The Project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE) includes approximately 10.5 acres. The Project includes paved roads, two irrigation canals, a walking trail, and the Fresno River, with an additional 50-foot buffer surrounding the Project site for a total of 14.7 acres (see Figure 3). Surrounding lands on both sides of the Fresno River are residential neighborhoods with paved roads.
Report Objectives
Construction activities such as that proposed by the Project could potentially damage biological resources or modify habitats that are crucial for sensitive plant and wildlife species. In cases such as these, development may be regulated by State or federal agencies, and/or addressed by local regulatory agencies.
This report addresses issues related to the following:
1. The presence of sensitive biological resources onsite, or with the potential to occur onsite.
2. The federal, State, and local regulations regarding these resources.
3. Mitigation measures that may be required to reduce the magnitude of anticipated impacts and/or comply with permit requirements of state and federal resource agencies.
Therefore, the objectives of this report are:
1. Summarize all site-specific information related to existing biological resources.
2. Make reasonable inferences about the biological resources that could occur onsite based on habitat suitability and the proximity of the site to a species’ known range.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 5
3. Summarize all State and federal natural resource protection laws that may be relevant to the APE.
4. Identify and discuss Project impacts to biological resources likely to occur onsite within the context of CEQA, NEPA, and/or State or federal laws.
5. Identify and publish a set of avoidance and mitigation measures that would reduce impacts to a lessthan-significant level (as identified by CEQA and NEPA) and are generally consistent with recommendations of the resource agencies for affected biological resources.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 6
Figure 1. Regional Location
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 7
Figure 2. Topographic Quadrangle Map
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 8
Figure 3. Area of Potential Effect
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 9
Study Methodology
A reconnaissance-level field survey of the APE (Figure 3) was conducted on August 26, 2022, by Provost & Pritchard biologists, Shaylea Stark and Roman Endicott. The survey consisted of walking and driving through the APE while identifying and noting land uses, biological habitats and communities, plant and animal species encountered and assessed for suitable habitats of various wildlife species.
The biologist conducted an analysis of potential Project-related impacts to biological resources based on the resources known to exist or with potential to exist within the APE. Sources of information used in preparation of this analysis included: the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB); the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California; CalFlora’s online database of California native plants; the Jepson Herbarium online database (Jepson eFlora); United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS); Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system; USFW National Wetlands Inventory (NWI); iNaturalist; the NatureServe Explorer online database; the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Plants Database; CDFW California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) database; the California Herps online database; and various manuals, reports, and references related to plants and animals of the San Joaquin Valley region.
The field investigation did not include focused surveys for special status species. The field survey conducted included the appropriate level of detail to assess the significance of potential impacts to sensitive biological resources resulting from the Project. Furthermore, the field survey was sufficient to generally describe those features of the Project that could be subject to the jurisdiction of federal and/or State agencies, such as the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, and the Arid West Regional Supplement, CDFW, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State, and used to support CEQA and NEPA documents.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 10
II. Existing Conditions
Regional Setting
Topography
The APE is located in Madera County within the San Joaquin Valley, northwest of the City of Fresno, California (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). This area lies within the San Joaquin Valley and the topography is relatively flat with elevations ranging from approximately 240 to 255 feet.
Climate
Like most of California, the APE experiences a Mediterranean climate. Warm, dry summers are followed by cool, moist winters. Summer temperatures range between 80- and 90-degrees Fahrenheit (˚F), but often exceeds 90˚F in the upper reaches of the counties. Winter minimum temperatures are near 40˚F. The average annual precipitation is approximately 13 inches, falling mainly from November to April (Weatherspark 2022).
Hydrology
The APE lies within two watersheds, Middle Fresno River; Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 1804000703, and Root Creek-San Joaquin River; HUC: 1804000108. The APE lies within two subwatersheds, Schmidt CreekFresno River; HUC: 180400070304, and Columbia well; HUC: 180400010805. The Middle Fresno River watershed and Root Creek-San Joaquin River watershed are both comprised of stormwater or snowmelt collected in upland areas which flows down into Rancheria Creek, China Creek, Miami Creek, Carter Creek, Peterson Creek, Crooks Creek, Spangle Gold Creek, Coarse Gold Creek, and Ashbrook Creek, which all flow into the Fresno River. The Fresno River then flows through Hensley Lake and flows through the City of Madera and terminates into the San Joaquin River. The San Joaquin River terminates at the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and into the Pacific Ocean (United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 2022).
Wetlands showed up south of the Fresno River on NWI, (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2022) though this area is now developed with residential housing and paved roads. The field survey confirmed that wetlands are no longer present in the area or within the APE.
Soils
Three soil mapping units representing two types were identified within the APE are listed in Table 1. The soils are displayed with their core properties in the table above, according to the Major Land Resource Area of California (MLRA) 19 map area. Riverwash is found within the channel of the Fresno River and consists of sand. The two soils are primarily used for row crops and irrigated pasture.
Table 1. List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties Soil Soil Map Unit Percent
of APE
Hydric
Unit
Hydric
Minor
Units
Drainage Permeability Runoff
Grangeville
Fine sandy loam,
0 to 1 percent
slopes
38.2% Yes Yes
Somewhat
poorly
drained
Rapid
permeability
Very low
runoff
Fine sandy loam,
slightly saline
alkali, 0 to 1
percent slopes
25.1% Yes Yes
Somewhat
poorly
drained
Moderate
permeability
Very low
runoff
Pachappa
Fine sandy loam,
slightly saline- 1.1% No No Well drained Moderate permeability Low runoff City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 11
Soil Soil Map Unit Percent
of APE
Hydric
Unit
Hydric
Minor
Units
Drainage Permeability Runoff
alkali, 0 to 1
percent slopes
Riverwash - 35.6% Yes -
Excessively
drained -
Very low
runoff
Three of the four major components were identified as hydric. Three of the 10 minor components were identified as hydric. Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions such that under sufficiently wet conditions, hydrophytic vegetation can be supported.
The complete Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey report is available in Appendix D at the end of this document.
Biotic Habitats
Riverine
The riverine habitat includes an approximate 3.5-acre section of the Fresno River. The river was dry at the time of the biological survey and appeared to have been driven through and cleared of vegetation recently.
Vegetation within the Fresno River included telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), willows (Salix sp.), giant reed (Arundo donax), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), Spanish clover (Acmispon americanus), wire lettuce species (Stephanomeria sp.), Goodding’s willow (Salix gooddingii), and western sycamore (Platanus racemose). The survey of the riverine habitat resulted in the observation of Canada Goose (Branta canadensis), Hummingbird species (Trochilidae sp.), Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura), and western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis).
Canal
The Canal habitat includes two Canals, one to the north of the Fresno River, Lateral Canal 24.2-14.2 and one to the south, Lateral Canal 24.2. They both run parallel to the Fresno River. Vegetation found within the Canals included buffalo gourd (Cucurbita foetidissima), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), rat's-tail fescue (Vulpia myuros), great brome (Bromus diandrus), and other invasive grasses. Lateral Canal 24.2-14.2 is surrounded by a fence and does not drain to a jurisdictional water. Lateral Canal 24.2 has no barriers and eventually connects to the Fresno River and is considered jurisdictional.
Residential
The residential portion of the APE contains houses, paved roads, and a walking trail. Vegetation in this section of the APE included ornamental plants surrounding houses, Chinese pistache trees (Pistacia chinensis), horseweed (Erigeron canadensis), mustard species (Brassica sp.), flatspine bursage (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), puncture vine (Tribulus terrestris), flax leaved horseweed (Erigeron bonariensis), Chinese hackberry tree (Celtis sinensis), Valley oak tree (Quercus lobata), sacred datura (Datura wrightii), Deodar cedar tree (Cedrus deodara), Jeffrey pine (Pinus jeffreyi), Bishop pine (Pinus muricata), western sycamore (Platanus racemose), turkey mullein (Croton setiger), Callery pear (Pyrus calleryana), and mistletoe (Viscum album). The survey of the residential habitat resulted in the observation of Western Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), California Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma californica), and California ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi).
Representative photographs of the site at the time of the survey are available in Appendix A at the end of this document.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 12
Natural Communities of Special Concern
Natural communities of special concern are those that are of limited distribution, distinguished by significant biological diversity, or home to special status species. CDFW is responsible for the classification and mapping of all-natural communities in California. Just as the special status plant and animal species, these natural communities of special concern can be found within the CNDDB.
According to CNDDB, there are no recorded observations of natural communities of special concern with potential to occur within the APE or vicinity. Additionally, no natural communities of special concern were observed during the biological survey.
Designated Critical Habitat of the APE
The USFWS often designates areas of “Critical Habitat” when it lists species as threatened or endangered.
Critical Habitat is a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. According to CNDDB and IPaC, designated critical habitat is absent from the APE and vicinity.
Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife movement corridors are routes that animals regularly and predictably follow during seasonal migration, dispersal from native ranges, daily travel within home ranges, and inter-population movements. Movement corridors in California are typically associated with valleys, ridgelines, and rivers and creeks supporting riparian vegetation.
Most of the APE contains features that would be likely to function as a wildlife movement corridor. The Fresno River and the Canals could be used as wildlife movement corridors. Many game trails and tracks were observed within the Fresno River during the field survey. The Project could influence use of a wildlife movement corridor and mitigation measures are warranted.
Special Status Plants and Animals
California contains several “rare” plant and animal species. In this context, rare is defined as species known to have low populations or limited distributions. As the human population grows, urban expansion encroaches on the already-limited suitable habitat. This results in sensitive species becoming increasingly more vulnerable to extirpation. State and federal regulations have provided the CDFW and the USFWS with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to California. Numerous native plants and animals have been formally designated as “threatened” or “endangered” under State and federal endangered species legislation. Other formal designations include “candidate” for listing or “species of special concern” by CDFW. The CNPS has its list of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered. Collectively these plants and animals are referred to as “special status species.” This survey was conducted outside of the blooming season for most plants. Further investigation of special status plants is recommended to occur inside the plants’ blooming seasons.
A thorough search of the CNDDB for published accounts of special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Madera 7.5-minute quadrangle that contains the APE in its entirety, and for the eight surrounding quadrangles: Berenda, Kismet, Daulton, Gregg, Herndon, Biola, Gravelly Ford, and Bonita Ranch. These species, and their potential to occur within the APE, are listed in Table 2 and Table 3 on the following pages.
Raw data obtained from CNDDB and IPaC is available in Appendix B and Appendix C at the end of this document. All relevant sources of information, as discussed in the Study Methodology section of this report, as well as field observations, were used to determine if any special status species are known to be within the APE.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 13
Figure 2 shows the Project’s 7.5-minute quadrangle, according to United States Geological Survey Topographic Maps.
Table 2. List of Special Status Animals with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
American badger
(Taxidea taxus)
CSC
Grasslands, savannas, and mountain
meadows near timberline are preferred.
Most abundant in drier open spaces of
shrub and grassland. Burrows in soil.
Unlikely. The APE and surrounding
areas have high human disturbance and
are unsuitable for this species. An
American Badger could potentially pass
through the APE, but it is unlikely they
would forage or live within the APE.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 10.5
miles northeast of the APE in 1965.
The most recent recorded observation
of this species was approximately 11
miles southwest of the APE in 2016.
Blunt-nosed leopard
lizard
(Gambelia sila)
FE, CE,
CFP
Inhabits semi-arid grasslands, alkali
flats, low foothills, canyon floors, large
washes, and arroyos, usually on sandy,
gravelly, or loamy substrate, sometimes
on hardpan. Often found where there
are abundant rodent burrows in dense
vegetation or tall grass. Cannot survive
on lands under cultivation. Known to
bask on kangaroo rat mounds and
often seeks shelter at the base of
shrubs, in small mammal burrows, or
in rock piles. Adults may excavate
shallow burrows but rely on deeper
pre-existing rodent burrows for
hibernation and reproduction.
Unlikely. The APE and surrounding
areas have high human disturbance and
lacked suitable vegetation. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 5.5 miles southwest
of the APE in 1990.
Burrowing Owl
(Athene cunicularia)
CSC
Resides in open, dry annual or
perennial grasslands, deserts, and
scrublands with low growing
vegetation. Nests underground in
existing burrows created by mammals,
most often ground squirrels.
Possible. The APE and surrounding
areas have high human disturbance
which could discourage this species
from residing in the area. There is
suitable habitat, but no burrows or
evidence of Burrowing Owls was
observed during the biological survey.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 1.5
miles north of the APE in 2005 but is
listed as possibly extirpated.
California tiger
salamander
(Ambystoma
californiense)
FT, CT,
CWL
Requires vernal pools or seasonal
ponds for breeding and small mammal
burrows for aestivation. Generally
found in grassland and oak savannah
plant communities in central California
from sea level to 1500 feet in elevation.
Unlikely. Vernal pools and upland
habitat are absent within the APE and
surrounding areas. The APE and
surrounding areas have high human
disturbance, and the Fresno River is
unsuitable for this species. The most
recent recorded observation of this
species was approximately 3.5 miles
northeast of the APE in 2022.
Coast horned lizard
(Phrynosoma
blainvillii)
CSC
Found in grasslands, coniferous
forests, woodlands, and chaparral,
primarily in open areas with patches of
Possible. Appropriate soils and
scattered vegetation occurred
throughout the APE. The only
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 14
Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
loose, sandy soil and low-lying
vegetation in valleys, foothills, and
semi-arid mountains. Frequently
found near ant hills and along dirt
roads in lowlands along sandy washes
with scattered shrubs.
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 9.5 miles southwest
of the APE in 2011.
Delta smelt
(Hypomesus
transpacificus)
FT, CE
This pelagic and euryhaline species is
Endemic to the Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta, upstream through
Contra Costa, Sacramento, San
Joaquin, and Solano Counties.
Absent. The APE is outside the
known range for this species. The
Fresno River and the Canals that flow
through the APE do not flow
perennially and are not connected to
the Delta. There are no recorded
observations of this species on
CNDDB within the regional vicinity of
the Project. This species is currently
only found in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin River Delta, upstream through
Contra Costa, Sacramento, San
Joaquin, and Solano Counties.
Fresno kangaroo rat
(Dipodomys
nitratoides exilis)
FE, CE
An inhabitant of alkali sinks open
grassland environments in western
Fresno County. Prefers bare, alkaline,
clay-based soils subject to seasonal
inundation with more friable soil
mounds around shrubs and grasses.
Unlikely. The highly disturbed
habitats of the APE and surrounding
lands are unsuitable for this species.
Humans and domestic dogs were
observed within the APE and
surrounding areas which would deter
this species from residing within the
APE. No tail drags were found at any
burrows within the APE. The only
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 6 miles southwest
of the APE in 1934.
Monarch Butterfly
(Danaus plexippus) FC
Roosts located in wind-protected tree
groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine,
cypress), with nectar and water sources
nearby. Larval host plants consist of
milkweeds (Asclepias sp.). Winter roost
sites extend along the coast from
northern Mendocino to Baja
California, Mexico.
Absent. Foraging and roosting habitat
is absent from within the APE and
surrounding areas. The APE contained
minimal vegetation with no nectar,
milkweeds or suitable groves of trees
were observed during the biological
survey. The nearest observation was
approximately 5 miles south of the
APE in 2022.
San Joaquin kit fox
(Vulpes macrotis
mutica)
FE, CT
Underground dens with multiple
entrances in alkali sink, valley
grassland, and woodland in valleys and
adjacent foothills.
Unlikely. There were no suitable dens,
tracks, or scat observed during the
biological survey. It is unlikely this
species would reside within the APE
due to human disturbance and
domestic dogs that were observed in
the APE during the biological survey.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 9.5
miles southwest of the APE in 1990.
Swainson’s Hawk
(Buteo swainsoni)
CT
Nests in large trees in open areas
adjacent to grasslands, grain or alfalfa
fields, or livestock pastures suitable for
supporting rodent populations.
Possible. There are trees within the
APE and surrounding areas that could
support nesting raptors. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 15
Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
was approximately 1 mile south of the
APE in 2016.
Tricolored Blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor)
CT,
CSC
Nests colonially near fresh water in
dense cattails or tules, or in thickets of
riparian shrubs. Forages in grassland
and cropland. Large colonies are often
found on dairy farm forage fields.
Possible. Vegetation within the
Fresno River looked like it had been
cleared recently. If vegetation grew
back, this species could nest within the
APE. The nearest recorded
observation of this species was
approximately 10 miles northeast of
the APE in 2011.
Valley elderberry
longhorn beetle
(Desmocerus
californicus
dimorphus)
FT
Lives in mature elderberry shrubs of
the Central Valley and foothills. Adults
are active March to June.
Absent. No elderberry shrubs were
found within the APE or surrounding
areas. The only recorded observation
of this species was approximately 13.5
miles southeast of the APE in 1989.
Vernal pool fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta
lynchi)
FT
Occupies vernal pools, clear to teacolored water, in grass or mudbottomed swales, and basalt depression pools.
Absent. Vernal pool habitat is absent
from the APE and surrounding lands.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 3.5
miles northeast of the APE in 2017.
Northwestern pond
turtle
(Emys marmorata)
CSC
An aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes,
slow-moving rivers, streams, and
irrigation ditches with riparian
vegetation. Requires adequate basking
sites and sandy banks or grassy open
fields to deposit eggs.
Possible. Suitable habitat is present
within the APE. This species is often
found in slow moving rivers and
irrigation canals. There are no recorded
observations of this species on
CNDDB within the regional vicinity of
the Project.
Western spadefoot
(Spea hammondii)
CSC
Prefers open areas with sandy or
gravelly soils, in a variety of habitats
including mixed woodlands, grasslands,
coastal sage scrub, chaparral, sandy
washes, lowlands, river floodplains,
alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats,
foothills, and mountains. Vernal pools
or temporary wetlands, lasting a
minimum of three weeks, which do not
contain bullfrogs, fish, or crayfish are
necessary for breeding.
Possible. Suitable habitat is present
within the APE. This species is often
found in rivers and irrigation canals.
The nearest recorded observation of
western spadefoot was approximately
2.5 miles north of the APE in 2015.
The most recent recorded observation
of this species was approximately 3.5
miles northeast of the APE in 2021.
Table 3. List of Special Status Plants with Potential to Occur Onsite and/or in the Vicinity Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
Alkali-sink goldfields
(Lasthenia
chrysantha)
CNPS
1B
Found in vernal pool and wet saline
flat habitats. Occurrences documented
in the San Joaquin and Sacramento
Valleys at elevations below 656 feet.
Blooms February - April.
Possible. Saline-alkali soils are present
within the APE and the surrounding
areas. The only recorded observation
of this species is approximately 13.5
miles south of the APE in 1956 but is
listed as possibly extirpated.
California alkali
grass
(Puccinellia simplex)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in saline flats
and mineral springs within valley
grassland and wetland-riparian
communities at elevations below 3000
feet. Blooms March–May.
Possible. Aquatic habitat and salinealkali soils are present within the APE.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 6.8
miles southwest of the APE in 2011.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 16
Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
Greene’s tuctoria
(Tuctoria greenei)
FE, CR,
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in vernal
pools within valley grassland, wetland,
and riparian communities at elevations
below 3500 feet. Blooms May –
September.
Unlikely. The APE is outside of the
known current range of this species.
The only recorded observation of this
species was approximately 6.5 miles
southeast of the APE in 1987 but is
listed as possibly extirpated.
Hairy Orcutt grass
(Orcuttia pilosa)
FE, CE,
CNPS
1B
Found in vernal pools in valley
grassland, wetland, and riparian
communities at elevations below 650
feet. Blooms May – September.
Possible. Aquatic habitat is present
within the APE and surrounding lands.
The nearest recorded observation of
this species was approximately 5.5
miles east of the APE in 2017.
Heartscale
(Atriplex cordulata
var. cordulata)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in saline or alkaline
soils within shadscale scrub, valley
grassland, and wetland-riparian
communities at elevations below 230
feet. Blooms June–July.
Possible. Aquatic habitat and salinealkali soils are present within the APE and surrounding lands. The only
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 8 miles southwest
of the APE in 2000.
Lesser saltscale
(Atriplex minuscula)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in
sandy, alkaline soils in alkali scrub,
valley and foothill grassland, and alkali
sink communities at elevations below
750 feet. Blooms April–October.
Possible. Required habitat and salinealkali soils are present within the APE and surrounding lands. The most
recent recorded observation of this
species was approximately 10 miles
northwest of the APE in 2000.
Madera leptosiphon
(Leptosiphon
serrulatus)
CNPS
1B
Found in openings in foothill
woodland, often yellow-pine forest,
and chaparral at elevations between
1000 feet and 4300 feet. Blooms April
– May.
Absent. The APE is outside of the
elevational requirements of this
species. Required habitats are absent
within the APE and surrounding lands.
The only recorded observation of this
species was approximately 1 mile east
of the APE in 1889.
Munz’s tidy-tips
(Layia munzii)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in
alkaline clay soils; often along hillsides
in alkali scrub and sometimes valley
and foothill grassland. Occurs at
elevations between 145 feet and 2625
feet Blooms March–April.
Absent. Required habitat and soils are
absent within the APE and
surrounding lands. The only recorded
observation of this species was mapped
to the general area of Madera in 1937.
Recurved larkspur
(Delphinium
recurvatum)
CNPS
1B
Occurs in poorly drained, fine, alkaline
soils in grassland and alkali scrub
communities at elevations between 100
feet and 2600 feet. Blooms March–
June.
