. Project work at Marin Road Bridge would not require any lane or bridge closure. Access would be maintained over the bridge throughout project construction. Therefore, project work at Marin Road Bridge would not substantially impair an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. No impact would occur.
Spruce Road Bridge
No Impact
During construction the Spruce Road would undergo temporary closures for vehicular traffic. As stated in Section 3.0, Project Description, traffic would be detoured via Arroyo Road and Azalea Drive, as shown in Figure 13. This detour would be minimal and would not obstruct any designated evacuation routes. Therefore, project work at Spruce Road Bridge would not substantially impair an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. No impact would occur.
Canyon Road Bridge
Less-than-Significant Impact
The Canyon Road Bridge would be closed off to motorized traffic for approximately four to five hours overnight while the deck is being sealing. Although Canyon Road is not a designated emergency evacuation route, the road is the only access point to and from the neighborhood it serves. As described in Section 3.0 Project Description, in order to ensure the safety of residents during the deck sealing period, a first-response crew and vehicle from RVFD would be positioned on the south end of the bridge for any emergency situations. Secondly, if an emergency crossing is needed during the short duration of bridge closure, the bridge would be opened for crossing by covering the sealing agent with plywood. Prior notifications would be sent to the neighborhood to inform them of the work schedule and details. With these measures incorporated into project design, project work at Canyon Road Bridge would not impair any emergency response plan. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 120
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less-than-Significant Impact
None of the project sites are within a Very High FHSZ; however, the Marin Road and Spruce Road Bridges are within a High FHSZ, and the Canyon Road Bridge is within 0.30 miles of a High FHSZ.
During construction, it is possible for construction equipment and machinery being used on-site to create sparks which could ignite nearby vegetation. The project sites are all within one mile of the RVFD Station 21; therefore, any accidental ignition would be controlled by the RVFD. There are no existing on-site conditions which would increase this temporary risk to a significant level, such as extremely dry vegetation, high winds, or steep slopes. The risk induced by construction work would be similar to the risk caused by other similar types of construction projects.
Therefore, construction of the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose occupants to pollutant concentrations or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
Once construction is finished operational use of the project sites would remain the same. The project would not build any new structures or change operations in a way that would exacerbate wildfire risk. The impact would be less than significant. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact
The project involves bridge repairs and does not require the construction of any associated infrastructure such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. No impact would occur.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Less-than-Significant Impact
As described in Section 4.2.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project would not substantially alter drainage patterns. The project would require minimal amounts of grading and would not change the overall topography within the project sites. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to risks resulting from post-fire instability. The impact would be less than significant.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 121
4.2.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-thanSignificant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
LessthanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects that will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Implementation of the project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Implementation of mitigation measures presented in Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources, would mitigate potential significant impacts that could substantially degrade the quality of the environment or impact biological resources. As discussed in Section 4.2.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 4.2.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, impacts to potentially unknown resources within the project site would be mitigated to a less than significant level by Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and Mitigation Measure CUL-2. Given the fact that potential impacts to biological and cultural resources would primarily occur during active construction (not long term) and that measures have been identified to reduce these temporary Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 122
impacts, impacts would not be considered significant. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an evaluation of potential environmental impacts when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. These impacts can result from a combination of the proposed project together with other projects causing related impacts. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.
Other projects in the vicinity of the three bridge sites are summarized below in Table 3.
Table 3. Summary of Projects Considered in the Cumulative Impact Analysis
PROJECT
NAME
PROJECT
LOCATION
PROJECT
STATUS
DISTANCE FROM SITE
MARIN
ROAD
SPRUCE
ROAD
CANYON
ROAD
Creek Road
Bridge
Project
Along Creek
Road south of
its intersection
with Dominga
Avenue
Currently
under CEQA
review;
construction
anticipated
in 2028
0.75 miles
south
0.35 miles
south
1 mile east
Meadow
Way Bridge
Project
Along
Meadow Way
at its
intersection
with Cascade
Drive
Construction
to start in
2027
1.24 miles
southwest
0.90 miles
southwest
0.34 miles
east
Azalea
Avenue
Bridge
Project
Intersection of
Azalea Avenue
and Arroyo
Road
Project
designs
under
development
0.34 miles
south
0.06 miles
north
1.17 miles
northeast
The bridge repair projects would not change the existing operational use of the roadways or bridges. Therefore, any project impacts that could contribute to a cumulative impact would be predominately related to construction activities. Construction activities could result in air quality impacts and noise impacts from construction equipment and vehicles, and transportation Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 123
impacts due to project work which may impact circulation through and around the project sites.