Absent. Required soils are absent
within the APE and surrounding lands.
The only recorded observation of this
species was approximately 8 miles
southwest of the APE in 2000.
San Joaquin Valley
Orcutt grass
(Orcuttia inaequalis)
FT, CE,
CNPS
1B
Found in the eastern San Joaquin
Valley and the Sierra Nevada foothills
in vernal pools within valley grassland,
freshwater wetland, and wetlandriparian communities at elevations below 2600 feet. Blooms April –
September.
Absent. Required vernal pool habitat
and associated soils are absent within
the APE and surrounding lands. The
nearest recorded observation of this
species was approximately 5.5 miles
northeast of the APE in 2010 but is
listed as extirpated.
Sanford’s arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley and
other parts of California in freshwatermarsh, primarily ponds and ditches, at elevations below 1000 feet. Blooms
May–October.
Possible. Suitable aquatic habitat
occurs within the Canals. The only
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 15.5 miles southeast
of the APE in 2020.
Shining navarretia CNPS
1B
Found in cismontane woodland and
valley and foothill grassland
Absent. Vernal pool habitat and acidic
soils are absent from the APE and
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 17
Species Status Habitat Occurrence within APE
(Navarretia
nigelliformis ssp.
radians)
communities, sometimes in vernal
pools. Occurs at elevations between
200 feet and 3200 feet. Blooms May –
July.
surrounding areas. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 6 miles northeast of
the APE in 1927.
Spiny-sepaled
button-celery
(Eryngium
spinosepalum)
CNPS
1B
Found in the Sierra Nevada Foothills
and the San Joaquin Valley. Occurs in
vernal pools, swales, and roadside
ditches. Often associated with clay soils
in vernal pools within grassland
communities. Occurs at elevations
between 50 feet and 4160 feet. Blooms
April–July.
Absent. Vernal pool habitat and
required clay soils are absent from the
APE and surrounding areas. The most
recent recorded observation of this
species was approximately 10 miles
southwest of the APE in 2000.
Subtle orache
(Atriplex subtilis)
CNPS
1B
Found in the San Joaquin Valley in
saline depressions in alkaline soils
within valley and foothill grassland
communities at elevations below 330
feet. Blooms June–October.
Absent. Alkaline soils are not present
within the APE. The most recent
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 10 miles southwest
of the APE in 2009.
Succulent owl’sclover
(Castilleja
campestris var.
succulenta)
FT, CE,
CNPS
1B
Found in vernal pools, often in acidic
soils at elevations below 2500 feet.
Blooms April – July.
Absent. Vernal pool habitat and acidic
soils are absent from the APE and
surrounding areas. The nearest
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 7.5 miles east of the
APE in 1982.
Vernal pool
smallscale
(Atriplex persistens)
CNPS
1B
Occurs in the San Joaquin Valley and
Sacramento Valley in alkaline vernal
pools at elevations below 375 feet.
Blooms June–September.
Absent. Vernal pool habitat and acidic
soils are absent from the APE and
surrounding areas. The most recent
recorded observation of this species
was approximately 6.5 miles southwest
of the APE in 2009.
EXPLANATION OF OCCURRENCE DESIGNATIONS AND STATUS CODES
Present: Species observed on the site at time of field surveys or during recent past.
Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis.
Possible: Species not observed on the site, but it could occur there from time to time.
Unlikely: Species not observed on the site, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient.
Absent: Species not observed on the site and precluded from occurring there due to absence of suitable habitat.
STATUS CODES
FE Federally Endangered CE California Endangered
FT Federally Threatened CT California Threatened
FC Federal Candidate CFP California Fully Protected
CSC California Species of Concern
CWL California Watch List
CR California Rare
CNPS LISTING
1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 18
III. Impacts and Mitigation
Significance Criteria
CEQA
General plans, area plans, and specific projects are subject to the provisions of CEQA. The purpose of CEQA is to assess the impacts of proposed projects on the environment prior to project implementation. Impacts to biological resources are just one type of environmental impact assessed under CEQA and vary from project to project in terms of scope and magnitude. Projects requiring removal of vegetation may result in the mortality or displacement of animals associated with this vegetation. Animals adapted to humans, roads, buildings, and pets may replace those species formerly occurring on a site. Plants and animals that are State and/or federally listed as threatened or endangered may be destroyed or displaced. Sensitive habitats such as wetlands and riparian woodlands may be altered or destroyed. Such impacts may be considered either “significant” or “less than significant” under CEQA. According to CEQA, Statute and Guidelines (AEP 2012), “significant effect on the environment” means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic interest. Specific project impacts to biological resources may be considered “significant” if they would:
• 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 CDFW or USFWS;
• 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; • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;
• 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.
• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.
Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) states that a project may trigger the requirement to make a “mandatory finding of significance” if the project has 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, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.”
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 19
NEPA
Federal projects are subject to the provisions of NEPA. The purpose of NEPA is to assess the effects of a proposed action on the human environment, assess the significance of those effects, and recommend measures that if implemented would mitigate those effects. As used in NEPA, a determination that certain effects on the human environment are “significant” requires considerations of both context and intensity (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1508.27).
For the purposes of assessing effects of an action on biological resources, the relevant context is often local.
The analysis may, however, require a comparison of the action area’s biological resources with the biological resources of an entire region. Project activities must have a federal nexus and discuss federally listed species, and/or designated critical habitat that may be affected in the action area.
Federal agencies are required to determine whether their actions may affect listed or proposed species and designated and proposed critical habitat. The primary role of this document is to provide agencies conclusion and the rationale to support those conclusions regarding the effects of any proposed actions of the Project on protected resources. Document content and recommended elements are identified in 50 CFR 402.12(f).
Under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, federal agencies must consult with NOAA Fisheries through an informal or formal consultation when any action the agency carries out, funds, or authorizes may affect either a species listed as threatened or endangered under the Act, or any critical habitat designated for it.
Once resources are assessed an Endangered Species Act Section 7 finding needs to be made regarding proposed or listed species and/or designated critical habitat that may be present in the Project area. This report will provide the necessary information for the lead federal agency to make a determination on affects. This finding may result in one of the following determinations:
▪ No Effect - means there will be no impacts, positive or negative, to listed or proposed resources.
Generally, this means no listed resources will be exposed to action and its environmental consequences.
Concurrence from the Service is not required.
▪ May affect - but not likely to adversely affect" means that all effects are beneficial, insignificant, or discountable. Beneficial effects have contemporaneous positive effects without any adverse effects to the species or habitat. Insignificant effects relate to the size of the impact and include those effects that are undetectable, not measurable, or cannot be evaluated. Discountable effects are those extremely unlikely to occur. These determinations require written concurrence from the Service. ▪ May affect - and is likely to adversely affect" means that listed resources are likely to be exposed to the action or its environmental consequences and will respond in a negative manner to the exposure.
Relevant Goals, Policies, and Laws
City of Madera General Plan
The City of Madera General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to the Project:
Biology
Goal Con-7: Protection of special-status plant and animal species, including their habitats, in compliance with all applicable state, federal, and other laws and regulations.
Goal Con-8: A balance between the protection of special status plants and animals and the need to provide recreational opportunities and other needs.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 20
Goal Con-10: A revitalized Fresno River which serves as an amenity, a source of civic pride, and a catalyst for residential and commercial development.
Water Quality
Policy Con-11: The City shall protect and maintain water quality for the health of all users, including natural plant and animal communities.
Biological Resources
Policy Con-23: The City shall seek to conserve and improve native wildlife and plant habitat in cooperation with governmental agencies, private associations, and individuals in Madera. Residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational projects shall avoid impacts to native wildlife and plant habitat to the extent feasible.
Policy Con-24: Residential, commercial, industrial, and recreational projects shall avoid impacts to native wildlife and plant habitat to the extent feasible.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Permits may be required from the USFWS and/or CDFW if activities associated with a project have the potential to result in the “take” of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the federal and/or state Endangered Species Acts. Take is defined by the State of California as “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill” (California Fish and Game Code, Section 86). Take is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include “harm” (16 USC, Section 1532(19), 50 CFR, Section 17.3). CDFW and USFWS are responsible agencies under CEQA and NEPA. Both agencies review CEQA and NEPA documents in order to determine the adequacy of their treatment of endangered species issues and to make project-specific recommendations for their conservation.
Designated Critical Habitat
When species are listed as threatened or endangered, the USFWS often designates areas of “Critical Habitat” as defined by section 3(5)(A) of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Critical Habitat is a term defined in the ESA as a specific geographic area that contains features essential for the conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and protection. Critical Habitat is a tool that supports the continued conservation of imperiled species by guiding cooperation with the federal government.
Designations only affect federal agency actions or federally funded or permitted activities. Critical Habitat does not prevent activities that occur within the designated area. Only activities that involve a federal permit, license, or funding and are likely to destroy or adversely modify Critical Habitat will be affected.
Migratory Birds
The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA: 16 USC 703-712) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in any bird species covered in one of four international conventions to which the United States is a party, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. The name of the act is misleading, as it actually covers almost all bird’s native to the United States, even those that are non-migratory. The MBTA encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. Additionally, California Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take or possess any non-game bird covered by the MBTA (Section 3513), as well as any other native non-game bird (Section 3800).
Birds of Prey
Birds of prey are protected in California under provisions of Fish and Game Code (Section 3503.5), which states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes (hawks and eagles) or Strigiformes (owls), as well as their nests and eggs. The bald eagle and golden eagle are afforded additional City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 21
protection under the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668), which makes it unlawful to kill birds or their eggs.
Nesting Birds
In California, protection is afforded to the nests and eggs of all birds. California Fish and Game Code (Section 3503) states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Breeding-season disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered a form of “take” by the CDFW.
Wetlands and other “Jurisdictional Waters”
Natural drainage channels and adjacent wetlands may be considered “Waters of the United States” or “jurisdictional waters” subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE. The extent of jurisdiction has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations but has also been subject to interpretation of the federal courts. Jurisdictional waters generally include:
• All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; • All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
• All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; • All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as Waters of the United States under the definition; • Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) (i.e., the bulleted items above).
As determined by the United States Supreme Court in its 2001 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) decision, channels and wetlands isolated from other jurisdictional waters cannot be considered jurisdictional on the basis of their use, hypothetical or observed, by migratory birds. Similarly, in its 2006 consolidated Carabell/Rapanos decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a significant nexus between a wetland and other navigable waters must exist for the wetland itself to be considered a navigable and therefore jurisdictional water. Furthermore, the Supreme Court clarified that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE will not assert jurisdiction over ditches excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water.
The USACE regulates the filling or grading of Waters of the United States. under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent of jurisdiction within drainage channels is defined by “ordinary high-water marks” on opposing channel banks. All activities that involve the discharge of dredge or fill material into Waters of the United States are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE. Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that results in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the RWQCB issues a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (or waiver of such certification) verifying that the proposed activity will meet State water quality standards.
Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, the SWRCB has regulatory authority to protect the water quality of all surface water and groundwater in the State of California (“Waters of the State”). Nine RWQCBs oversee water quality at the local and regional level. The RWQCB for a given region regulates discharges of fill or pollutants into Waters of the State through the issuance of various permits and orders.
Discharges into Waters of the State that are also Waters of the United States require a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB as a prerequisite to obtaining certain federal permits, such as a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit. Discharges into all Waters of the State, even those that are not also Waters of the City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 22
United States., require Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), or waivers of WDRs, from the RWQCB. The RWQCB also administers the Construction Storm Water Program and the federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Projects that disturb one acre or more of soil must obtain a Construction General Permit under the Construction Storm Water Program. A prerequisite for this permit is the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer. Projects that discharge wastewater, storm water, or other pollutants into a Water of the United States. may require a NPDES permit.
CDFW has jurisdiction over the bed and bank of natural drainages and lakes according to provisions of Section 1601 and 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. Activities that may substantially modify such waters through the diversion or obstruction of their natural flow, change or use of any material from their bed or bank, or the deposition of debris require a notification of a Lake or Streambed Alteration. If CDFW determines that the activity may adversely affect fish and wildlife resources, a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement will be prepared. Such an agreement typically stipulates that certain measures will be implemented to protect the habitat values of the lake or drainage in question.
Potentially Significant Project-Related Impacts and Mitigation Species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by CDFW or USFWS that have the potential to be impacted by the Project include Burrowing Owl, coast horned lizard, Swainson’s Hawk, Tricolored Blackbird, western pond turtle, western spadefoot, alkalisink goldfields, California alkali grass, hairy Orcutt grass, heartscale, lesser saltscale, and Sanford’s arrowhead.
Discussion and corresponding mitigation measures are provided below.
General Mitigation Measures
Prior to the start of construction, all personnel associated with construction of the Project will be trained to be able to identify these candidate, sensitive, or special status species in order to prevent impacts to sensitive resources; therefore, the following general mitigation measures will be implemented:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a (WEAP Training): Prior to initiating construction activities (including staging and mobilization), all personnel associated with Project construction will attend mandatory Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training, conducted by a qualified biologist, to aid workers in identifying special status resources that may occur in the APE. The specifics of this program will include identification of the sensitive species and suitable habitats, a description of the regulatory status and general ecological characteristics of sensitive resources, and review of the limits of construction and mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to biological resources within the work area. This training will discuss special status species, describe the laws and regulations in place to provide protection of these species, identify the penalties for violation of applicable environmental laws and regulations, and a list of required protective measures to avoid “take.” A fact sheet conveying this information, along with photographs or illustrations of sensitive species with potential to occur onsite, will also be prepared for distribution to all contractors, their employees, and all other personnel involved with construction of the Project. All employees will sign a form documenting that they have attended WEAP training and understand the information presented to them.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1b (BMPs): The Project proponent will ensure that all workers employ the following best management practices (BMPs) in order to avoid and minimize potential impacts to special status species:
• Vehicles will observe a 15-mph speed limit while on unpaved access routes.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 23
• Workers will inspect areas beneath parked vehicles prior to mobilization. If special status species are detected beneath vehicles, the individual will either be allowed to leave of its own volition or will be captured by the qualified biologist (must possess appropriate collecting/handling permits) and relocated out of harm’s way to the nearest suitable habitat beyond the influence of the Project work area. “Take” of a listed (rare, threatened, or endangered) species is prohibited. • The presence of any special status species and/or any wildlife mortalities will be reported to the Project’s designated biologist and the appropriate regulatory agencies.
Project-Related Impacts to Wildlife Movement Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites.
Rivers and canal banks can function as passages through highly disturbed areas within the San Joaquin Valley.
Anthropogenic activities would deter wildlife from using these corridors during the day, though these deterrents are absent at night. The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts to nocturnal wildlife movement to a less than significant level.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented during or prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-2a (Operational Hours): Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours to reduce potential impacts to wildlife movement corridors.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2b (Wildlife Access): At no point will access to the river and canals be blocked outside of construction hours or during overnight hours or weekends. If construction must block both sides of a wildlife access route, an alternative route through the construction area will be identified by a qualified biologist and maintained throughout the construction schedule timeframe.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2c (Cover Excavations): Pipeline/culvert/siphon excavations and vertical pipes will be covered each night to prevent wildlife from falling in and becoming trapped or injured during migratory or dispersal movements.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Nesting Raptors, Migratory Birds, and Special Status Birds
The APE contains suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat for a variety of ground and tree nesting avian species.
It is anticipated that during nesting bird season, numerous species of birds could use the APE for nesting.
Swainson’s Hawks and Tricolored Blackbirds were deemed the only special status species possible to occur within the APE. Trees near the APE have the potential to host a multitude of nesting birds, and species such as Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) are known to build nests on bare ground or compacted dirt roads. Construction activities could disturb birds nesting within or adjacent to work areas, resulting in nest abandonment.
Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors and migratory birds or result in the mortality of individual birds constitute a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a significant impact under CEQA and NEPA. Birds nesting within the APE during construction have the potential to be injured or killed by Project-related activities. In addition to the direct “take” of nesting birds, nesting birds within the APE or adjacent areas could be disturbed by Project-related activities resulting in nest abandonment.
Projects that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors and migratory birds or result in the mortality of individual birds is considered a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a potentially significant impact under CEQA and NEPA.
Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential impacts to nesting raptors, migratory birds, and special status birds to a less than significant level under CEQA and NEPA and will ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting these avian species.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 24
Mitigation. The following measures would be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-3a (Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, between September 16 and January 31 (outside of nesting bird season) in an effort to avoid impacts to nesting birds. If all Project activities will occur outside of nesting bird season, no further mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3b (Pre-construction Surveys): If activities must occur within nesting bird season (February 1 to September 15), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction survey for Swainson’s Hawk nests onsite and within a 0.5-mile radius. This survey will be conducted in accordance with the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley (Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000), the Staff Guidance Regarding Avoidance of Impacts to Tricolored Blackbird Breeding Colonies on Agricultural Fields (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2015), or current guidance. The Swainson’s Hawk survey will not be completed between April 21 to June 10 due to the difficulty of identifying nests during this time of year. The preconstruction survey would also provide a presence/absence survey for all other nesting birds within the APE and an additional 50 feet, no more than seven (7) days prior to the start of construction. All raptor nests would be considered “active” upon the nest-building stage.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3c (Establish Buffers): On discovery of any active nests or breeding colonies near work areas, the biologist will determine appropriate construction setback distances based on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines and/or the biology of the species in question. Active Swainson’s Hawk nests will receive a 0.5-mile buffer and active Tricolored Blackbird nests will receive a 200-foot buffer. Reduced buffer distances may be appropriate for Swainson’s Hawk and Tricolored Blackbirds depending on site conditions and ongoing disturbance levels and may be discussed with CDFW. Construction buffers will be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and will be maintained until the biologist has determined that the nestlings have fledged.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3d (ITP): In the event an active Swainson’s Hawk nest, Tricolored Blackbird nest, or other nest is detected during surveys and cannot be avoided, consultation with CDFW will be warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization through the acquisition of an ITP pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2081, subdivision (b) is necessary to comply with CESA.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance of Burrowing Owls The APE contains suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat for Burrowing Owls. Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of Burrowing Owls or result in the mortality of individual birds constitute a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a significant impact under CEQA and NEPA. Birds nesting within the APE during construction have the potential to be injured or killed by Project-related activities. In addition to the direct “take” of nesting birds, nesting birds within the APE or adjacent areas could be disturbed by Project-related activities resulting in nest abandonment. Projects that adversely affect the nesting success of migratory birds or result in the mortality of individual birds is considered a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a potentially significant impact under CEQA and NEPA.
Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential impacts to nesting raptors, migratory birds, and special status birds to a less than significant level under CEQA and NEPA and will ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting this avian species.
Mitigation. The following measures would be implemented prior to the start of construction:
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 25
Mitigation Measure BIO-4a (Pre-construction Take Avoidance Survey): A qualified biologist will conduct a pre-construction take avoidance survey for burrowing owls in accordance with CDFW’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), within thirty (30) days prior to the start of construction activities. The survey will include the proposed work area and surrounding lands within 250 feet. If no burrowing owl individuals or suitable burrows are observed, no further mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure BIO-4b (Avoidance/Monitoring): If an active burrowing owl burrow is detected, a qualified biologist will remain onsite to monitor and the occurrence will be reported to the local CDFW office and the CNDDB. A disturbance-free buffer will be implemented in accordance with CDFW’s 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, as outlined in the table below:
Mitigation Measure BIO-4c (Consultation with CDFW and Passive Relocation): If avoidance of an active burrowing owl burrow is not feasible, CDFW will be immediately consulted to determine the best course of action, which may include passive relocation during non-breeding season. Passive relocation and/or burrow exclusion will not take place without coordination with CDFW and preparation of an approved exclusion and relocation plan.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance to Coast Horned Lizards Habitats and soils within the APE and surrounding area were determined to be suitable for coast horned lizards, a California Species of Special Concern. Construction activities occurring within occupied habitat could result in injury, mortality, displacement, disturbance, or inhibit the movement of this species. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1a listed above, requires each employee, worker, or visitor onsite to attend a mandatory training session, including printed educational materials regarding the conservation status of special status amphibians with potential to occur onsite, laws protecting these species, penalties for violation of those laws, and a list of required protective measures that must be employed to avoid “take” or other significant impacts. Additionally, mitigation measure BIO-1b requires implementation of BMPs on the work site which would avoid and minimize potential impacts to special status species.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-5a (Pre-construction Survey): A qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey of Project areas within thirty (30) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbing activities. Environmentally sensitive areas will be flagged for avoidance. If Coast horned lizards are detected, construction monitoring will be required. Surveys will not take place when daytime temperatures are below 60˚F or above 95˚F. If no suitable habitat or species observations are found, no further mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5b (Monitor): If species observations are found, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-activity clearance survey each day and remain onsite to oversee all vegetation clearing and ground disturbing activities conducted within suitable habitat for Coast horned lizards. If a listed species is observed within the Project area, the biologist will stop work and allow the species to leave City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 26
the site of its own volition or contact the appropriate regulatory agency (CDFW and/or USFWS) for guidance on how to proceed.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5c (ITP): In the event Coast horned lizards are detected during surveys and cannot be avoided, or a biological monitor is not on-site through construction, consultation with CDFW is warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization through the acquisition of an ITP pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2081, subdivision (b) is necessary to comply with CESA.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5d (Mortality Reporting): The Sacramento Field Office of USFWS and the Fresno Field Office of CDFW will be notified in writing within three working days in the case of the accidental death or injury to a Coast horned lizard during construction. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident and any other pertinent information.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance to Bats
Although no special status bat species were identified as possible to occur within the APE there is the possibility for common bat species to occur within the APE. Roosting habitat becomes especially sensitive to bat populations during the maternity season (March 1 to September 30) while pups are maturing. A survey for bats was determined to be necessary to identify if Project activities would impact existing bat habitat, presence of high-quality roosting habitat, and/or foraging areas within the APE. Trees within the APE will be removed during the Project and could potentially be used as roosting habitat for bat species. Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential impacts to roosting and foraging bats to a less than significant level under CEQA and ensure compliance with State and federal laws protecting these bat species.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-6a (Avoidance): The Project’s construction activities will occur, if feasible, between November 1 and February 28 (outside of bat maternity season) in an effort to avoid impacts to maternity roosts.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6b (Pre-Construction Survey): A pre-construction survey for bats will be performed if construction activities fall between March 1 and September 30 (bat maternity season) and include tree removal. The survey will be focused on trees to be removed during construction and be conducted by a qualified biologist within fourteen (14) days prior to tree removal. All trees will be inspected for potential roosting habitat. This survey can be performed simultaneously with nesting bird surveys.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6c (Emergence Survey): An emergence bat survey will be performed if suitable habitat or trees for roosting bats are found during the pre-construction survey. This survey will take place between May and September (outside of bat hibernation) and will be conducted during dusk hours. The survey will be focused on trees to be removed during construction and will be conducted by a qualified biologist within two (2) days prior to tree removal.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6d (Establish Buffers): On discovery of any bat roosts near work areas, a qualified biologist should determine appropriate construction setback distances (buffer zones) based on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines, if appropriate. Construction buffers should be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and should be maintained until the biologist has determined that the roost should no longer be impacted by construction.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 27
Mitigation Measure BIO–6e (Operational Hours): Construction activities shall be limited to daylight hours to reduce potential impacts to special status bats that could be foraging onsite.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance to Northwestern Pond Turtles Western pond turtles were once a single species known as Actinemys marmorata but was split into two distinct species by Spinks et al. in 2014. The two distinct species are now known as Northwestern pond turtles (Actinemys marmorata) and Southwestern pond turtles (Actinemys pallida). The Northwestern Pond turtle (NPT) range extends from Washington State south and inland through California’s San Joaquin Valley. The Southwestern Pond turtle (SPT) range extends from the south of the San Francisco Bay along the central California coast to Baja California (Spinks PQ 2014). The top four threats for NPT are predation by nonnative species, pathogens, land alterations, and drought. The top three threats for SPT were drought, predation by nonnative species, floods, and land alteration (Manzo S 2021). The APE lies within the San Joaquin Valley where only NPT inhabit.
NPT habitat features for nesting, overwintering, dispersal, and basking and can occur in the APE. These features include aquatic and terrestrial habitats such as ponded areas, irrigation canals, riparian, and upland habitat. NPT are known to nest in the spring or early summer within 100 meters of a water body, although nest sites as far away as 500 meters have also been reported. Noise, vegetation removal, movement of workers, construction, and ground disturbance as a result of Project activities have the potential to significantly impact NPT populations. Without appropriate avoidance and minimization measures for NPT, potentially significant impacts associated with Project activities could include nest reduction, inadvertent entrapment, reduced reproductive success, reduction in health or vigor of eggs and/or young, and direct mortality.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-7a (Pre-construction Survey): No less than fourteen (14) days and no more than thirty (30) days prior to the start of construction, a qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey for NPT within the Fresno River and Canals, as well as adjacent to the proposed work area. Pre-construction surveys will be conducted in accordance with the United States Geological Survey Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata) Visual Survey Protocol for the Southcoast Ecoregion (United States Geological Survey 2006). Surveys will be conducted outside of winter months (December – February).
If no NPT are observed during the pre-construction survey, then construction activities may begin. If construction is delayed or halted for more than 90 days, another pre-construction survey for NPT will be conducted. If the surveys result in the identification of a special status species, the qualified biologist should determine if appropriate buffers can be implemented to avoid impacts to the individual(s) or if further surveys are required to avoid impacts to potential nesting sites.
Mitigation Measure BIO-7b (Monitor): If species observations are found, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-activity clearance survey each day and remain onsite to oversee all vegetation clearing and ground disturbing activities conducted within suitable habitat for NPT. If a listed species is observed within the Project area, the biologist will stop work and allow the species to leave the site of its own volition or contact the appropriate regulatory agency (CDFW and/or USFWS) for guidance on how to proceed.
Mitigation Measure BIO-7c (ITP): In the event NPT are detected during surveys and cannot be avoided, consultation with CDFW is warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization through the acquisition of an ITP pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2081, subdivision (b) is necessary to comply with CESA.
Project-Related Mortality and/or Disturbance to Western Spadefoot Habitats within the APE and surrounding area were determined to be suitable for western spadefoot, a California Species of Special Concern. Construction activities occurring within occupied habitat could result in City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 28
injury, mortality, displacement, disturbance, or inhibit the movement of this species. Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-1a listed above, requires each employee, worker, or visitor onsite to attend a mandatory training session, including printed educational materials regarding the conservation status of special status amphibians with potential to occur onsite, laws protecting these species, penalties for violation of those laws, and a list of required protective measures that must be employed to avoid “take” or other significant impacts. Additionally, mitigation measure BIO-1b requires implementation of BMPs on the work site which would avoid and minimize potential impacts to special status species.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-8a (Pre-construction Survey): A qualified biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey within thirty (30) days prior to the start of construction. The goals of this survey will be to identify if any suitable breeding or upland habitat is present within the APE and an additional 100-foot survey area around the designated APE. If no individuals or suitable habitat is observed, no further mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure BIO-8b (Avoidance): On discovery of any suitable habitat near work areas, the biologist will determine appropriate construction setback distances based on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines for western spadefoot. Construction buffers will be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and will be maintained until the end of the Project. If appropriate construction buffers cannot be maintained a focused survey will be required to determine if western spadefoots are found within the Project area or 100 feet of the Project.
Mitigation Measure BIO-8c (Focused Survey): If appropriate buffers cannot be maintained, a qualified biologist will conduct a focused survey during the known peak breeding months of this species (February-March), prior to the start of construction. Transects will be walked throughout the entire APE and surrounding lands within 100 feet and vantage points will be used to survey for standing water. If no western spadefoots adults or larvae are observed during the survey, then construction activities may begin. If the survey results in the identification of this special status species, a qualified biologist will consult CDFW to determine if appropriate buffers can be implemented to avoid impacts to individual(s) during construction.
Mitigation Measure BIO-8d (Monitor): If species observations are found, a qualified biologist will conduct a pre-activity clearance survey each day and remain onsite to oversee all vegetation clearing and ground disturbing activities conducted within suitable habitat for western spadefoot. If a listed species is observed within the Project area, the biologist will stop work and allow the species to leave the site of its own volition or contact the appropriate regulatory agency (CDFW and/or USFWS) for guidance on how to proceed.
Mitigation Measure BIO-8e (Formal Consultation): If western spadefoots are detected during surveys and cannot be avoided, consultation with CDFW is warranted to discuss how to implement the Project and avoid take. If take cannot be avoided, take authorization through the acquisition of an ITP pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 2081, subdivision (b) is necessary to comply with CESA.
Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Plant Species In reviewing the CNDDB, the following special status plant species were identified to occur within or adjacent to the APE: alkali-sink goldfields, California alkali grass, hairy Orcutt grass, heartscale, lesser saltscale, and Sanford’s arrowhead. The survey of the APE was conducted outside the blooming season for these plants. It is recommended a more detailed survey be conducted within the blooming season. Projects that adversely affect City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 29
special status plants or result in the mortality of special status plants is considered a violation of State and federal laws and are considered a potentially significant impact under CEQA and NEPA.
Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential impacts to special status plants to a less than significant level under CEQA and NEPA and will ensure compliance with State and Federal laws protecting these plant species.
Mitigation. The following measures will be implemented prior to the start of construction:
Mitigation Measure BIO-9a (Focused Survey): A qualified botanist/biologist will conduct focused botanical surveys during their specific blooming period or overlapping blooming period. Alkali-sink goldfields (Feb-April), California alkali grass (March-May), hairy Orcutt grass (May-Sept), heartscale (June-July), lesser saltscale (April-Oct), and Sanford’s arrowhead (May-Oct) will be surveyed for according to CDFW’s Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) 2018), or current guidance, for areas where ground disturbance will occur and prior to the start of construction.
Disturbance-free buffers and use of exclusion fencing will be placed around the area as not to disturb the plants or its root system.
Mitigation Measure BIO-9b (Avoidance): If any suitable habitat for special status plants are identified during the survey, a disturbance-free buffer and use of exclusion fencing will be placed around the area.
Mitigation Measure BIO-9c (Formal Consultation): If rare plant individuals or populations or sensitive natural communities are detected within Project work areas during the survey, and the plants cannot be avoided, the Project proponent will initiate consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS to determine next steps for relocation or to obtain an Incidental Take Permit (ITP).
Project-Related Impacts to Riparian Habitat and Natural Communities of Special Concern
There are no CNDDB-designated “natural communities of special concern” recorded within the APE or surrounding lands. Portions of riparian habitat were identified during the survey, specifically within the Fresno River. Riparian habitats fall under the jurisdiction of CDFW and therefore any work occurring within these areas will require regulatory permitting through this agency.
Project-Related Impacts to Regulated Waters, Wetlands, and Water Quality The Project involves the construction of a bridge over the Fresno River. An Aquatic Resources Delineation was conducted on August 26, 2022, to evaluate the site for potential waters of the United States and delineate potential jurisdictional boundaries of these features. The investigation and delineation were conducted in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, the Arid West Regional Supplement (United States Army Corps of Engineers 1987), the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Water Resources Control Board 2021), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Map was consulted for known wetlands in the area.
The Fresno River within the APE, below the ordinary high-water mark, would most likely fall under the jurisdiction of USACE as a waters of the United States and construction activities in this area would be subject to USACE permit requirements pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. This Project may be authorized under a Nationwide Permit but could require an individual permit if Nationwide Permit limits are exceeded. In addition, a Section 401 of the CWA Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB is required for dredge and fill of waters of the State and activities must meet State water quality standards. These permits and certifications are City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 30
typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that result in no net loss of wetland functions, jurisdictional waters or beneficial uses. An Aquatic Resource Delineation (ARD) was performed on the Fresno River and Lateral Canal 24.2-14.2 to determine the channel and Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM).
If the Project’s construction work would result in impacts to waters of the United States, the Project proponent will be required to secure permits from USACE and RWQCB. Compliance with each permit requires avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to ensure that Project-related impacts to these potentially jurisdictional waters are less-than-significant in nature or are fully mitigated.
Project activities with potential to alter the Fresno River including the bed, bank, floodplain and associated riparian habitat, would be within CDFWs jurisdiction, pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. The Project proponent would be required to notify CDFW if the Project’s activities have potential to impact rivers, streams, or the riparian corridor of any aquatic features onsite that may be beneficial to fish or wildlife resources. If CDFW determines that the Project could potentially adversely affect fish and wildlife resources and/or riparian habitat, a Lake or Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement would be issued prior to construction. LSA Agreements are typically issued with mandatory avoidance and minimization measures, protective measures for special status species, and required compensatory mitigation for removal of riparian trees, shrubs, and herbaceous cover along the banks. Compliance with measures of the LSA Agreement would ensure that the Project’s impacts to aquatic features and riparian habitat within CDFW’s jurisdiction remain less-than-significant or are fully mitigated.
There are no designated wild and scenic rivers within the APE; therefore, the Project would not result in direct impacts to wild and scenic rivers. Compliance with USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW permits, certifications, and agreements would ensure there are no indirect downstream effects to jurisdictional waters.
Since construction would involve ground disturbance over an area greater than one acre, the Project would also be required to obtain a Construction General Permit under the Construction Storm Water Program administered by the RWQCB. A prerequisite for this permit is the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to ensure construction activities do not adversely affect water quality.
Section 7 Determinations
In addition to the effects analysis performed in Table 2 and Table 3 of this document, Table 4 summarizes Project effect determinations for Federally Listed Species found on the USFWS IPaC list generated on August 25, 2022 (Appendix C), in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
Table 4. Section 7 Determinations
Species Determination Rationale for Determination
Blunt-nosed leopard lizard
(Gambelia sila) No effect
Habitat absent. The APE and surrounding
areas have high human disturbance and lacked
suitable vegetation.
California tiger salamander
(Ambystoma californiense)
No effect
Habitat absent. Vernal pools and upland
habitat are absent within the APE and
surrounding areas. The APE and surrounding
areas have high human disturbance, and the
Fresno River is unsuitable for this species.
Delta smelt
(Hypomesus transpacificus)
No effect Habitat absent. The APE is outside of the
known distribution range of this species.
Fresno kangaroo rat
(Dipodomys nitratoides exilis) No effect Disturbed habitat. The highly disturbed habitats of the APE and surrounding lands are unsuitable City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 31
Species Determination Rationale for Determination
for this species. Humans and domestic dogs were
observed within the APE and surrounding areas
which would deter this species from residing
within the APE.
Monarch butterfly
(Danaus plexippus) No effect
Habitat absent. Foraging and roosting habitat is
absent from within the APE and surrounding
areas.
Hairy Orcutt grass
(Orcuttia pilosa) No effect
Habitat present. Aquatic habitat is present
within the APE and surrounding lands.
Implementation of mitigation measure BIO-8
found on Page 22 would reduce affects to no
effect.
San Joaquin kit fox
(Vulpes macrotis mutica) No effect
Habitat absent. There were no suitable dens,
tracks, or scat observed during the biological
survey. It is unlikely this species would reside
within the APE due to human disturbance and
domestic dogs that were observed in the APE
during the biological survey.
Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle
(Desmocerus californicus
dimorphus)
No effect Habitat absent. No elderberry shrubs were
found within the APE or surrounding areas.
Vernal pool fairy shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi) No effect
Habitat absent. Vernal pools and upland habitat
are absent within the APE and surrounding areas.
The APE and surrounding areas have high human
disturbance, and the Fresno River is unsuitable
for this species.
Less than Significant Project-Related Impacts
Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Animal Species Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site
Of the 15 regionally occurring special status animal species, 9 are considered absent from or unlikely to occur within the APE due to past or ongoing disturbance and/or the absence of suitable habitat. These species include: American badger, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, California tiger salamander, Delta smelt, Fresno kangaroo rat, Monarch butterfly, San Joaquin kit fox, Valley elderberry longhorn beetle, vernal pool fairy shrimp.
Since it is unlikely that these species would occur onsite, implementation of the Project would have no impact on these 9 special status species through construction mortality, disturbance, or loss of habitat. Mitigation measures are not warranted.
Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Plant Species Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site
Of the 16 regionally occurring special status plant species, 10 are considered absent from or unlikely to occur within the APE due to past or ongoing disturbance and/or the absence of soils or suitable habitat. These species include: Greene’s tuctoria, Madera leptosiphone, Munz’s tidy-tips, recurved larkspur, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, shining navarretia, spiny-sepaled button-celery, subtle orache, succulent owl’s-clover, and vernal pool smallscale.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 32
Since it is unlikely that these species would occur onsite, implementation of the Project should have no impact on these 10 special status species through construction mortality, disturbance, or loss of habitat. Mitigation measures are not warranted.
Project-Related Impacts to Special Status Fishes Absent From, or Unlikely to Occur on, the Project Site
Chinook salmon were identified in the National Marine Fisheries (NMFS) Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Mapper (Appendix E). At the time of the survey, special status fishes are not considered present or likely to occur within the APE. The Fresno River does not flow perennially, and the Canals do not have connections to waterbodies that contain special status fish species. Mitigation measures are not warranted.
Project-Related Impacts to Critical Habitat
Designated critical habitat is absent from the APE and surrounding lands. Therefore, there would be no impact to critical habitat, and mitigation is not warranted.
Local Policies or Habitat Conservation Plans
The Project appears to be consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Madera General Plan. There are no known habitat conservation plans (HCPs) or a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) in the Project vicinity. Tree removal will be a part of Project activities but there is no permitting process for tree removal within the City of Madera. Mitigation measures are not warranted.
Coastal Zone and Coastal Barriers Resources Act
The Project would not be located within the coastal zone. The Project would not impact or be located within or near the Coastal Barrier Resources System or its adjacent wetlands, marshes, estuaries, inlets, and near-shore waters. Mitigation is not warranted.
Project-Related Impact to Essential Fish Habitat
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) and EFH and are absent from the APE and surrounding lands, and consultation with the NMFS would not be required. Query results of the NMFS EHF Mapper can be found in Appendix E at the end of this document. Mitigation is not warranted.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 33
IV. References
Association of Environmental Professionals. 2022. 2022 California Environmnetal Quality Act Statute & Guidelines. Accessed September 2022.
Baldwin, B.G., D. H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.G. Wilken. 2012. The Jepson Manual; Vascular Plants of California, second edition. Berkeley: University of California Press. Accessed September 2022.
Calflora. 2022. Accessed 2022 September. http://www.calflora.org/.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. "Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensative Natural Communities." March. Accessed September 2022. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2015. Staff Guidance Regarding Avoidance of Impacts to Tricolored Blackbird Breeding Colonies on Agricultural Fields. March. Accessed September 2022.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. "Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation." Accessed August 2022.
California Native Plant Society. 2022. Accessed September 2022. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/.
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). 2022. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Accessed September 2022.
City of Madera. 2009. City of Madera General Plan. October 7. Accessed September 2022. https://www.madera.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/City-of-Madera-GP-12-04-20.pdf.
Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2016. "Bulletin 118: California's Groundwater, Interim Update." Accessed September 2022.
Department of Water Resources. n.d. Accessed September 2022. http://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bbat/. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2022. Accessed September 2022. https://ebird.org/.
Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2022. Accessed September 2022. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.
Karrigan Bork, Peter Moyle, John Durand, Tien-Chieh Hung and Andrew Rypel. n.d. Futures for Delta Smelt.
Accessed September 2022. https://californiawaterblog.com/2019/12/15/futures-for-delta-smelt/.
Manzo S, Nicholson EG, Devereux Z, Fisher RN, Brown CW, Scott PA, Shaffer HB. 2021. "Conservation of Northwestern and Southwestern Pond Turtles: Threats, Population Size Estimates, and Population Viability Analysis." Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 12 (2): 485-501. Accessed September 2022.
Nafis, G. 2022. Accessed September 2022. http://www.californiaherps.com/.
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. websoilsurvey. Accessed September 2022. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 34
NatureServe Explorer. 2022. An Online Encyclopedia of Life. Accessed September 2022. http://explorer.natureserve.org/.
Shuford, W., and T. Gardali. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1.
Camarillo and Sacramento, CA: Western Field Ornithologists and California Department of Fish and Game. Accessed September 2022.
Spinks PQ, Thomson RC, Shaffer HB. 2014. "The advantages of going large: genome-wide SNPs clarify the complex population history and systematics of the threatened wester pond turtle." Molecular Ecology 23: 2228-2241. Accessed September 2022.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2021. "State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharge of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State." April 6. Accessed September 2022.
Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. 2000. "Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley." CA: CDFW, May. Accessed August 2022.
The California Burrowing Owl Consortium. 1993. "Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines." Accessed September 2022.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Habitat Conservation. 2022. "Essential Fish Habitat Mapper." Accessed September 2022.
https://www.habitat.noaa.gov/apps/efhmapper/?page=page_5.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the Army. Accessed May 2022.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Recources Conservation Service. n.d. The Plants Database.
Accessed September 2022. http://plants.sc.egov.usda.gov/java/.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2022. Waters GeoViewer. Accessed September 2022. https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-geoviewer.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022. Accessed June 2022. https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. —. 2022. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). Accessed September 2022. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Recovery Plan for the Giant Garter Snake (Thamnophis gigas).
Sacramento: United States Fish and Wlidlife Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Accessed September 2022.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 2022. "National Wetlands Inventory." National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed September 2022.
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Biological Evaluation Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 35
United States Fish and Wildlife Servicel.. 2022. Information on Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Accessed September 2022. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.
United States Geological Survey. 2006. United States Geological Survey Western Pond Turtle (Emys marmorata) Visual Survey Protocol for the Southcoast Ecoregion. Accessed September 2022. https://sdmmp.com/upload/SDMMP_Repository/0/4fnpv18xm0sqtw29j7d3rz56bkychg.pdf.
Weatherspark. 2022. Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Madera California, United States. Accessed August 2022. https://weatherspark.com/y/1298/Average-Weather-in-Madera-California-United-StatesYear-Round.
Wilkerson, R.L., and R.B. Siegel. 2010. "Assessing changes in the distribution and abundance of burrowing owls in California, 1993-2007." Bird Populations 10:1-36. Accessed September 2022.
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BLVD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix A: Photos of the
Project Area
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-1
Photograph 1
Overview of North Westberry Boulevard on the south
side of the Fresno River.
Photograph 2
Overview of Riverview
Drive facing west.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-2
Photograph 3
Overview of the Irrigation
Canal located south of the
Fresno River.