Such impacts would be temporary and would generally be focused in the project site vicinity.
Each project would implement basic construction measures as recommended by the BAAQMD during construction to reduce fugitive dust emissions from construction. Therefore, none of the projects would contribute to a cumulatively considerable air quality impact.
Temporary delays could result from construction work at the project sites due to the need for lane or road closures. If other projects in the vicinity of the three bridge sites also require lane or road closures, a potentially significant cumulative transportation impact could occur.
Construction at the Marin Road Bridge and Spruce Road Bridge would take approximately ten working days to complete, and construction at Canyon Road Bridge would take approximately fifteen days to complete. During construction, Marin Road Bridge would remain entirely open; therefore, no cumulative transportation impacts would occur from construction at this site.
Construction at Spruce Road Bridge would require closures for a limited number of hours during the 10-day working period, which may generate delays around the project site.
Construction at Canyon Road Bridge would require approximately fifteen working days to complete and would require the bridge to be closed for a few hours during one night of construction. There are no projects within the immediate vicinity of the Canyon Road Bridge site which would also require lane or road closures. Additionally, since the closure would occur at night in a low-density residential neighborhood, this closure would not result in a cumulatively considerable transportation impact.
Due to the limited scope of direct physical impacts to the environment associated with construction, the project’s impacts are project-specific in nature. Compliance with the conditions of approval issued for the proposed development would further assure that projectlevel impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Consequently, the project along with other cumulative projects would create a less-than-significant cumulative impact with respect to all environmental issues.
Given the project does not result in any significant impacts that cannot be completely mitigated to less-than-significant levels, the temporary nature of construction related impacts, and compliance with all regulations adopted to protect the environment, the proposed project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively considerable. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less-than-Significant Impact
Potential impacts to human beings have been addressed in this IS/MND, including impacts related to air quality, noise, and transportation. Project construction activities would cause potential temporary impacts to humans due to the generation of criteria air pollutants and fugitive dust emissions. As described in Section 4.2.3, Air Quality, the project would implement BAAQMD-recommended fugitive dust control measures as Mitigation Measure AIR-1, which would reduce potential air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 124
As discussed in Section 4.2.13, Noise, the project would generate noise that may temporarily substantially increase existing ambient noise levels above the Town’s threshold. The project would implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 to reduce potential impacts to a less-thansignificant level.
Transportation impacts resulting from the project were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. As such, the project would not have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program · Town of Fairfax Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration | April 2026 125
5.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT IS/MND
The Draft IS/MND for the proposed Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (State Clearinghouse No. 2026010532) was circulated for a 32-day public review period from January 16, 2026, to February 16, 2026, pursuant to Section 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The Draft IS/MND and the response to comments on the Draft IS/MND are informational documents prepared by the Lead Agency that must be considered by decision makers before approving the proposed Project and that must reflect the Lead Agency’s independent judgement and analysis (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15074).
This section of the Final IS/MND provides responses to the comments and questions on the Draft IS/MND circulated by the Town to public agencies and the public. As discussed below in the response to comments, edits to the Draft IS/MND have incorporated the comments where appropriate. With these edits, the Final IS/MND does not describe a project having any new or substantially more severe impacts than those identified and analyzed in the Draft IS/MND.
Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5, recirculation of the Draft IS/MND is not required.
This section contains a copy of the comment letters submitted during the public review period on the Draft IS/MND, and the individual responses to those comments. Where responses have resulted in changes to the Draft IS/MND, these changes are shown in the response and also appear in the Final IS/MND as underlined or strike out text.
During the public review period, the following organizations/persons provided written comments on the Draft IS/MND to the District:
A. Kyle Prenzlow
B. John E. Sharp
February 16th, 2026