Photograph 4
Overview of the paved walking trail south of the Fresno River. Human and domestic
dog disturbance was prevalent along the trail.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-3
Photograph 5
Overview a typical California ground squirrel burrow
found within the APE.
Photograph 6
Overview of the Fresno River from the south bank. Human and domestic dog disturbance was prevalent within the channel of the
Fresno River.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-4
Photograph 7
Overview of soil disturbance
within the river bed. Tire
tracks can be seen throughout.
Photograph 8
Overview of giant reed
(Arundo donax) found within the river bed. This species is considered invasive in riparian habitats.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-5
Photograph 9
Overview of unidenti¿able
wildlife tracks left in the
sandy soil of the river channel. The Fresno River and
Canals are used as wildlife
movement corridors.
Photograph 10
Overview of the Fresno River from the north bank looking southwest.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-6
Photograph 11
Overview of the Irrigation
Canal located north of the
Fresno River.
Photograph 12
Overview of North Westberry Boulevard on the north
side of the Fresno River.
Corner Structural Engineering Group
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Appendix A
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group A-7
Photograph 13
Overview of surrounding
roads outside of the APE
located south of the Fresno
River.
Photograph 14
Overview of residential
housing outside of the APE
on the south side of the Fresno River.
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 1
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BLVD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix B: CNDDB 9-
Quad Search
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
alkali-sink goldfields
Lasthenia chrysantha
PDAST5L030 None None G2 S2 1B.1
American badger
Taxidea taxus
AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC
blunt-nosed leopard lizard
Gambelia sila
ARACF07010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 FP
burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
ABNSB10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
California alkali grass
Puccinellia simplex
PMPOA53110 None None G2 S2 1B.2
California linderiella
Linderiella occidentalis
ICBRA06010 None None G2G3 S2S3
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
AAAAA01181 Threatened Threatened G2G3T3 S3 WL
coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
ARACF12100 None None G3G4 S3S4 SSC
Fresno kangaroo rat
Dipodomys nitratoides exilis
AMAFD03151 Endangered Endangered G3TH SH
Greene's tuctoria
Tuctoria greenei
PMPOA6N010 Endangered Rare G1 S1 1B.1
hairy Orcutt grass
Orcuttia pilosa
PMPOA4G040 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
heartscale
Atriplex cordulata var. cordulata
PDCHE040B0 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2
hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
AMACC05030 None None G3G4 S4
lesser saltscale
Atriplex minuscula
PDCHE042M0 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Madera leptosiphon
Leptosiphon serrulatus
PDPLM09130 None None G3 S3 1B.2
midvalley fairy shrimp
Branchinecta mesovallensis
ICBRA03150 None None G2 S2S3
moestan blister beetle
Lytta moesta
IICOL4C020 None None G2 S2
molestan blister beetle
Lytta molesta
IICOL4C030 None None G2 S2
Munz's tidy-tips
Layia munzii
PDAST5N0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Query Criteria: Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Madera (3612081)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Berenda (3712012)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Kismet (3712011)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Daulton (3711918)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Gregg (3611988)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Herndon (3611978)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Biola (3612071)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Gravelly Ford (3612072)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Bonita Ranch (3612082)) Report Printed on Wednesday, August 17, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated July, 31 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 2 Information Expires 1/31/2023
Selected Elements by Common Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
CTT44110CA None None G3 S3.1
recurved larkspur
Delphinium recurvatum
PDRAN0B1J0 None None G2? S2? 1B.2
San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica
AMAJA03041 Endangered Threatened G4T2 S2
San Joaquin pocket mouse
Perognathus inornatus
AMAFD01060 None None G2G3 S2S3
San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
PMPOA4G060 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Sanford's arrowhead
Sagittaria sanfordii
PMALI040Q0 None None G3 S3 1B.2
shining navarretia
Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians
PDPLM0C0J2 None None G4T2 S2 1B.2
spiny-sepaled button-celery
Eryngium spinosepalum
PDAPI0Z0Y0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
subtle orache
Atriplex subtilis
PDCHE042T0 None None G1 S1 1B.2
succulent owl's-clover
Castilleja campestris var. succulenta
PDSCR0D3Z1 Threatened Endangered G4?T2T3 S2S3 1B.2
Swainson's hawk
Buteo swainsoni
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S3
tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S1S2 SSC
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
IICOL48011 Threatened None G3T2T3 S3
Valley Sacaton Grassland
Valley Sacaton Grassland
CTT42120CA None None G1 S1.1
vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S3
vernal pool smallscale
Atriplex persistens
PDCHE042P0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
AAABF02020 None None G2G3 S3 SSC
Record Count: 36
Report Printed on Wednesday, August 17, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated July, 31 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 2 Information Expires 1/31/2023
Selected Elements by Common Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 2
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BLVD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix C: IPaC Search
August 25, 2022
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
Phone: (916) 414-6600 Fax: (916) 414-6713
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2022-0079126
Project Name: Westberry Boulevard Bridge
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) 08/25/2022 2
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project-related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan (when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-tobirds.php.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations/ executive-orders/e0-13186.php.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit to our office.
08/25/2022
3 ▪
Attachment(s):
Official Species List
08/25/2022 1
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed action".
This species list is provided by:
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
(916) 414-6600
08/25/2022 2
Project Summary
Project Code: 2022-0079126
Project Name: Westberry Boulevard Bridge
Project Type: Bridge - New Construction
Project Description: We understand that the base scope of work assumes the new Westberry Blvd bridge over the
Fresno River in the City of Madera will consist of a 402 ft. long, 94 ft. wide 10-span cast-in-place
reinforced concrete flat slab bridge. It is assumed the bridge will be supported on seat type
abutments founded on 36 in. diameter cast-in-steel-shell or cast-in-drilledhole piles.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:// www.google.com/maps/@36.9668852,-120.10124715491538,14z Counties: Madera County, California
08/25/2022 3
1. Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 9 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Fresno Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys nitratoides exilis
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5150
Endangered
San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2873
Endangered
Reptiles
NAME STATUS
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/625
Endangered
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
Population: U.S.A. (Central CA DPS)
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
1 08/25/2022 4
Fishes
NAME STATUS
Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacificus
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321
Threatened
Insects
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7850
Threatened
Crustaceans
NAME STATUS
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Hairy Orcutt Grass Orcuttia pilosa
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2262
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION.
08/25/2022
5 IPaC User Contact Information
Agency: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Name: Roman Endicott
Address: 455 W. Fir Ave
City: Clovis
State: CA
Zip: 93611
Email [email protected]
Phone: 5594492700
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 3
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BLVD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix D: NRCS Soils
Report
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Madera Area,
California
Westberry Bridge
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
August 25, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Madera Area, California..................................................................................13 GaA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17.........13 GbA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes....................................................................................................14 PbA—Pachappa fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percen slopes....................................................................................................16 Rh—Riverwash........................................................................................... 17 References............................................................................................................18 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4094820 4094900 4094980 4095060 4095140 4095220 4095300 4095380 4094820 4094900 4094980 4095060 4095140 4095220 4095300 4095380 4095460 757810 757890 757970 758050 758130 758210 758290
757890 757970 758050 758130 758210 758290
36° 58' 11'' N
120° 6' 14'' W
36° 58' 11'' N
120° 5' 54'' W
36° 57' 50'' N
120° 6' 14'' W
36° 57' 50'' N
N
120° 5' 54'' W
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900
Feet
0 45 90 180 270
Meters
Map Scale: 1:3,200 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:20,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Madera Area, California
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 7, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 16, 2022—Mar 21, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI GaA Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0
to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17
5.6 38.2%
GbA Grangeville fine sandy loam,
slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1
percent slopes
3.7 25.1%
PbA Pachappa fine sandy loam,
slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1
percen slopes
0.2 1.1%
Rh Riverwash 5.2 35.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 14.7 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
Custom Soil Resource Report
11 The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Madera Area, California
GaA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vncx
Elevation: 30 to 1,760 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 25 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 12 to 79 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 2 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 3.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, hydric
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, channeled
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
GbA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hk72
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 11 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 11 to 20 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 20 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to silt loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 1 percent
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Foster
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 PbA—Pachappa fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percen slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hk8t
Elevation: 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Pachappa and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Pachappa
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 14 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 14 to 28 inches: loam
H3 - 28 to 45 inches: fine sandy loam
H4 - 45 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to fine sandy loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Custom Soil Resource Report
16 Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Fresno
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Rh—Riverwash
Map Unit Composition
Riverwash: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Riverwash
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Parent material: Sandy and gravelly alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 6 inches: sand
H2 - 6 to 60 inches: stratified coarse sand to sandy loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 3.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 18 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
19 CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BLVD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix E: NMFS EFH
Mapper
EFH Mapper Report
EFH Data Notice
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) is defined by textual descriptions contained in the fishery management plans developed by the regional fishery management councils. In most cases mapping data can not fully represent the complexity of the habitats that make up EFH. This report should be used for general interest queries only and should not be interpreted as a definitive evaluation of EFH at this location. A location-specific evaluation of EFH for any official purposes must be performed by a regional expert. Please refer to the following links for the appropriate regional resources.
West Coast Regional Office
Alaska Regional Office
Query Results
Degrees, Minutes, Seconds: Latitude = 36º 58' 0" N, Longitude = 121º 53' 55" W Decimal Degrees: Latitude = 36.967, Longitude = -120.101 The query location intersects with spatial data representing EFH and/or HAPCs for the following species/management units.
EFH
No Essential Fish Habitats (EFH) were identified at the report location.
Salmon EFH
Link HUC Name Species/Management
Unit
Lifestage(s) Found at
Location
Management
Council FMP
Fresno River - Below
Hidden Chinook Salmon All Pacific Pacific CoastSalmon Plan HAPCs
No Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) were identified at the report location.
EFH Areas Protected from Fishing
No EFH Areas Protected from Fishing (EFHA) were identified at the report location.
Spatial data does not currently exist for all the managed species in this area. The following is a list of species or management units for which there is no spatial data. **For links to all EFH text descriptions see the complete data inventory: open data inventory --> Spatial data does not currently exist for all the managed species in this area. The following is a list of species or management units for which there is no spatial data. **For links to all EFH text descriptions see the complete data inventory: open data inventory --> Pacific Coastal Pelagic Species,
Jack Mackerel,
Pacific (Chub) Mackerel,
Pacific Sardine,
Northern Anchovy - Central Subpopulation,
Northern Anchovy - Northern Subpopulation,
Pacific Highly Migratory Species,
Bigeye Thresher Shark - North Pacific,
Bluefin Tuna - Pacific,
Dolphinfish (Dorado or Mahimahi) - Pacific,
Pelagic Thresher Shark - North Pacific,
Swordfish - North Pacific
Appendices
Westberry Bridge Project
November 2023 C-1
Appendix C: Class III Inventory/Phase I Cultural Resources Survey Draft
CLASS III INVENTORY/PHASE I SURVEY,
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT,
MADERA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
23-SCAO-107
Prepared for:
Ms. Briza Sholars
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
206 West Cromwell Avenue
Fresno, CA 93711-2715
Prepared by:
Peter A. Carey, M.A., RPA
Director/Principal Investigator
and
K. Ross Way, A.A.
Associate Archaeologist
ASM Affiliates
4800 Stockdale Hwy, Ste 405
Bakersfield, CA 93309
May 2023
PN 36510.26
Table of Contents
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.........................................................................................iii
1. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT...................................... 1
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION, DESCRIPTION, AND APE ................................................. 1
1.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 2
1.2.1 National Historic Preservation Act ........................................................................ 2
1.2.2 National Register Criteria for Evaluation .............................................................. 3
1.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act .................................................................. 4
2. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND .............................. 9
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND ....................................................................... 9
2.2 GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT ...................................................................... 9
2.3 ETHNOGRAPHIC CONTEXT .................................................................................... 9
2.4 PRE-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ...................................... 11
2.5 HISTORICAL CONTEXT ......................................................................................... 14
2.6 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................ 16
2.6.1 Pre-Contact Archaeology .................................................................................... 16
2.6.2 Historical Archaeology: Native American .......................................................... 18
2.6.3 Historical Archaeology: Euro-American ............................................................. 19
3. ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH..................................................................... 25
3.1 TRIBAL COORDINATION ...................................................................................... 25
4. METHODS AND RESULTS................................................................................ 27
4.1 SURVEY RESULTS .................................................................................................. 27
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................... 33
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 33 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 35 CONFIDENTIAL APPENDICES .................................................................................. 41 Confidential Appendix A: Records Search and Tribal Coordination Confidential Appendix B: Site Record Update and Original Site Record
Table of Contents
ii Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Location of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge, Madera County, California. ........... 6 Figure 2. APE detail map of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, Madera County, California ..................................................................................... 7 Figure 3. Overview of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, looking north ................. 30 Figure 4. Overview of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, showing surrounding development, looking north-northeast.. ............................................ 30 Figure 5. Drawing of Lateral 24.2 between Stations 790 and 795, on the south side of the Fresno River channel, United States Bureau of Reclamation 1953 ...................... 31 Figure 6. Drawing of Lateral 24.2-14.2 between Stations 3500 and 4000, United States Bureau of Reclamation, 1960 ..................................................................... 32 Management Summary
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project iii
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
An intensive Class III inventory/Phase I cultural resources survey was conducted for the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project (Project), Madera County, California. This study was conducted by ASM Affiliates (ASM), with Peter A. Carey, M.A, RPA, serving as Principal Investigator.
Background studies and fieldwork for the survey were completed in October 2022 – February 2023 under a Fieldwork Authorization issued by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) April 8th, 2022 (CGB-153/2.1.1.04). The study was undertaken to assist with compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (54 USC § 306108; 36 CFR §800), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The proposed Project consists of the construction of a new bridge along Westberry Boulevard across the Fresno River. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the Project was defined by the Reclamation as all areas of potential ground-surface disturbance including staging, lay-down, and work areas. The horizontal APE is approximately 10.5-acres (ac). The vertical APE, defined as the maximum depth of excavation for the pier piles, is approximately 95-feet (ft).
A records search of site files and maps was conducted by staff at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center (SSJVIC), California State University, Bakersfield on October 4 th, 2022. According to the records search results, no previous archaeological surveys had been completed within the Project APE or within a 0.5-mile (mi) radius. One resource is known to cross the APE: P-20-002308, Madera Irrigation District (MID). The MID laterals that cross the APE are Lateral 24.2 and Lateral 24.2-14.2. In 2018 consultation correspondence related to a City of Madera sewer crossing project, State Historic Preservation Officer Julianne Polanco commented to Reclamation that Madera Canal Lateral 24.2 is one of three primary laterals built in the 1950s by Reclamation to divert water from the Madera Canal, and that it is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as a contributor to the Madera Canal, which itself is a contributor to the CVP; however the three laterals are not individually eligible (Julianne Polanco to Anastasia T. Leigh, January 17, 2018 regarding Project #17-SCAO-232.001).
A search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File was completed November 28th, 2022. Based on the NAHC records, no sacred sites or traditional cultural places had been identified within or adjacent to the Project APE. Outreach letters and follow-up emails were sent to tribal organizations on the NAHC contact-list. No responses have been received as a result of this outreach.
The Class III inventory/Phase I survey fieldwork was conducted in February 2023 with parallel transects spaced at approximately 15-meter (m) intervals walked across the APE. Ground surface visibility within the APE was excellent. Two segments of previously recorded built environment resource P-20-002308 (Madera Irrigation District) are located within the APE. The resource within the APE consists of segments of Lateral 24.2 and Lateral 24.2-14.2. Both laterals retain sufficient integrity for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility at the local level under Criteria A/1 and C/3 as contributors to the Madera Canal, which is itself eligible as a contributor to the Central Valley Project (CVP). After review, the Project would not result in loss of eligibility for the resource as a whole. Therefore, the Table of Contents
iv Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
modification to these segments of Lateral 24.2 and Lateral 24.2-14.2 will not result in a significant adverse effect to historic resources.
Based on these findings, a determination of No Historic Properties Affected/No Significant Impact is recommended for the Project. It is further recommended an archaeologist be contacted if cultural resources are identified during the construction of the proposed Project.
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 1
1. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY CONTEXT
ASM was retained by Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group to conduct an intensive Class III Inventory/Phase I cultural resources survey for the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, Madera County, California. The purpose of this investigation was to assist with compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (54 USC § 300101 et seq.; 36 CFR § 800), and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The investigation was undertaken, specifically, to ensure that no significant adverse effects or impacts to historical resources or historic properties occur as a result of the construction of this project.
This current study included:
• A background records search and literature review to determine if any known archaeological sites were present in the project zone and/or whether the APE had been previously and systematically studied by archaeologists; • A search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File to determine if any traditional cultural places or cultural landscapes have been identified within the APE, with outreach letters sent and follow-up calls made to the NAHC tribal contact list;
• An on-foot, intensive inventory of the Project APE to identify and record previously undiscovered cultural resources and to examine known sites; and • A preliminary assessment of any such resources found within the subject property.
This study was conducted by ASM Affiliates, Inc., of Tehachapi, California, with Peter A. Carey, M.A., RPA, serving as Principal Investigator. Fieldwork was conducted by ASM Assistant Archaeologist Margarita Medina Lemus, B.A.
This manuscript constitutes a report on the Class III Inventory/Phase I survey. Subsequent chapters provide background to the investigation, including historic context studies; the findings of the archival records search; a summary of the field surveying techniques employed; and the results of the fieldwork. We conclude with management recommendations for the Project APE.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION, DESCRIPTION, AND APE
The proposed Project is located on the west side of Madera in southern Madera County, California.
More specifically, it is in Section 15 and 22, Township 11 South, Range 17 East (Mount Diablo Base and Meridian), along Westberry Boulevard, Madera, California, 93636. This places it on the open flats of the San Joaquin Valley along the Fresno River (Figures 1 and 2).
The City of Madera proposes to construct a new vehicular bridge along the proposed Westberry Boulevard Alignment crossing the Fresno River in the northwest portion of the City of Madera in order to improve traffic circulation and to avoid any future congestion on existing upstream bridges at Granada Drive and Schnoor Avenue. The proposed bridge crossing structure will be approximately 402-ft long by approximately 94-ft wide and will accommodate two 12-ft traveled ways in each direction, one 12-ft wide center median, two 6-ft shoulder/bike lanes, two 10-ft sidewalks, and two 1-ft concrete barriers with tubular hand railing along each side of the bridge
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
2 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
deck. Based on the geography of the existing site, earthen irrigation canals owned by Reclamation and operated by MID run along the exterior side of each riverbank and there is also an existing pedestrian trial that runs along the south bank of the river. The proposed structure will consist of a 10-span cast-in-place reinforced concrete flat slab bridge supported on seat type abutments and 36-inch diameter cast-n-steel-shell or cast-in-drilled hole piles at the abutments and piers.
The depth of the 36-inch diameter pier piles extends down to an elevation of 152.5-ft. The existing ground elevation ranges from elevation 242-ft to elevation 247-ft, so the depth of the pier piles would be between 89 feet to 95 feet. The depth of the 42-inch diameter abutment piles extends down to an elevation of 206-ft. The bottom of abutment elevations are 246-ft and 247-ft, so the depth of the abutment piles would be approximately 40-ft.
Earthen irrigation canals border the north and south riverbanks. The northern canal is Lateral 24.2-
14.2, and the southern canal is Lateral 24.2. The canals will be converted to culverts where they intersect the proposed roadway improvements. There is also an existing pedestrian trail that runs along the south bank of the river. Non-native vegetation removal along the trail and south side of the Lateral 24.2 will be a part of Project activities.
Road and sidewalk improvements will be completed on the approaches to the bridge north and south of the river. The new bridge will hold a new City of Madera 12-inch water main, and AT&T and PG&E utilities will be located within the bridge itself. The City of Madera has an existing buried 33-inch sewer main which crosses the Reclamation canals and Fresno River within the new bridge/roadway alignment and will remain in service.
The Project APE was defined by Reclamation as all areas of potential ground-surface disturbance including staging, lay-down, and work areas. For this project, the horizontal APE comprises a total of 10.5-ac. The vertical APE, defined as the maximum depth of excavation for the pier piles, is approximately 95-ft.
1.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT
1.2.1 National Historic Preservation Act
The NHPA of 1966, as amended (54 United States Code § 300101 et seq.), is the primary federal legislation that outlines the federal government’s responsibility to consider the effects of its actions on historic properties and affords the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment. Section 106 of the NHPA and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part 800 describes the process that the federal agency shall take to identify cultural resources and assess the level of effect that the proposed undertaking will have on historic properties. An undertaking is defined as a “…project, activity or program funded in whole or in part, under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a federal agency.” This includes projects that are carried out by, or on behalf of, the agency; those carried out with federal assistance; those requiring a federal permit, license, or approval; and those subject to state or local regulation administered pursuant to a delegation, or approval by, a federal agency.
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 3
A cultural resource is a broad term that includes prehistoric, historic, architectural, and traditional cultural properties. Those cultural resources that are listed on, or are eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are referred to as historic properties. The criteria for NRHP eligibility are outlined at 36 CFR Part 60. Other applicable federal cultural resources laws and regulations that could apply include, but are not limited to, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA).
Compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA (36 CFR Part 800) follows a series of steps that are designed to identify and consult with interested parties, determine the APE, determine if historic properties are present within the APE, and assess the effects the undertaking will have on historic properties. Section 106 requires consultation with Indian Tribes concerning the identification of sites of religious or cultural significance and with individuals or groups who are entitled, or requested, to be consulting parties. The regulations at 36 CFR Part 800.5 require federal agencies to apply the criteria of adverse effect to the historic properties identified within the APE. The criteria of adverse effect, defined at 36 CFR Part 800.5(a)(1), states that:
“An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association.”
The 36 CFR Part 800 regulations include consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to provide an opportunity to comment on, and concur with, a federal agency’s determinations. If the undertaking would result in adverse effects to historic properties, these adverse effects must be resolved in consultation with the SHPO and other parties identified during the Section 106 process before the undertaking can proceed to implementation.
1.2.2 National Register Criteria for Evaluation
The criteria for evaluation of NRHP eligibility are outlined at 36 CFR Part 60.4. A district, site, building, structure, or object must generally be at least 50 years old to be eligible for consideration as a historic property. That district, site, building, structure, or object must retain integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feelings, and association as well as meet one of the following criteria to demonstrate its significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. A district, site, building, structure, or object must:
(A) be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; or,
(B) be associated with the lives of people significant in our past; or, (C) embody the distinct characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values,
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
4 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or,
(D) have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
A site must have integrity and meet one of the four criteria of eligibility to demonstrate its historic associations in order to convey its significance. A property must be associated with one or more events important in the history or prehistory in order to be considered for listing under Criterion A. Additionally, the specific association of the property itself must also be considered significant.
Criterion B applies to properties associated with individuals whose specific contributions to the history can be identified and documented. Properties significant for their physical design or construction under Criterion C must have features with characteristics that exemplify such elements as architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, and artwork. Criterion D most commonly applies to properties that have the potential to answer, in whole or in part, important research questions about human history that can only be answered by the actual physical materials of cultural resources. A property eligible under Criterion D must demonstrate the potential to contain information relevant to the prehistory and history (National Register Bulletin 15).
A district, site, building, structure, or object may also be eligible for consideration as a historic property if that property meets the criteria considerations for properties generally less than 50 years old, in addition to possessing integrity and meeting the criteria for evaluation.
1.2.3 California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA is applicable to discretionary actions by state or local lead agencies. Under CEQA, lead agencies must analyze impacts to cultural resources. Significant impacts under CEQA occur when “historically significant” or “unique” cultural resources are adversely impacted, which occurs when such resources could be altered or destroyed through project implementation. Historically significant cultural resources are defined by eligibility for or by listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). In practice, the federal NRHP criteria for significance applied under Section 106 are generally (although not entirely) consistent with CRHR criteria (see PRC § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Sections § 4852 and § 15064.5(a)(3)).
Significant cultural resources are those archaeological resources and historical properties that:
(A)Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; (B) Are associated with the lives of persons important in our past; (C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual, or possess high artistic values; or
(D)Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Unique resources under CEQA, in slight contrast, are those that represent:
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 5
an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. (2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC § 21083.2(g)).
Preservation in place is the preferred approach under CEQA to mitigating adverse impacts to significant or unique cultural resources.
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
6 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
Figure 1. Location of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project APE, Madera County, California.
1. Introduction and Regulatory Context
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 7
Figure 2. APE detail map of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, Madera County, California.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 9
2. ENVIRONMENTAL AND CULTURAL
BACKGROUND
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND
The Project APE is located adjacent to residential development on the north and south side of the Fresno River and including the Fresno River itself. Elevations within the Project APE, which is relatively flat, range from approximately 242-ft to 250-ft above mean sea level (amsl). Although this location currently may be characterized as open valley bottom, historically oak groves and valley grasslands likely would have dominated (Preston 1981:70). Historical and recent land-use has thus changed the vegetation that was once present within and near the Project APE. However, it is also likely that Riparian Woodlands of greater density were once found along local drainages, including along the Fresno River (see Schoenherr 1992).
2.2 GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT
A Caltrans geoarchaeological study that included the Project APE classified this location as having Moderately High sensitivity for subsurface sites (Meyer et al. 2010). This study involved first determining the location and ages of late Pleistocene (>25,000 years old) landforms in the southern San Joaquin Valley. These were identified by combining a synthesis of 2,400 published paleontological, soils and archaeological chronometric dates with geoarchaeological field testing.
The ages of surface landforms were then mapped to provide an assessment for the potential for buried archaeological deposits. These ages were derived primarily from the Soil Survey Geographic Database (SSURGO) and the State Soils Geographic (STATSGO) database. A series of maps were created from this information that ranked locations in 7 ordinal classes for sensitivity for buried soils, from Very Low to Very High.
There is very low potential for buried sites within the Fresno River due to the active fluvial environmental. Outside of the banks of the Fresno River, the Meyer et al. (2010) model shows Moderately High sensitivity for buried sites. The areas on the north and south of the Fresno River that are indicated as having Moderately High sensitivity are entirely disturbed due to existing roadways and modified open land for infrastructure and will experience only roadway and sidewalk improvements. Given the Project area’s distance from known centers of prehistoric occupation, the previously disturbed nature of the location due to the existing infrastructure, and the limited nature of the disturbance of the current project, it is unlikely that the Project APE would contain subsurface archaeological deposits.
Based on these factors and conditions, the Project APE is considered to have low archaeological sensitivity, with limited potential for subsurface archaeological remains.
2.3 ETHNOGRAPHIC CONTEXT
Penutian-speaking Yokuts tribal groups occupied the southern San Joaquin Valley region and much of the nearby Sierra Nevada. Ethnographic information about the Yokuts was collected
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
10 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
primarily by Powers (1971, 1976 [originally 1877]), Kroeber (1925), Gayton (1930, 1948), Driver (1937), Latta (1977) and Harrington (n.d.). For a variety of historical reasons, existing research information emphasizes the central Yokuts tribes who occupied both the valley and particularly the foothills of the Sierra. The northernmost tribes suffered from the influx of Euro-Americans during the Gold Rush and their populations were in substantial decline by the time ethnographic studies began in the early twentieth century. In contrast, the southernmost tribes were partially removed by the Spanish to missions and eventually absorbed into multi-tribal communities on the Sebastian Indian Reservation (on Tejon Ranch), and later the Tule River Reservation and Santa Rosa Rancheria to the north. The result is an unfortunate scarcity of ethnographic detail on southern Valley tribes, especially in relation to the rich information collected from the central foothills tribes where native speakers of the Yokuts dialects are still found. Regardless, the general details of indigenous lifeways were similar across the broad expanse of Yokuts territory, particularly in terms of environmentally influenced subsistence and adaptation and with regard to religion and belief, which were similar everywhere.
This scarcity of specific detail is particularly apparent in terms of southern valley tribal group distribution. Kroeber (1925) places the general area of Madera, including the APE, in Heuchi Yokuts territory. Kroeber (1925) lists the nearest village to the APE as Ch’ekayu, approximately 4-mi downriver to the west.
Regardless of tribal affiliation, historical village distribution was similar across the region. Winter villages were typically located along lakeshores and major stream courses (as these existed circa AD 1800), with dispersal phase family camps located at elevated spots on the valley floor and near gathering areas in the foothills.
Most Yokuts groups, regardless of specific tribal affiliation, were organized as a recognized and distinct tribelet; a circumstance that almost certainly pertained to the tribal groups noted above.
Tribelets were land-owning groups organized around a central village and linked by shared territory and descent from a common ancestor. The population of most tribelets ranged from about 150 to 500 peoples (Kroeber 1925).
Each tribelet was headed by a chief who was assisted by a variety of assistants, the most important of whom was the winatum, a herald or messenger and assistant chief. A shaman also served as religious officer. While shamans did not have any direct political authority, as Gayton (1930) has illustrated, they maintained substantial influence within their tribelet.
Shamanism is a religious system common to most Native American tribes. It involves a direct and personal relationship between the individual and the supernatural world enacted by entering a trance or hallucinatory state (usually based on the ingestion of psychotropic plants, such as jimsonweed or more typically native tobacco). Shamans were considered individuals with an unusual degree of supernatural power, serving as healers or curers, diviners, and controllers of natural phenomena (such as rain or thunder). Shamans also produced the rock art of this region, depicting the visions they experienced in vision quests believed to represent their spirit helpers and events in the supernatural realm (Whitley 1992, 2000).
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 11
The centrality of shamanism to the religious and spiritual life of the Yokuts was demonstrated by the role of shamans in the yearly ceremonial round. The ritual round, performed the same each year, started in the spring with the jimsonweed ceremony, followed by rattlesnake dance and (where appropriate) first salmon ceremony. After returning from seed camps, fall rituals began in the late summer with the mourning ceremony, followed by first seed and acorn rites and then bear dance (Gayton 1930:379). In each case, shamans served as ceremonial officials responsible for specific dances involving a display of their supernatural powers (Kroeber 1925).
Subsistence practices varied from tribelet to tribelet based on the environment of residence.
Throughout Native California, and Yokuts territory in general, the acorn was a primary dietary component, along with a variety of gathered seeds. Valley tribes augmented this resource with lacustrine and riverine foods, especially fish and wildfowl. As with many Native California tribes, the settlement and subsistence rounds included the winter aggregation into a few large villages, where stored resources (like acorns) served as staples, followed by dispersal into smaller camps, often occupied by extended families, where seasonally available resources would be gathered and consumed.
Although population estimates vary and population size was greatly affected by the introduction of Euro-American diseases and social disruption, the Yokuts were one of the largest, most successful groups in Native California. Cook (1978) estimates that the Yokuts region contained 27 percent of the aboriginal population in the state at the time of contact; other estimates are even higher. Many Yokuts continue to live in Tulare, Fresno and Kings counties to this day.
2.4 PRE-CONTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
The San Joaquin Valley region has received minimal archaeological attention compared to other areas of the state. In part, this is because the majority of California archaeological work has concentrated in the Sacramento Delta, Santa Barbara Channel and central Mojave Desert areas (see Moratto 1984). Although knowledge of the region’s prehistory is limited, enough is known to determine that the archaeological record is broadly similar to south-central California as a whole (see Gifford and Schenk 1926; Hewes 1941; Wedel 1941; Fenenga 1952; Elsasser 1962; Fredrickson and Grossman 1977; Schiffman and Garfinkel 1981). Based on these sources, the general prehistory of the region can be outlined as follows.
Initial occupation of the region occurred at least as early as the Paleoindian Period, or prior to about 10,000 YBP (years before present). Evidence of early use of the region is indicated by characteristic fluted and stemmed points found around the margin of Tulare Lake, in the foothills of the Sierra, and in the Mojave Desert proper. (In each case, these are locations many miles distant from the study area.)
Both fluted and stemmed points are particularly common around the Tulare Lake margins, suggesting a terminal Pleistocene/early Holocene lakeshore adaptation similar to that found throughout the far west at the same time; little else is known about these earliest peoples. Over 250 fluted points have been recovered from the Witt Site (CA-KIN-32), located along the western shoreline of ancient Tulare Lake west of the Project APE, demonstrating the importance of this early occupation in the San Joaquin Valley specifically (see Fenenga 1993). Additional finds
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
12 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
consist of a Clovis-like projectile point discovered in a flash-flood cut-bank near White Oak Lodge in 1953 on Tejon Ranch (Glennan 1987a, 1987b). More recently, a similar fluted point was found near Bakersfield (Zimmerman et al. 1989), and a number are known from the Edwards Air Force Base and Boron area of the western Mojave Desert. Although human occupation of the state is well-established during the Late Pleistocene, relatively little can be inferred about the nature and distribution of this occupation with a few exceptions. First, little evidence exists to support the idea that people at that time were big-game hunters, similar to those found on the Great Plains.
Second, the western Mojave Desert evidence suggests small, very mobile populations that left a minimal archaeological signature. The evidence from the ancient Tulare Lake shore, in contrast, suggests a much more substantial population and settlements which, instead of relying on big game hunting, were tied to the lacustrine lake edge. Variability in subsistence and settlement patterns is thus apparent in California, in contrast to the Great Plains.
Substantial evidence for human occupation of California first occurs during the middle Holocene, roughly 7,500 to 4,000 YBP. This period is known as the Early Horizon, or alternatively as the Early Millingstone along the Santa Barbara Channel. In the south, populations concentrated along the coast with minimal visible use of inland areas. Adaptation emphasized hard seeds and nuts with tool-kits dominated by mullers and grindstones (manos and metates). Additionally, little evidence for Early Horizon occupation exists in most inland portions of the state, partly due to a severe cold and dry paleoclimatic period occurring at this time. Regardless of specifics, Early Horizon population density was low with a subsistence adaptation more likely tied to plant food gathering than hunting.
Environmental conditions improved dramatically after about 4,000 YBP during the Middle Horizon (or Intermediate Period). This period is known climatically as the Holocene Maximum (circa 3,800 YBP) and was characterized by significantly warmer and wetter conditions than previously experienced. Archaeologically, it was marked by large population increase and radiation into new environments along coastal and interior south-central California and the Mojave Desert (Whitley 2000). In the Delta region to the north, this same period of favorable environmental conditions was characterized by the appearance of the Windmiller culture which exhibited a high degree of ritual elaboration (especially in burial practices) and perhaps even rudimentary mound-building tradition (Meighan, personal communication, 1985). Along with ritual elaboration, Middle Horizon times experienced increasing subsistence specialization, perhaps correlating with the appearance of acorn processing technology. Penutian speaking peoples (including the Yokuts) are also posited to have entered the state roughly at the beginning of this period and, perhaps to have brought this technology with them (cf. Moratto 1984). Likewise it appears the so-called "Shoshonean Wedge" in southern California or the Takic speaking groups that include the Gabrielino/Fernandeño, Tataviam and Kitanemuk, may have moved into the region at this time, rather than at about 1,500 BP as first suggested by Kroeber (1925).
Evidence for Middle Horizon occupation of interior south-central California is substantial. For example, in northern Los Angeles County along the upper Santa Clara River, to the south of the San Joaquin Valley, the Agua Dulce village complex indicates occupation extending back to the Intermediate Period, when the population of the village may have been 50 or more people (King et al n.d.). Similarly, inhabitation of the Hathaway Ranch region near Lake Piru, and the Newhall Ranch near Valencia, appears to date to the Intermediate Period (W & S Consultants 1994). To the
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 13
west, little or no evidence exists for pre-Middle Horizon occupation in the upper Sisquoc and Cuyama River drainages; populations first appear there at roughly 3,500 YBP (Horne 1981). The Carrizo Plain, the valley immediately west of the San Joaquin, experienced a major population expansion during the Middle Horizon (W & S Consultants 2004; Whitley et al. 2007), and recently collected data indicates the Tehachapi Mountains region was first significantly occupied during the Middle Horizon (W & S Consultants 2006). A parallel can be drawn to the inland Ventura County region where a similar pattern has been identified (Whitley and Beaudry 1991), as well as the western Mojave Desert (Sutton 1988a, 1988b), the southern Sierra Nevada (W & S Consultants 1999), and the Coso Range region (Whitley et al. 1988). In all of these areas a major expansion in settlement, the establishment of large site complexes and an increase in the range of environments exploited appear to have occurred sometime roughly around 4,000 years ago. Although most efforts to explain this expansion have focused on local circumstances and events, it is increasingly apparent this was a major southern California-wide occurrence and any explanation must be sought at a larger level of analysis (Whitley 2000). Additionally, evidence from the Carrizo Plain suggests the origins of the tribelet level of political organization developed during this period (W & S Consultants 2004; Whitley et al. 2007). Whether this same demographic process holds for the southern San Joaquin Valley, including the study area, is yet to be determined.
The beginning of the Late Horizon is set variously at 1,500 and 800 YBP, with a consensus for the shorter chronology. Increasing evidence suggests the importance of the Middle-Late Horizons transition (AD 800 to 1200) in the understanding of south-central California. This corresponds to the so-called Medieval Climatic Anomaly, a period of climatic instability that included major droughts and resulted in demographic disturbances across much of the west (Jones et al. 1999). It is also believed to have resulted in major population decline and abandonments across southcentral California, involving as much as 90 percent of the interior populations in some regions including the Carrizo Plain (Whitley et al. 2007). It is not clear whether site abandonment was accompanied by a true reduction in population or an agglomeration of the same numbers of peoples into fewer but larger villages. What is clear is that Middle Period villages and settlements were widely dispersed across the landscape; many at locations that lack contemporary evidence of fresh water sources. Late Horizon sites, in contrast, are typically located where fresh water was available during the historical period, if not currently.
One extensively studied site that shows evidence of intensive occupation during the Middle-Late Horizons transition (~1,500 – 500 YBP) is the Redtfeldt Mound (CA-KIN-66/H), located near the Santa Rosa Rancheria, northwest of the study area. There, Siefkin (1999) reported on human burials and a host of artifacts and ecofacts excavated from a modest-sized mound. He found that both Middle Horizon and Middle-Late Horizons transition occupations were more intensive than Late Horizon occupations, which were sporadic and less intensive (Siefkin 1999:110-111).
The subsequent Late Horizon can be best understood as a period of recovery from a major demographic collapse. One result is the development of regional archaeological cultures as the precursors to ethnographic Native California, suggesting that ethnographic life-ways recorded by anthropologists extend roughly 800 years into the past.
The position of San Joaquin Valley prehistory relative to patterns seen in surrounding areas is still somewhat unknown. The presence of large lake systems in the valley bottoms can be expected to
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
14 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
have mediated some of the desiccation seen elsewhere. But, as the reconstruction of Soda Lake in the nearby Carrizo Plain demonstrates (see Whitley et al. 2007) environmental perturbations had serious impacts on lake systems too. Identifying certain of the prehistoric demographic trends for the southern San Joaquin Valley and determining how these trends (if present) correlate with those seen elsewhere, is a current important research objective.
2.5 HISTORIC CONTEXT
Spanish explorers first visited the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley in 1772, but its lengthy distance from the missions and presidios along the Pacific Coast delayed permanent settlement for many years, including during the Mexican period of control over the Californian region. In the 1840s, Mexican rancho owners along the Pacific Coast allowed their cattle to wander and graze in the San Joaquin Valley (JRP Historical Consulting 2009). The Mexican government granted the first ranchos in the southern part of the San Joaquin Valley in the early 1840s, but these did not result in permanent settlement. It was not until the annexation of California in 1848 that the exploitation of the southern San Joaquin Valley began (Pacific Legacy 2006).
The discovery of gold in northern California in 1848 resulted in a dramatic increase of population, consisting in good part of fortune seekers and gold miners, who began to scour other parts of the state. After 1851, when gold was discovered in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in eastern Kern County, the population of the area grew rapidly. Some new immigrants began ranching in the San Joaquin Valley to supply the miners and mining towns. Ranchers grazed cattle and sheep, and farmers dry-farmed or used limited irrigation to grow grain crops, leading to the creation of small agricultural communities throughout the valley (JRP Historical Consulting 2009).
After the American annexation of California, the southern San Joaquin Valley became significant as a center of food production for this new influx of people in California. The expansive unfenced and principally public foothill spaces were well suited for grazing both sheep and cattle (Boyd 1997). As the Sierra Nevada gold rush presented extensive financial opportunities, ranchers introduced new breeds of livestock, consisting of cattle, sheep and pig (Boyd 1997).
With the increase of ranching in the southern San Joaquin came the dramatic change in the landscape, as non-native grasses more beneficial for grazing and pasture replaced native flora (Preston 1981). After the passing of the Arkansas Act in 1850, efforts were made to reclaim small tracts of land in order to create more usable spaces for ranching. Eventually, as farming supplanted ranching as a more profitable enterprise, large tracts of land began to be reclaimed for agricultural use, aided in part by the extension of the railroad in the 1870s (Pacific Legacy 2006).
Following the passage of state-wide ‘No-Fence’ laws in 1874, ranching practices began to decline, while farming expanded in the San Joaquin Valley in both large land holdings and smaller, subdivided properties. As the farming population grew, so did the demand for irrigation. Settlers began reclamation of swampland in 1866 and built small dams across the Kern River to divert water into the fields. By 1880, 86 different groups were taking water from the Kern River. Ten years later, 15 major canals provided water to thousands of acres in Kern County.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 15
During the period when unproductive lands were being reclaimed in the southern San Joaquin Valley, grants were given to individuals who had both the resources and the finances to undertake the operation alone. One small agricultural settlement, founded by Colonel Thomas Baker in 1861 after procuring one such grant, took advantage of reclaimed swampland along the Kern River.
This settlement became the City of Bakersfield in 1869, and quickly became the center of activity in the southern San Joaquin Valley, and in the newly formed Kern County. Located on the main stage road through the San Joaquin Valley, the town became a primary market and transportation hub for stock and crops, as well as a popular stopping point for travelers on the Los Angeles and Stockton Road. The Southern Pacific Railroad reached the Bakersfield area in 1873, connecting it with important market towns elsewhere in the state, dramatically impacting both agriculture and oil production (Pacific Legacy 2006).
Three competing partnerships developed during this period which had a great impact on control of water, land reclamation and ultimately agricultural development in the San Joaquin Valley:
Livermore and Chester, Haggin and Carr, and Miller and Lux, perhaps the most famous of the enterprises. Livermore and Chester were responsible, among other things, for developing the large Hollister plow (three feet wide by two feet deep), pulled by a 40-mule team, which was used for ditch digging. Haggin and Carr were largely responsible for reclaiming the beds of the Buena Vista and Kern lakes, and for creating the Calloway Canal, which drained through the Rosedale area in Bakersfield to Goose Lake (Morgan 1914). Miller and Lux ultimately became one of the biggest private property holders in the country, controlling the rights to over 22,000 square miles, and their impacts were widespread. They recognized early-on that control of water would have important economic implications, and they played a major role in the water development of the state. They controlled, for example, over 100 miles of the San Joaquin River with the San Joaquin and Kings River Canal and Irrigation System. They were also embroiled for many years in litigation against Haggin and Carr over control of the water rights to the Kern River.
Fresno County was formed in 1856. It included what is now Madera County at that time. The first focus of Euro-American settlement in the region occurred at Millerton, close to Fort Miller, which was the initial Fresno County seat. A flood in 1867 inundated Millerton, causing many settlers to move to Centerville. The Fresno area at the time was primarily used for sheep herding due to insufficient water for dryland farming. The Central Pacific Railroad reached the Fresno area in 1872, connecting it with important market towns elsewhere in the state, dramatically impacting agriculture production (Pacific Legacy 2006). “Fresno Station” soon became “Fresno,” named after the ash trees that are common along the San Joaquin River. Fresno was made the county seat in 1874 and was incorporated in 1885. By 1890, the population had grown to more than 10,000 (Brady and Roper 2011; City of Fresno n.d.)
Madera County was created in 1893 through a special referendum. The county seat was established at the then-existing town of Madera in 1896. Madera had been initially established in 1876 at the location where the California Lumber Company’s flume intersected the railroad line. “Madera,” appropriately, is Spanish for “wood” (City of Madera n.d.).
The Wright Act of 1887 allowed the creation of public irrigation districts, greatly facilitating the funding and construction of water conveyance systems. The current MID was established in 1920 but has pre-1914 rights to divert water from Big Creek and the North Fork of the Willow Creek.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
16 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
An earlier Madera Irrigation District had been formed in 1888 but it had been litigated into effective insolvency by Miller and Lux, to avoid paying taxes to the district. Miller and Lux likewise sued the new MID but an accommodation, involving the creation of a new district (the San Joaquin River Water Storage District) partly owned by the ranching company, was reached in 1922. The MID currently encompasses an area of approximately 139,757-ac, which includes the City of Madera. MID operates a primarily gravity irrigation distribution system with approximately 300 miles of open flow canal systems as well as 150-mi of large diameter pipelines. (Crider 2020).
With increasing demand for water, the Central Valley Project (CVP) was developed to supply water to Fresno, Tulare and Kern counties. Friant Dam, which created Millerton Lake, was completed in 1942 and supplies water for the Friant Kern Canal (FKC) and Madera Canals. The FKC was constructed between 1945 and 1951 and is approximately 152 miles in length. The MID receives CVP water from Millerton Lake and Hensley Lake (ibid). Hensley Lake was created by the construction of Hidden Dam on the Fresno River, approximately ten miles northeast of Madera.
This project was authorized by the 1962 Flood Control Act as part of the Comprehensive Flood Control Survey Report and Plan of Development for the San Joaquin River Basin. Completed in 1974, Hidden Dam provides flood control and water storage for irrigation, as well as recreation opportunities (Army Corps of Engineers, Sacrament District, 2017). Fresno River water is available from both controlled release and uncontrolled flows from Hidden Dam, and water from the Madera Canal may also be released into the Fresno River, from which its is diverted at MID’s Franchi Diversion Weir on the east side of the District. A major natural drainage channel for the City of Madera, the Fresno River is dry for much of the year since the flow is dependent on water releases from upstream water impoundments. (Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group 2017:10, 134).
The paved Fresno River Trail, built circa 2000, is located between the natural river channel and Lateral 24.2-14.2, and runs from Rotary Park on the east side of U.S. 99 westward for approximately 1.5-mi (historicaerials.com 1998, 2005). A chain link fence separates the trail from the lateral.
2.6 RESEARCH DESIGN
2.6.1 Pre-Contact Archaeology
Previous research and the nature of the pre-contact archaeological record suggest two significant NRHP themes, both of which fall under the general Pre-Contact Archaeology area of significance.
These are the Expansion of Pre-Contact Populations and Their Adaptation to New Environments; and Adaptation to Changing Environmental Conditions.
The Expansion of Pre-Contact Populations and Their Adaptation to New Environments theme primarily concerns the Middle Horizon/Holocene Maximum. Its period of significance runs from about 4,000 to 1,500 YBP. It involves a period during which the prehistoric population appears to have expanded into a variety of new regions, developing new adaptive strategies in the process.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 17
The Adaptation to Changing Environmental Conditions theme is partly related to the Holocene Maximum, but especially to the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. The period of significance for this theme, accordingly, extends from about 4,000 to 800 YBP. This theme involves the apparent collapse of many inland populations, presumably with population movements to better environments such as the coast. It is not yet known whether the southern San Joaquin Valley, with its system of lakes, sloughs and swamps, experienced population decline or, more likely, population increase due to the relatively favorable conditions of this region during this period of environmental stress.
The range of site types that are present in this region include:
• Villages, primarily located on or near permanent water sources, occupied by large groups during the winter aggregation season;
• Seasonal camps, again typically located at water sources, occupied during other parts of the year tied to locally and seasonally available food sources; • Special activity areas, especially plant processing locations containing bedrock mortars (BRMs), commonly (though not exclusively) near existing oak woodlands, and invariably at bedrock outcrops or exposed boulders;
• Stone quarries and tool workshops, occurring in two general contexts: at or below naturally occurring chert exposures on the eastern front of the Temblor Range; and at quartzite cobble exposures, often on hills or ridges;
• Ritual sites, most commonly pictographs (rock art) found at rockshelters or large exposed boulders, and cemeteries, both commonly associated with villages; and • A variety of small lithic scatters (low density surface scatters of stone tools).
The first requisites in any research design are the definition of site age/chronology and site function. The ability to determine either of these basic kinds of information may vary between survey and test excavation projects, and due to the nature of the sites themselves. BRM sites without associated artifacts, for example, may not be datable beyond the assumption that they postdate the Early Horizon and are thus less than roughly 4,000 years old.
A second fundamental issue involves the place of site in the settlement system, especially with respect to water sources. Because the locations of the water sources have sometimes changed over time, villages and camps are not exclusively associated with existing (or known historical) water sources (W & S Consultants 2006). The size and locations of the region’s lakes, sloughs and delta channels, to cite the most obvious example, changed significantly during the last 12,000 years due to major paleoclimatic shifts. This altered the area’s hydrology and thus prehistoric settlement patterns. The western shoreline of Tulare Lake was relatively stable because it abutted the Kettleman Hills. But the northern, southern and eastern shorelines comprised the near-flat valley floor. Relatively minor fluctuations up or down in the lake level resulted in very significant changes in the areal expression of the lake on these three sides, and therefore the locations of villages and camps. Although perhaps not as systematic, similar changes occurred with respect to stream channels and sloughs, and potential site locations associated with them. This circumstance has implications for predicting site locations and archaeological sensitivity. Site sensitivity is then hardest to predict in the open valley floor, where changes in stream courses and lake levels occurred on numerous occasions.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
18 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
Nonetheless, the position of San Joaquin Valley prehistory relative to the changing settlement and demographic patterns seen in surrounding areas is still somewhat unknown (cf. Siefkin 1999), including to the two NRHP themes identified above. The presence of large lake systems in the valley bottoms can be expected to have mediated some of the effects of desiccation seen elsewhere.
But, as the reconstruction of Soda Lake in the nearby Carrizo Plain demonstrates (see Whitley et al. 2007), environmental perturbations had serious impacts on lake systems too. Identifying certain of the prehistoric demographic trends for the San Joaquin Valley and determining how these trends (if present) correlate with those seen elsewhere, is another primary regional research objective.
Archaeological sites would primarily be evaluated for NRHP eligibility under Criterion D, research potential.
2.6.2 Historical Archaeology: Native American
Less research has been conducted on the regional historical archaeological record, both Native American and Euro-American. For Native American historical sites, the ethnographic and ethnohistoric periods in the southern San Joaquin Valley extended from first Euro-American contact, in AD 1772, to circa 1900, when tribal populations were first consolidated on reservations.
The major significant historic NRHP themes during this period of significance involve the related topics of Historic-Aboriginal Archaeology, and Native American Ethnic Heritage. More specifically, these concern the Adaptation of the Indigenous Population to Euro-American Encroachment and Settlement, and their Acculturation to Western Society. These processes included the impact of missionization on the San Joaquin Valley (circa 1800 to about 1845); the introduction of the horse and the development of a San Joaquin Valley “horse culture,” including raiding onto the coast and Los Angeles Basin (after about 1810); the use of the region as a refuge for mission neophyte escapees (after 1820); responses to epidemics from introduced diseases (especially in the 1830s); armed resistance to Euro-American encroachment (in the 1840s and early 1850s); the origins of the reservation system and the development of new tribal organizations and ethnic identities; and, ultimately, the adoption of the Euro-American society’s economic system and subsistence practices, and acculturation into that society.
Site types that have been identified in the region dating to the ethnographic/ethnohistoric period of significance primarily include villages and habitations, some of which contain cemeteries and rock art (including pictographs and cupules). Dispersed farmsteads, dating specifically from the reservation period or post-1853, would also be expected. The different social processes associated with this historical theme may be manifest in the material cultural record in terms of changing settlement patterns and village organization (from traditional nucleated villages to single family dispersed farmsteads); the breakdown of traditional trading networks with their replacement by new economic relationships; changing subsistence practices, especially the introduction of agriculture initially via escaped mission neophytes; the use of Euro-American artifacts and materials rather than traditional tools and materials; and, possibly, changing mortuary practices.
Inasmuch as culture change is a primary intellectual interest in archaeology, ethnographic villages and habitations may be NRHP eligible under Criterion D, research potential. Rock art sites, especially pictographs, may be eligible under Criterion C as examples of artistic mastery. They
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 19
may also be eligible under Criterion A, association with events contributing to broad patterns of history. Ethnographic sites, further, may be NRHP eligible as Traditional Cultural Properties due to potential continued connections to tribal descendants, and their resulting importance in traditional practices and beliefs, including their significance for historical memory, tribal- and selfidentity formation, and tribal education.
For Criteria A, C and D, eligibility requires site integrity (including the ability to convey historical association for Criterion A). These may include intact archaeological deposits for Criterion D, as well as setting and feel for Criteria C and A. Historical properties may lack physical integrity, as normally understood in heritage management, but still retain their significance to Native American tribes as Traditional Cultural Properties if they retain their tribal associations and uses.
2.6.3 Historical Archaeology: Euro-American
Approaches to historical Euro-American archaeological research relevant to the region have been summarized by Caltrans (1999, 2000, 2007, 2008). These concern the general topics of historical landscapes, agriculture and farming, irrigation (water conveyance systems), and mining. Caltrans has also identified an evaluation matrix to aid in determinations of eligibility. The identified research issues include site structure and land-use (lay-out, land use, feature function); economics (self-sufficiency, consumer behavior, wealth indicators); technology and science (innovations, methods); ethnicity and cultural diversity (religion, race); household composition and lifeways (gender, children); and labor relations. Principles useful for determining the research potential of an individual site or feature are conceptualized in terms of the mnemonic AIMS-R, as follows:
1. Association refers to the ability to link an assemblage of artifacts, ecofacts, and other cultural remains with an individual household, an ethnic or socioeconomic group, or a specific activity or property use.
2. Integrity addresses the physical condition of the deposit, referring to the intact nature of the archaeological remains. In order for a feature to be most useful, it should be in much the same state as when it was deposited. However, even disturbed deposits can yield important information (e.g., a tightly dated deposit with an unequivocal association).
3. Materials refers to the number and variety of artifacts present. Large assemblages provide more secure interpretations as there are more datable items to determine when the deposit was made, and the collection will be more representative of the household, or activity. Likewise, the interpretive potential of a deposit is generally increased with the diversity of its contents, although the lack of diversity in certain assemblages also may signal important behavioral or consumer patterns.
4. Stratigraphy refers to the vertically or horizontally discrete depositional units that are distinguishable. Remains from an archaeological feature with a complex stratigraphic sequence representative of several events over time can have the added advantage of providing an independent chronological check on artifact diagnosis and the interpretation of the sequence of environmental or sociocultural events.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
20 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
5. Rarity refers to remains linked to household types or activities that are uncommon.
Because they are scarce, they may have importance even in cases where they otherwise fail to meet other thresholds of importance (Caltrans 2007:209).
For agricultural sites, most likely to be pertinent to the Project APE, Caltrans (2007) has identified six themes to guide research: Site Structure and Land Use Pattern; Economic Strategies; Ethnicity and Cultural Adaptation; Agricultural Technology and Science; Household Composition and Lifeways; and Labor History. Expected site types would include farm and ranch homesteads and facilities, line camps, and refuse dumps. In general terms, historical Euro-American archaeological sites would be evaluated for NRHP eligibility under Criterion D, research potential. However, they also potentially could be eligible under Criteria A and B for their associate values with major historical trends or individuals. Historical landscapes might also be considered.
Historical structures are typically evaluated for NRHP eligibility under Criteria A and/or B, for their associative values with major historical trends or individuals, and C for potential design or engineering importance.
With respect to irrigation canals and features, Caltrans (2000) has identified the Development of Irrigated Agriculture as a significant theme or event in California history, including in the San Joaquin Valley. In the years following California’s statehood and the gold rush, increasing population created an increasing market for agricultural products. The total irrigated acreage in the state grew from 60,000 acres in 1860 to nearly 400,000 acres by 1880, an increase of more than 650 percent, and the San Joaquin Valley contained the highest percentage of that land (approximately 47 percent) (Caltrans 2000). Private water companies, land colonies, mutual water companies, and irrigation districts were established in the mid- to late nineteenth century to build irrigation systems to further develop the state’s agriculture industry. Irrigation districts became the most influential of these organizations, especially after state legislation—the Wright Act of 1887—causing irrigation districts to grow in number, power, as well as the actual amount of irrigated land throughout the state. Forty-nine irrigation districts were organized between 1887 and 1896, most of them located between Stockton and Bakersfield. However, by the late 1920s, only seven of the original districts were still in existence, among them the Modesto, Turlock, and Tulare irrigation districts (Caltrans 2000). Under the impetus of increased demand during World War I, agricultural production reached a new peak in 1920. Companies like Pacific Gas & Electric and San Joaquin Valley Light and Power helped finance large irrigation reservoirs to feed district canals in return for the power generated. By 1930, there were 94 active districts in California, and the land watered by these agencies mushroomed to 1.6 million acres (Caltrans 2000). Irrigation districts provided more than 90 percent of the surface water used for irrigation in the San Joaquin Valley before the Central Valley Project came on-line in the 1940s (Caltrans 2000). Most were located in the San Joaquin Valley, with the most successful in Modesto, Turlock, Merced, and Fresno.
The period of significance for this theme begins with the earliest development of irrigated agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley, with the construction of the earthen ditches in Visalia in 1852. Irrigated agriculture continues to be an important industry and influence in the Valley. The period of significance ends in 1964 following recommended guidance for closing a period of significance when activities continued to have importance, but no more specific date can be
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 21
defined to end the historic period, and there is no justification for exceptional significance to extend the period of significance to an end date within the last 50 years (National Register of Historic Places 1997).
An associated property type for this theme would be a water conveyance system. Components and features of water conveyance systems include diversion structures, conduits, flow control devices, cleansing devices, and associated resources and settings. They would be eligible under NRHP Criterion A/CRHR Criterion 1 for their association with this significant theme if:
• The association with the theme is important--simply because a water conveyance existed during the period of significance is not enough for that system to be eligible; • The resource retains high overall integrity because of the high number of comparable examples. The property should retain most of the seven aspects of integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. • Due to the nature of this type of resource, repairs and modifications are acceptable but not if they substantially changed the resource.
Water conveyance systems potentially would be eligible under NRHP Criterion B/CRHR Criterion 2 for their association with this significant theme if they:
• Are associated with an important person’s productive life and represent the property that is most closely associated with that person;
• The resource retains high overall integrity. The property should retain most of the seven aspects of integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
• Due to the nature of this type of resource, repairs and modifications are acceptable but not if those modifications substantially changed the resource.
Water conveyance systems will rarely be found eligible under Criterion B. In California notable names for which there might be associations with water planning, construction, or engineering include Anthony Chabot, George Chaffey, Frederick Eaton, William Mulholland, George Maxwell, Robert Marshall, Elwood Mead and C. E. Grunsky (Caltrans 2000).
A second potential NRHP/CRHR theme identified by Caltrans (2000) that could be applicable to water conveyance systems is Technological Innovation in Irrigated Agriculture in California, 1852-1964. Water conveyance systems would be eligible under the technological innovation theme under Criterion C/3 if they have:
• Unique values.
• Are the best or are an excellent example of the property type that possess distinctive characteristics of the type and through those characteristics clearly illustrates at least one of the following;
o the pattern of features common to a particular class of resources; o the individuality or variation of features that occurs within the class; o the evolution of that class; or
o the transition between classes of resources.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
22 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
• The earliest, best preserved, largest, or sole surviving example of particular types of water conveyance systems.
• A design innovation of evolutionary trends in engineering. • Were designed by a figure of acknowledged greatness in the field or by someone unknown whose workmanship is distinguishable from others by its style and quality and represent a good example of that designer’s work.
• The resource retains high overall integrity and most of the seven aspects of integrity:
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.
A large water conveyance system with multiple components will often be evaluated as a district rather than as a single property. An eligible historic district must possess a significant concentration or linkage of resources that are united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. It should be a significant and distinguishable entity, although its components need not possess individual distinction (Caltrans 2000).
A third potential NRHP/CRHR theme identified by Caltrans (2000) is Construction of the CVP Engineering and Associated Features, 1937 to 1956. Property types associated with the CVP consist of structures built for storage, regulation, delivery of water, and hydro-electric power development. In addition, there are property types associated with the ongoing operation and maintenance of the CVP and with the protection of fish affected by construction of the CVP facilities. These properties include dams, power-plants, water conveyance structures, canals and appurtenant features, laterals, sub-laterals, drains, pumping plants, buildings, dikes, and fish facilities. A core feature of the CVP are the conveyance systems used to carry water from the storage and diversion facilities to the farmlands, or to pumping plants for further geographical redistribution. The backbone of the conveyance system is comprised of the 500-mi of main canals.
These include the Contra Costa Canal, Delta Cross Channel, Delta-Mendota Canal, Friant-Kern Canal, and Madera Canal. All main canals but the Delta Cross Channel and the first section of the Contra Costa Canal (near Rock Slough) are concrete lined. All of the main canals are typically defined to include operating roads on one or both sides of the canal prism. For the CVP, the water conveyance scope is huge: in addition to the over 500-mi of main canals, it contains thousands of miles of laterals (and sub- and sub-sub-laterals) that deliver water from the main canals to irrigation ditches on farms. Also falling within this property type are about 84-mi of drains that carry excess water away from farm fields (Bailey 2010). The period of significance for laterals, sub-laterals, and drains begins in 1937 with the initial construction of the first CVP canal, the Contra Costa Canal, and ends in 1956 with the end of construction for the facilities associated with this historic context.
Laterals, sub-laterals, and drains could be eligible under the following NRHP/CRHR criteria for their association with this significant theme as follows:
• Criterion A/1: They have had a significant impact on the settlement, agricultural economy, or development patterns of the project area; they have been defining elements in the evolution of the cultural landscape; they are directly associated with important events. • Criterion B/2: not applicable.
• Criterion C/3: They are among the best or a rare surviving example of a distinctive type of latera, sub-lateral, or drain; they represent the evolving technology in the design of laterals,
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 23
sub-laterals, and drains; they represent a unique design solution developed in response to a difficult engineering challenge; they were identified during the construction period as an individually significant feature; or
• Criterion D/4: They have the ability to yield information important to understanding the history of the CVP.
3. Archival Records Search
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 25
3. ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH
An archival records search was obtained from the SSJVIC on October 4th, 2022 to determine: (i) if prehistoric or historical cultural resources had previously been recorded within the APE; (ii) if the APE had been systematically surveyed by archaeologists prior to the initiation of this field study; and/or (iii) whether the region of the Project was known to contain archaeological sites and to thereby be archaeologically sensitive. Additionally, a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File was conducted in order to ascertain whether traditional cultural places or cultural landscapes had been identified within the APE. The results of this archival records search are summarized here and are available in Confidential Appendix A.
According to the records search results, no previous archaeological surveys had been completed within the APE or within a 0.5-mi radius of it. One linear resource, however, had been recorded that extends into the APE: P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H, the Madera Irrigation District and multiple laterals. Segments of this resource were first recorded in 1992 by JRP Historical Consulting Services and, subsequently, by 12 other consultants at various times. In 2018 consultation correspondence related to a City of Madera sewer crossing project, State Historic Preservation Officer Julianne Polanco commented to the Reclamation that Madera Canal Lateral
24.2 is one of three primary laterals built in the 1950s by Reclamation to divert water from the Madera Canal, and that it is eligible for listing in the NRHP as a contributor to the Madera Canal, which itself is a contributor to the CVP; however the three laterals are not individually eligible (Julianne Polanco to Anastasia T. Leigh, January 17, 2018 regarding Project #17-SCAO-232.001).
3.1 TRIBAL COORDINATION
A search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File was completed on November 28th, 2022. Based on the NAHC records, no sacred sites or traditional cultural places had been identified within or adjacent to the APE (Appendix A). Outreach letters and follow-up emails were sent to tribal organizations on the NAHC contact list. No responses were received.
Based on the records search, tribal knowledge, and other sources, the APE appeared to have low cultural resources sensitivity.
4. Methods and Results
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 27
4. METHODS AND RESULTS
An intensive Class III inventory/Phase I survey of the Project APE was conducted on February 6, 2023, by ASM Assistant Archaeologist Margarita Medina Lemus, B.A. The APE was examined by walking parallel transects space at approximately 15-m intervals, in order to identify surface artifacts, archaeological indicators (e.g., shellfish or animal bone), and/or archaeological deposits (e.g., organically enriched midden soil); tabulation and recording of surface diagnostic artifacts; site sketch mapping; preliminary evaluation of site integrity; and site recording, following the California Office of Historic Preservation Instructions for Recording Historic Resources, using DPR 523 forms. Special attention was paid to rodent burrow back dirt piles, in the hope of identifying sub-surface soil conditions that might be indicative of archaeological features or remains.
4.1 SURVEY RESULTS
The Project APE consists of developed and undeveloped portions of land along the Fresno River and within the city limits of Madera (Figure 2). The Project APE bordered by residential tract development, paved streets, bike trails, and existing rights-of-way (Figure 3). Ground-surface visibility of the Project APE was excellent. Modern refuse (i.e., clothing, paper products) and concrete fragments was noted within the Project APE. As a result of the survey, one resource was identified within the Westberry Bridge Project APE: P-20-002308/CA-MAD-2649H, the Madera Irrigation District. MID Laterals 24.2 and 24.2-14-2 are located within the APE.
The recorded segments of the MID Laterals 24.2 and 24.2-14-2 measure approximately 40-ft (north-south) by 805-ft (east-west) by 12-ft deep; and 40-ft (north-south) by 350-ft (east-west) by 12-ft deep, respectively. The laterals are situated at an elevation of approximately 260-ft amsl. The recorded sections of the canal are earthen in construction with moderately steep sloping sidewalls and an approximately 15-ft wide bed. The recorded segments retain their original alignments; however, contemporary irrigation features (i.e., water pumps, cinderblock housing, sluice gates, slide gates, concrete and steel weirs, culverts) are present within them. Dirt roads run along both sides of the canal. No diagnostic artifacts of any kind were noted within or around the canal.
A DPR site record update and original site records for the resource are available in Confidential Appendix B. The history of this canal is discussed below.
Madera Irrigation District and Madera Canal
In 1992, JRP Historical Consulting Services prepared a brief historic context of the Madera Canal.
Given the constraints of this project, ASM did not recreate a historic context for the Madera Canal.
Instead, the 1992 historic context has been excepted below:
The Madera Canal, or Friant-Madera Canal, is an operational part of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Central Valley Project, a huge system of dams and canals which irrigates much of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. The Madera Canal is a lesser component of the USBR Friant Division, which also includes Friant Dam and the Friant-Kern Canal.
4. Methods and Results
28 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
The Friant Division impounds the water of the San Joaquin River at Friant Dam, east of Fresno on the Fresno-Madera County line and delivers water to the two canals through outlets at either side of the dam. The much larger Friant-Kern Canal carries San Joaquin River water more than 160 miles south to the Bakersfield area. The Madera Canal carries water north into Madera County, a total distance of about 36 miles.
Like most other components of the Central Valley Project, the Madera Canal had its origin in local and state plans before being implemented by the federal government. The Madera Irrigation District, organized in 1914, began planning to build a dam on the San Joaquin River during the late 1920s. Various financial and water rights issues, however, delayed implementation of these plans, even though the district had acquired the dam site at Friant (Taylor 1967:51, 59). During the late 1920s and early 1930s, the State of California Division of Engineering and Irrigation conducted extensive studies which led to the State Water Plan, a massive, coordinated water development plan which became the basis for the Central Valley Project. Financial difficulties associated with the Great Depression halted bond sales by the state, leading to state-federal agreements to authorize the major components of the State Water Plan as the federal Central Valley Project. The initial federal authorizations for the CVP were passed by Congress in 1935. Construction began in 1937 on Shasta Dam, the linchpin of the system. The bulk of the CVP, however, was not completed until after World War 11 (California State Chamber of Commerce 1943).
The Friant Division was authorized by Congress in 1936 and construction of Friant Dam began in November 1939. Construction was initiated on the two conveyance canals in 1940. The entire project was delayed, however, by American entry into World War 11, although construction did proceed at a diminished rate during the late years of the war. The dam was completed in 1944. Construction on the two canals proceeded more slowly. Some test diversions were made into the Madera Canal in 1944 but the full canal was not completed for several more years. The canal was marginally operational during the late 1940s, in part because laterals has not been constructed and in part because local and federal officials could not agree on how to implement the acreage limitations imposed by federal reclamation law. The canal reached Its capacity around 1950. The Madera Canal is strictly a bulk delivery canal; all distribution through laterals is handled by irrigation district canals [Mikesell 1992:32-33].
Of the major canals of the CVP system, the largest is the Friant-Kern Canal and the Delta-Mendota Canal. In comparison to those two canals, the Madera is shorter and smaller than the other two canals (Mikesell 1992:35). However, Mikesell noted it uniqueness in its departure from earlier irrigation works, which were much smaller endeavors (Mikesell 1992). The Madera Canal also provided a consistent supply of water that laid the foundation for population and agricultural growth. Laterals 24.2 and 24.2-14.2 convey water from the Madera Canal.
Construction of Lateral 24.2
MID constructed Lateral 24.2 from the Madera Canal based on Reclamation design and drawings in 1953 (United States Bureau of Reclamation 1953, Figure 5). Riverview Drive, adjacent to the south side of Lateral 24.2 in this location, was constructed about 1990 concurrent with the
4. Methods and Results
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 29
residential development to the south, which terminated at Westberry Boulevard in 1998; the street was extended to its current terminus west of Caitlan Drive by the mid-2000s, as the land west of Westberry Boulevard was developed (historicaerials.com, 1981, 1998, 2005). No alteration to Lateral 24.2 is evident as a result of Riverview Drive’s construction, and the current alignment segment of Lateral 24.2 within the APE appears to be original. It is not clear when the chain link fencing on either side of the lateral channel was installed.
At the southwest corner of the APE, a paved path provides access to the Fresno River Trail from Riverview Drive just west of Westberry Boulevard. Built about 2000, this path crosses Lateral
24.2 at a siphon turnout, and its construction resulted in no alteration to Lateral 24.2.
Construction of Lateral 24.2-14.2
MID built Lateral 24.2-14.2 in 1960, also from Reclamation designs and drawings (United States Bureau of Reclamation 1960; Figure 6). Hampton Drive, adjacent to the north side of Lateral 24.2-
14.2 in this location, was constructed about 2005, concurrent with the residential development on its north side. No alteration to Lateral 24.2-14.2 is evident as a result of the road’s construction, and the current alignment segment of Lateral 24.2-14.2 within the APE appears to be original.
4. Methods and Results
30 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
Figure 3. Overview of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, looking north.
Figure 4. Overview of the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, showing surrounding development, looking north-northeast.
4. Methods and Results
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 31 Figure 5. Drawing of Lateral 24.2 between Stations 790 and 795, on the south side of the Fresno River channel, United States Bureau of Reclamation 1953. 32 4. Methods and Results
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Figure 6. Drawing of Lateral 24.2-14.2 between Stations 3500 and 4000, United States Bureau of Reclamation, 1960.
5. Summary and Recommendations
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 33
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
An intensive Class III inventory/Phase I cultural resources survey was conducted for the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project, Madera County, California. A records search of site files and maps was conducted at the SSJVIC and a search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File was completed. No Native American sacred sites or cultural landscapes had been identified within or immediately adjacent to the study APE. One linear resource (P-20-002308) consisting of segments of MID Laterals 24.2 and 24.2-14.2 had been recorded within the APE. Other segments of this resource were first recorded in 1992 by JRP Historical Consulting Services and, subsequently, an additional 12 times by a variety of consultants.
The survey fieldwork of the APE was conducted in February 2023 with parallel transects spaced at approximately 15-m intervals walked across the APE. Two segments (Lateral 24.2 and Lateral
24.2-14.2) of built environment resource P-20-002308 were identified within the APE. No other cultural resources were identified within the APE.
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
Evaluation of Eligibility for Lateral 24.2
In 2018 consultation correspondence related to a City of Madera sewer crossing project, State Historic Preservation Officer Julianne Polanco commented to the Reclamation that Madera Canal Lateral 24.2 is one of three primary laterals built in the 1950s by Reclamation to divert water from the Madera Canal, and that it is eligible for listing in the NRHP as a contributor to the Madera Canal, which itself is a contributor to the CVP; however the three laterals are not individually eligible (Julianne Polanco to Anastasia T. Leigh, January 17, 2018 regarding Project #17-SCAO232.001).
Routine maintenance of Lateral 24.2 in the APE has resulted in alterations to the materials and workmanship of the earth-lined channel, however it retains a trapezoidal shape, and design and dimensions similar to those shown in the 1953 construction drawings. The lateral’s location within the APE does not appear to have changed, but Lateral 24.2’s setting and feeling has been diminished by changes in the surrounding area from primarily agricultural use with a low density of housing to suburban development, including the construction of the paved walking/bike Fresno River Trail that crosses it. However, the lateral retains high integrity of association with water conveyance systems and irrigation districts, and their importance to patterns of development in this region. Overall, it retains sufficient integrity for NRHP/CRHR eligibility at the local level under Criteria A/1 and C/3 as a contributor to the Madera Canal, which is itself eligible as a contributor to the CVP.
Evaluation of Eligibility for Lateral 24.2-14.2
As noted above, Lateral 24.2 has been determined NRHP/CRHR eligible at the local level as a contributor to the eligible Madera Canal, as a contributor to the CVP. Routine maintenance of Lateral 24.2-14.2 in the APE has resulted in alterations to the materials and workmanship of the
4. Methods and Results
34 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
earth-lined channel, however its trapezoidal shape, design and dimensions are similar to those shown in the 1960 construction drawings. Similar to Lateral 24.2, it appears to be in its original location, but mid-2000s development has resulted in its former agricultural setting becoming residential. Despite these changes to its setting, Lateral 24.2-14.2 retains its function as part of a water conveyance system. As noted in a 2000 Caltrans evaluation of Lateral 32.2, the Madera Canal is a “bulk conveyance system,” from which laterals along its route are used by irrigation districts to supply water for farming (Karana Hattersley-Drayton, Caltrans, DPR 523B BSO Supplement for P-20-002308, December 12, 2000). As such, Lateral 24.2-14.2 retains sufficient integrity for NRHP/CRHR eligibility at the local level under Criteria A/1 and C/3 as a contributor to the Madera Canal, which is itself eligible as a contributor to the CVP.
Findings
Lateral 24.2 and 24.2-14.2 will be diverted to a new culvert to pass under the proposed Westberry Bridge; the culvert for Lateral 24.2 will be approximately 140-ft in length, and the culvert for Lateral 24.2-14.2 will be approximately 200-ft in length. The proposed Project will result in some physical effects to the Madera Canal, limited to the two small sections where the laterals will be diverted underground. Specific physical effects consist of the loss of original form and location by diverting these segments underground.
The physical effects (described above) of the proposed Project will not result in adverse effects to the character-defining features (CDFs) of the Madera Canal. The proposed Project will not adversely affect the CDFs of the Madera Canal. The Project will result in some loss of the form and location of 340-ft of the canal’s laterals. However, these alterations will only directly affect small portions of the large linear resource, and small portions of the Madera Canal’s overall CDFs.
Upon completion of the Project, the laterals will continue to irrigate Madera and the Central Valley agriculture lands and continue their historic function. As such, the Project would not result in loss of eligibility for the resource as a whole. Therefore, the modification to these segments of Lateral
24.2 and Lateral 24.2-14.2 will not result in a significant adverse effect to historic resources.
In the unlikely event that previously unknown cultural resources are identified during the development or use of the APE, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist must be notified to evaluate the discovery and implement appropriate evaluation and/or protection measures.
References
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 35
REFERENCES
Anderson, Katherine
2016 Department of Parks and Recreation Forms: MID Lateral 6.2 Segments. Primary P20-002308. Trinomial CA-MAD-2649H. Recorded by ESA on December 20.
Applied Earthwork
2006 Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation on the Sumner Peck Ranch for the Tesora Viejo Project, Madera County, California. Prepared for Tesora Viejo, Inc. May.
Army Corps of Engineers, Sacrament District
2017 “Hidden Dam – Hensley Lake Project Master Plan Fact Sheet,” published online by the Army Corps of Engineers:
https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/Lake_Projects/Hensley/Hensle y_Public_Input_Form.pdf?ver=2017-07-05-183434-983, accessed February 23, 2023.
Boyd, W.H.
1997 Lower Kern River Country 1850-1950: Wilderness to Empire. Kings River Press, Lemoore.
Brady, Jon L., and C. Kristina Roper
2011 A Cultural Resources Survey for the Fresno Irrigation District’s Briggs Canal Improvement Project, Malaga, Fresno County, California. Prepared for Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group.
California State Chamber of Commerce, Research Department 1943 "California's Central Valley Project," Sacramento: September 1943.
Caltrans
1999 General Guidelines for Identifying and Evaluating Historic Landscapes. Sacramento:
Caltrans.
2000 Water Conveyance Systems in California: Historic Context Development and Evaluation Procedures. Sacramento: Caltrans.
2007 A Historical Context and Archaeological Research Design for Agricultural Properties in California. Sacramento: Caltrans.
2008 A Historical Context and Archaeological Research Design for Mining Properties in California. Sacramento: Caltrans.
City of Fresno
n.d. History of Fresno. Electronic document: https://www.fresno.gov/darm/historicpreservation/history-of-fresno/. Accessed February 23, 2023.
References
36 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
City of Madera
n.d. History of Madera. Electronic document: https://www.madera.gov/home/ourcommunity/welcome-to-madera/. Accessed February 23, 2023.
Cook, S. F.
1978 Historical Demography. In California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 91-98. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.
Crider, J.
2020 100 Years of Madera Irrigation District. Madera, CA.
Driver, H. E.
1937 Cultural Element Distributions: VI, Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53-154. Berkeley.
Elsasser, A.
1962 Indians of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. Three Rivers: Sequoia Natural History Association.
Fenenga, F.
1952 The Archaeology of the Slick Rock Village, Tulare County, California. American Antiquity 17:339-347.
Fenenga, G.
1993 Test Excavations at the Witt Site (CA-KIN-32). In W.J. Wallace and F.A. Riddell, editors, pp. 25-38, Finding the Evidence: The Quest for Tulare Lake’s Archaeological Past. Contributions to Tulare Lake Archaeology II. Redondo Beach, Tulare Lake Archaeological Research Group.
Fredrickson, D.A. and J. Grossman
1977 A San Dieguito component at Buena Vista Lake, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:173-190.
Fresno Valves
2022 “Our Story.” Available at https://www.fresnovalves.com/about/our-story/. Accessed June 15th, 2022.
Gayton, A. H.
1930 Yokuts-Mono Chiefs and Shamans. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 24:361-420. Berkeley
1948 Yokuts and Western Mono Ethnography. University of California Anthropological Records 10:1–290. Berkeley.
References
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 37
Gifford, E. W., and W. E. Schenck
1926 Archaeology of the Southern San Joaquin Valley. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 23(1):1-122.
Harrington, John Peabody
n.d. Yokuts ethnographic notes. National Anthropological Archives, Washington, D.C.
Hattersley-Drayton, Karana (Caltrans)
2000 DPR 523B BSO Supplement for P-20-002308, December 12.
Hewes, G.
1941 Archaeological reconnaissance of the central San Joaquin Valley. American Antiquity 7:123-133.
historicaerials.com
Madera, California, aerial images: 1946, 1957, 1962, 1981, 1998, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2012.
Horne, S.P.
1981 The Inland Chumash: Ethnography, Ethnohistory and Archaeology. Ph.D. dissertation, UCSB. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
Jones, T. L., G. M. Brown, L. M. Raab, J. L. McVickar, W. G. Spaulding. D. J. Kennett, A. York, and P. L. Walker
1999 Demographic Crisis in Western North America during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology 40:137-170.
JRP Historical Consulting
2009 North Kern Water Storage District, Lateral Canal 8-1: Inventory and Evaluations, Kern County, California. Prepared for North Kern Water Storage District.
King, C., C. Smith and T. King
n.d. Archaeological Report Related to the Interpretation of Archaeological Resources Present at the Vasquez Rocks County Park. Report on file, UCLA AIC.
Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78.
Washington, D.C.
Latta, F. F.
1977 Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz.
Crider, J.
2020 100 Years of Madera Irrigation District. Madera Irrigation District.
Madera Irrigation District
1952 Drawing 214-223-214. Revised October 3.
References
38 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
Meyer, J, D. Craig Young, and Jeffrey S. Rosenthal
2010 Volume I: A Geoarchaeological Overview and Assessment of Caltrans Districts 6 and
9. Submitted to California Department of Transportation.
Mikesell, Stephen
1992 Historic Resource Evaluation Report: Perrin Ditch and Madera Canal. JRP Historical Consulting Services. Provided by the Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center.
Moratto, M
1984 California Archaeology. New York: Academic Press.
Morgan, W.A.
1914 History of Kern County, California with Biographical Sketches. Los Angeles: Historic Record Company.
National Park Service
2004 A History of Japanese Americans in California: Kawasaki Labor Camp. Electronic document, https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/5views/5views4h46.htm.
Accessed: June 25th, 2022.
National Register of Historic Places
1997 How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, National Register Bulletin 15, National Park Service, revised 1997.
Pacific Legacy, Inc.
2006 Southern San Joaquin Valley Oil Fields Comprehensive Study. Manuscript on file, BLM Bakersfield office.
Polanco, Julianne, California State Historic Preservation Officer 2018 Section 106 Consultation letter to Anastasia T. Leigh, January 17, 2018 regarding Project #17-SCAO-232.001.
Powers, Stephen
1971 The Yokuts Dance for the Dead. In The California Indians: A Source Book (second edition), edited by R. F. Heizer and M. A. Whipple, pp. 513-519. University of California Press, Berkeley (original 1877).
1976 Tribes of California. Berkeley, University of California Press (original 1877).
Preston, William L.
1981 Vanishing Landscapes: Land and Life in the Tulare Lake Basin. Berkeley, University of California Press.
Provost and Pritchard Consulting Group
References
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 39
2017 City of Madera, 2015 Urban Water Management Plan Update, 2017:10, 134, published online by City of Madera: https://www.madera.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2017/03/2015-Madera-UWMP-Draft-1.pdf, accessed February 28, 2023.
Schiffman, R. A., and A. P. Garfinkel
1981 Prehistory of Kern County: An Overview. Bakersfield College Publications in Archaeology No. 1.
Schoenherr, A.A.
1992 A Natural History of California. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Siefkin, Nelson
1999 Archaeology of the Redfeldt Mound (CA-KIN-66), Tulare Basin, California. Master’s thesis, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, California State University, Bakersfield.
Sutton, M.Q.
1988a An Introduction to the Archaeology of the Western Mojave Desert, California. Archives of California Prehistory, No. 14. Salinas: Coyote Press. 1988b On the Late Prehistory of the Western Mojave Desert. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):22-29.
Taylor, Gary C.
1967 "Economic Planning of Water Supply Systems," Berkeley, Giannini Foundation Research Report No. 291, May 1967, 51, 59.
United States Bureau of Reclamation,
1993 “Madera Distribution System, Lateral No. 24, Sta. 756 to Sta. 805,” Alinement [sic], Profile, and Section drawings, August 15.
1960 “Madera Distribution System, Lateral No. 24.2-14.2, Sta. 28+BG72 to 65+BG63,” Plan and Profile drawings, September 14.
W & S Consultants
1994 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance at CA- LAN-2133, - 2233, -2234, -2235, -2236, -2240, -2241 and -2242, Los Angeles County, California.
Manuscript on file, CSUF AIC.
1999 Class III Inventory/Limited Archaeological Testing Program for the Ducor Telephone Project, Kennedy Meadows, Tulare County, California. Manuscript on file, CSUB AIC.
2004 Class II Inventory of the Carrizo Plain National Monument, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report on file, BLM Bakersfield office.
2006 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance for the Tejon Mountain Village Project, Kern County, California. Report on file, Tejon Ranch Company.
References
40 Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project
Wedel, W.
1941 Archaeological Investigations at Buena Vista Lake, Kern County, California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 130.
Whitley, D.S.
1992 Shamanism and Rock Art in Far Western North America. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2(1):89-113.
2000 The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of California. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Whitley, D.S. and M.P. Beaudry
1991 Chiefs on the Coast: The Development of Complex Society in the Tiquisate Region in Ethnographic Perspective. The Development of Complex Civilizations in Southeastern Mesoamerica, W. Fowler, ed., pp. 101-120. Orlando: CRC Press.
Whitley, D.S., G. Gumerman IV, J. Simon and E. Rose
1988 The Late Prehistoric Period in the Coso Range and Environs. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):2-10.
Whitley, David S., Joseph M. Simon and Johannes H.N. Loubser 2007 The Carrizo Collapse: Art and Politics in the Past. In Collected Papers in Honor of the Achievements of Archaeologist Jay von Werlhof, edited by Russell L. Kaldenberg, pp. 199-208. Maturango Museum Press No. 20. Ridgecrest, California.
Appendices
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project 41
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDICES
Appendices
Westberry Bridge Project
November 2023 D-1
Appendix D: Aquatic Resources Delineation
Prepared by: Kira McCall, Environmental Specialist
PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP | 1800 30TH STREET STE 280, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 PHONE: 661-616-5900
EMAIL: [email protected]
AQUATIC RESOURCES
DELINEATION REPORT
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
MAY 2023
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 2
Executive Summary
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P) conducted a delineation of aquatic resources on August 26, 2022 for the Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project (Project) over the Fresno River in the northwest part of the City of Madera within Madera County, California. The Project proposes to build a new cast-in-place (CIP) 8 span bridge over Fresno River (River) which would connect the segments of Westberry Boulevard that are located north and south of the River. Project activities would have the potential to alter jurisdictional areas including the Fresno River. The entire Project Area is approximately 14.7 acres, comprised of the Fresno River, two Madera Irrigation District operated canals, and the Westberry Boulevard alignment around the Fresno River.
P&P environmental specialist, Kira McCall, examined the entire survey area for features exhibiting an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and/or wetland characteristics. Pertinent information about such features was recorded on Arid West Ephemeral and Intermittent Streams OHWM Datasheets and/or Arid West Wetland Determination Data Forms.
The survey was conducted in accordance with guidelines of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (United States Army Corps of Engineers 2008), A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (Lichvar and McColley 2008), State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Water Resources Control Board 2019), and the Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (United States Army Corps of Engineers: Sacramento District 2016).
Aquatic resources delineated on the site fell into a single category: Riverine. Aquatic resource boundaries mapped during P&P’s field investigation total approximately 1.06 acres. Areas outside the boundaries of the delineated aquatic features consist of riparian sandbar habitat, narrow irrigation canals, residential neighborhoods, and public walking paths.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 3
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 2 I. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Contact Information ......................................................................................................................................... 6 II. Location ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Driving Directions ............................................................................................................................................ 6 III. Regulatory Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 10 Waters of the United States ............................................................................................................................ 10 Court Decisions Affecting the Definitions of Waters of the United States ...................................................... 11 Pasqua Yaqui Tribe v. United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Army Corps of Engineers .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Executive Order 13990 Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis ........................................................................................................................................ 11 United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc. (Riverside) ..................................................................... 11 SWANCC Decision .................................................................................................................................... 11 Consolidated Carabell/Rapanos Decision .................................................................................................. 12 State of California Jurisdiction over Aquatic Features ................................................................................... 12 IV. Methods.................................................................................................................................................. 14 V. Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................................... 15 Landscape Settings ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Topography ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Climate ....................................................................................................................................................... 15 Watershed .................................................................................................................................................. 15 Soils ............................................................................................................................................................ 16 Project Site ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Riverine ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Riparian ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Upland Areas .............................................................................................................................................. 18 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Fresno River ............................................................................................................................................... 18 Lateral 24.2-14.2 ........................................................................................................................................ 18 Lateral 24.2 ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 VI. References .............................................................................................................................................. 20 City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 4
List of Figures
Figure 1. Regional Location Map ......................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2. Topographic Quadrangle Map .............................................................................................................. 8 Figure 3. Project Area Map ................................................................................................................................... 9 List of Tables
Table 1. Wetland Indicator Plant Species Status Ratings ................................................................................... 14 Table 2. List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties ........................................................................ 16 Table 3. Aquatic Resources Within the Project Area .......................................................................................... 18 List of Appendices
Appendix A. Aquatic Resources Delineation Maps
Appendix B. Photographs
Appendix C. OHWM Data Sheets
Appendix D. NRCS Soils Report
Appendix E. Vascular Plant List
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 5
I. Introduction
Provost & Pritchard environmental specialist, Kira McCall, conducted a delineation of potential waters of the Unites States within the proposed Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project (Project) area. The entire Project Area, which is approximately 14.7 acres, was evaluated for aquatic features (See Figure 3 for the Project Area map).
The Project includes construction of a new vehicular and pedestrian bridge along the Westberry Boulevard Alignment. This bridge would cross the Fresno River (River) in the central portion of the City of Madera in order to improve traffic circulation and to avoid future congestion on existing upstream bridges at Granada Drive and Schnoor Avenue. The bridge would also cross the two canals bordering each side of the River, which are owned and operated by Madera Irrigation District (MID). The north canal is identified as Lateral 24.2-14.2 and the south canal as Lateral 24.2.
The bridge crossing structure would consist of an 8-span cast-in-place prestressed concrete flat slab bridge supported on seat type abutments with 42-inch diameter cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles at the abutments and 36-inch diameter CIDH piles at the piers. The bridge would measure approximately 408 feet long by approximately 92 feet wide and would accommodate two 11-foot traveled ways in each direction, one 14-footwide center median, two 6-foot shoulder/bike lanes, two 9-foot sidewalks, and two 1-foot concrete barriers with tubular hand railing along each side of the bridge deck. The structure would consist of a 10-span cast-inplace reinforced concrete flat slab bridge supported on seat type abutments and 36-inch diameter cast-in-steelshell or cast-in-drilled-hole piles at the abutments and piers.
In addition, an existing trail that runs east-west along the top of the southern bank of the Fresno River would be rerouted to cross under the proposed bridge. The trail would be 12-foot wide and require retaining walls along the riverbank slopes. It would consist of a 6-inch thick reinforced concrete pavement on top of a 6-inch thick layer of Class II aggregate base. The new segment of this undercrossing would connect to the original walkway on both sides of the southern bank of the Fresno River.
On August 26, 2022, the dry channel of the Fresno River and Lateral 24.2-14.2 canal to the north of the River were delineated, as illustrated in Figure 3. The delineation of the fenced in Lateral 24.2 canal to the south was conducted on February 10, 2023, when P&P obtained access to this area. The purpose of the delineation was to evaluate the site for potential waters of the United States and delineate potential jurisdictional boundaries of these features. This report facilitates efforts to: 1) avoid or minimize impacts to aquatic resources during the design process, 2) document aquatic resource boundary determinations for review by regulatory authorities, and 3) provide background information. Ultimately, this aquatic resources delineation would be used in determining the extent of waters of the United States within the Project Area.
Waters of the United States include drainage channels, or tributary waters, their impoundments, and wetlands (Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1990). Tributary waters include incised channels that connect to other jurisdictional waters. Such channels may carry a permanent, intermittent, or ephemeral flow of water.
Jurisdictional wetlands are those wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters. Such wetlands are characterized by the presence of wetland hydrology (i.e., surface inundation or saturated soils), hydric soils (i.e., soils which have developed under the anaerobic conditions imposed by soil saturation), and hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., an association of plants adapted to saturated soils).
The Department of the Army, acting through the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), is authorized to issue permits for the filling, grading, or excavation of waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), including isolated wetlands and tributaries. This determination was established by the recently interpreted decision in the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) and Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision).
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 6
Contact Information
Project Applicant: City of Madera
Contact: Steve Bettencourt
Phone: (559) 661-5428
Email: [email protected]
Property Owner: Madera Irrigation District
Contact: Darren Garcia
Phone: (559) 673-3514
Email: [email protected]
II. Location
The Project is located within the northwest portion in the City of Madera in Madera County, California, northwest of the City of Fresno (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). This area lies within the San Joaquin Valley, which has a relatively flat topography. Elevation at the Project site ranges from approximately 245 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) in the bed of the river to approximately 260 feet NGVD at the top of its banks. The surrounding area contains residential neighborhoods. As illustrated in Figure 2, the Project is located within the Madera USGS Topographic Quadrangle, Township 11S, Range 17E, Sections 15 and 22.
Driving Directions
The Project is accessible starting from California State Route 99. To access the southernmost point of the site, take California State Route 99 North towards Sacramento and take exit 154 towards 4th Street. Turn left onto 4th street and then turn right onto Sunset Avenue. Stay on Sunset Avenue for 1.9 miles and then turn right onto north Westberry Boulevard. Stay on north Westberry Boulevard for 0.6 miles where you would then reach the southernmost point of the Project Area. To reach the Fresno River from north Westberry Boulevard turn left onto Riverview Drive for 0.14 miles and there is a break in the fence to access the Fresno River.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 7
Figure 1. Regional Location Map
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 8
Figure 2. Topographic Quadrangle Map
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 9
Figure 3. Project Area Map
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 10
III. Regulatory Definitions
Waters of the United States
The definition of waters of the United States often changes from one presidential administration to the next and jurisdictional limits of these waters have been disputed in federal court cases, altering the definition further.
All activities that involve the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United States are subject to the regulatory requirements of the USACE under the authority of Section 404 of the CWA. The extent of jurisdiction is deteremined by the “ordinary high-water mark” on opposing channel bank and has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations.
The Pre-2015 Regulatory Definition and Practice of waters of the United States 40 CFR 120.2:
• (a)(1) Traditional Navigable Waters - all waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
• (a)(1) Territorial Seas
• (a)(1) Interstate Waters - waters including lakes, streams, or wetlands that cross or form part of state boundaries;
• (a)(2) Impoundments - impounded waters created in or from “waters of the United States;” • (a)(3) Tributaries - waters that ultimately flow into traditional navigable waters, territorial seas, interstate waters or (a)(2) impoundments. Tributaries are jurisdictional if they meet either the relatively permanent standard or significant nexus standard;
• (a)(4) Adjacent Wetlands - wetlands adjacent to (a)(1) waters; wetlands adjacent to and with a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent (a)(2) impoundments or relatively permanent jurisdictional tributaries; or wetlands adjacent to (a)(2) impoundments or jurisdictional tributaries when the wetlands meet the significant nexus standard;
• (a)(5) All other waters such as intrastate lakes and ponds, streams or wetlands not defined in (a)(1) - (a)(4) above that meet either the relatively permanent standard or the significant nexus standard.
Familiar and longstanding exclusions have been consolidated under the new rule, which excludes from jurisdiction any feature that satisfies the following terms:
• Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons; • Prior converted cropland;
• Ditches excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;
• Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if irrigation ceased; • Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land for the use of stock watering, irrigation, settling basins or rice growing;
• Artificial reflecting or swimming pools;
• Waterfilled depressions created in dry land;
• Swales and erosional features (ex. gullies and small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow;
For the purposes of the CWA, the final authority regarding jurisdiction remains with the USEPA and USACE.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 11
Court Decisions Affecting the Definitions of Waters of the United States
The reach and extent of CWA jurisdiction over aquatic features has been the subject of several United States Supreme Court decisions in: United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes (Riverside), Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), and Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision). In general, these decisions address the jurisdictional status of aquatic features that are not hydrologically connected to navigable waters or their tributaries or have such an insubstantial hydrologic connection that destruction or modification of the aquatic feature would have little effect on downstream waters of the United States.
Pasqua Yaqui Tribe v. United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Army Corps of Engineers
On August 30, 2021 the United States District Court of the District of Arizona found “fundamental, substantive flaws that cannot be cured without revising or replacing the NWPR’s definition” and accordingly remanded and vacated the 2020 Navigable Waters Protection Rule.
Executive Order 13990 Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis
President Biden’s Executive Order 13990 on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis (Jan. 20, 2021) directed federal agencies to review regulations issued by the Trump administration, including the NWPR. On June 9, 2021, USEPA and the USACE announced their intention to revise the NWPR’s definition of WOTUS and restore the pre-2015 regulations, amended to be consistent with United States Supreme Court decisions. On November 18, 2021, the USEPA and USACE announced the signing of a proposed rule revising the definition of “waters of the United States” implementing the regulatory process announced in June 2021. The agencies propose to put back into place the pre-2015 definition of “waters of the United States,” updated to reflect consideration of Supreme Court decisions while the agencies continue to consult with states, Tribes, local governments, and a broad array of stakeholders in both the implementation of waters of the United States and future regulatory actions.
United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc. (Riverside) In Riverside (1985), the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that adjacent wetlands are “inseparably bound up” with the waters that they are adjacent to. Therefore, wetlands, including intrastate wetlands, adjacent to waters of the United States were, themselves, waters of the United States (80 Fed. Reg. 37076, 2015).
SWANCC Decision
In January of 2001, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (the SWANCC decision) that “non-navigable, isolated, intrastate” waters could not be claimed as jurisdictional by the USACE on the basis of their use by migratory birds.
Although the Court did not specifically address the meaning of the word “isolated,” it upheld the jurisdictional status of “adjacent” wetlands (and other waters), which are by definition wetlands that are “bordering, contiguous, or neighboring” other jurisdictional waters. Therefore, the term “isolated wetland” has implicitly been defined as “wetlands that are not bordering, contiguous, or neighboring” other jurisdictional waters. This definition does not, however, address the degree of proximity necessary to establish that one wetland (or other water) is “adjacent” to a known jurisdictional water. As established by the Supreme Court in their Riverside (1985) decision, “wetlands separated from other waters by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like are ‘adjacent wetlands.’”
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 12
Consolidated Carabell/Rapanos Decision
In June of 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the consolidated cases of June Carabell v. United States Army Corps of Engineers and John Rapanos v. United States that wetlands are waters of the United States “if the wetlands, either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as ‘navigable.’” When, in contrast, a wetland’s effects on water quality are speculative or insubstantial, they fall outside the zone fairly encompassed by the statutory term “navigable waters.” On June 5, 2007, the USEPA and the USACE jointly issued guidance in interpreting the Carabell/Rapanos cases as they apply to the extent of federal jurisdiction covered by Section 404 of the CWA. The agencies revised this guidance memorandum on December 2, 2008. The key points of this guidance are that the USEPA and the USACE: 1) will assert jurisdiction over traditional navigable waters, wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters, relatively permanent non-navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters where the tributaries typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months), and wetlands that directly abut such tributaries; 2) will decide jurisdiction over relatively impermanent non-navigable tributaries of navigable waters, wetlands adjacent to such tributaries, and wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting a relatively permanent non-navigable tributary, based on a fact-specific analysis to determine whether they have a “significant nexus” with a traditional navigable water; and 3) generally will not assert jurisdiction over swales or erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow) or ditches excavated wholly in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water. In applying the “significant nexus” standard, the USEPA and USACE will “assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by all wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical and biological integrity of downstream traditional navigable waters.” “Significant nexus” includes consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors.
The court rulings and subsequent guidance provided by the USEPA and USACE discussed above are germane to the delineation of jurisdictional waters summarized in this report. They are presently the basis for determining the jurisdictional status of drainage features and wetlands of the study area.
All activities that involve the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United States are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE. Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that result in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issues a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (or waiver of such certification) verifying that the proposed activity will meet state water quality standards.
State of California Jurisdiction over Aquatic Features
The State of California also asserts jurisdiction over drainages, wetlands, and other aquatic features. The limits of State jurisdiction differ from those of the USACE. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the RWQCB are the two state regulatory agencies responsible for implementing state regulations that identify and protect waters of the state.
According to Section 1602 of the CDFW Code, public and private entities may not substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake within the state. This section of the CDFW Code establishes the State’s interest in regulating construction activities in the “bed, channel, or bank” of a natural drainage or stream. A “stream” subject to the jurisdiction of the CDFW has been defined 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” (California Code of Regulations, Title 14).
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 13
Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and nine local RWQCBs have regulatory authority over activities affecting water quality in all surface waters of the State, consisting of rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands of the State.
Shortly after the United States Supreme Court rendered its SWANCC Decision, the SWRCB notified the Regional Boards that isolated waters, including wetlands, were subject to the jurisdiction of the State of California per provisions of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. The Regional Boards, therefore, now assert jurisdiction over isolated wetlands disclaimed as jurisdictional by the USACE.
The RWQCB for a given region regulates discharges of fill or pollutants into waters of the State through the issuance of various permits and orders. Discharges into waters of the State that are also waters of the United States require a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB as a prerequisite to obtaining certain federal permits, such as a Section 404 CWA permit. Discharges into all waters of the State, even those that are not also waters of the United States, require Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), or waivers of WDRs, from the RWQCB.
The RWQCB also administers the Construction Storm Water Program and the federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Projects that disturb one or more acres of soil must obtain a Construction General Permit under the Construction Storm Water Program. A prerequisite for this permit is the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer. Projects that discharge wastewater, storm water, or other pollutants into a water of the United States may require a NPDES permit.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 14
IV. Methods
The majority of the Project Area was surveyed on foot for aquatic resources on August 26, 2022. Fencing prohibited access to the south Lateral 24.2 canal at this time, but access was obtained for delineation of the south canal on February 10, 2023. The Project Area is approximately 14.7-acres. Prior to the field study, several online resources were consulted to assist in guiding the delineation, including the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetland Mapper (USFWS 2022), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Waters GeoViewer (USEPA 2022), and district maps for the Madera Irrigation District (Madera Irrigation District 2022). Aerial imagery and USGS topographic maps were also used to support the survey effort. The boundaries of potential jurisdictional waters were mapped with an EOS Arrow 100 sub-meter Global Positioning System (GPS) unit and an iPad with ArcGIS Collector application in the field.
The survey was conducted in accordance with guidelines of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (United States Army Corps of Engineers 2008), A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (Lichvar and McColley 2008), State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Water Resources Control Board 2019), and the Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (United States Army Corps of Engineers: Sacramento District 2016).
Plants observed during the survey were identified using Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora Project (eds.) 2023), CalFlora (CalFlora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation 2023), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Plants Database (United States Department of Agriculture 2023), and various field guides. Jepson nomenclature was used except where it conflicted with nomenclature in the National Wetland Plant List (NWPL) (United States Army Corps of Engineers 2020), which was given priority on the data sheets. The wetland indicator status of each species was obtained online from the NRCS Plants Database (United States Department of Agriculture 2023). A list of vascular plant species observed on the site was documented is provided in Appendix E.
Table 1 below describes the wetland indicator plant species designated according to their frequency of occurrence in wetlands.
Table 1. Wetland Indicator Plant Species Status Ratings Abbreviation Indicator Status % Occurrence in wetlands
OBL Obligate. Occur almost always under natural conditions in wetlands. >99
FACW Facultative Wetland. Usually occur in wetlands but occasionally found in non-wetlands. 67-99
FAC Facultative. Equally likely to occur in wetlands and nonwetlands. 33-67 FACU Facultative Upland. Usually occur in non-wetlands but occasionally found in wetlands. 1-33
UPL
Upland. Occur in wetlands in another region, but occur
almost always under natural conditions in non-wetlands in the region specified.
<1
The River, Lateral 24.2-14.2, and Lateral 24.2 within the Project Area were surveyed on foot and the channel and banks were visually inspected in order to document physical characteristics of OHWM. Because the entire Project Area is highly disturbed, a clear and defined OHWM was difficult to discern in most areas. Knickpoints on the banks, break in slope, visual change in vegetation on the banks, soil cracks, changes in sediment size and texture, and other hydrologic indicators were used to delineate the potential boundaries of USACE jurisdiction within the OHWM.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 15
The site was inspected for evidence of wetland hydrology, which can consist of primary indicators including, but not limited to, the presence of surface water, saturation, water marks, water-stained leaves, and the presence of a biotic crust. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology include, but are not limited to, drainage patterns, saturation observed on aerial imagery, and a dry season water table.
Three sampling locations were selected within the Project Area to document site conditions and assess vegetation, hydrology, and soils. Soil samples were taken with an auger at all three locations, and excavated soil was examined for low chromas, gleying, mottling, concretions, and sulfidic odors. Information involving soils, hydrology, OHWM, and vegetation was entered onto USACE’s standard Ordinary High Water Mark Delineation Datasheet (Appendix C).
Two aquatic features were identified and delineated during the survey: the Fresno River and Lateral 24.2-14.2 north of the River. A third aquatic feature, Lateral 24.2 running parallel to the south side of the River, was identified as a potential aquatic resource, but fencing prohibited access.
V. Existing Conditions
Landscape Settings
Topography
The Project Area is located in Madera County within the San Joaquin Valley, northwest of the City of Fresno, California. This area lies within the San Joaquin Valley and is bordered by the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range to the east. The Project Area is found within the channel of the Fresno River and the topography is relatively flat with elevations averaging approximately 75 feet above mean sea level.
Climate
Like most of California, the Project Area experiences a Mediterranean climate. Warm, dry summers are followed by cool, moist winters. Summer maximum temperatures range between 90 and 100 degrees Fahrenheit (˚F), and minimum temperatures fall to 60 ˚F on average. Winter maximum temperatures are between 55 ˚F and 70 ˚F, and minimum temperatures fall to an average of 40˚F. The normal annual precipitation is approximately
10.5 inches, falling mainly from November to April (National Weather Service 2022).
Watershed
The Project Area lies within two watersheds, Middle Fresno River; Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 1804000703, and Root Creek-San Joaquin River; HUC: 1804000108. The Project Area lies within two subwatersheds, Schmidt Creek-Fresno River; HUC: 180400070304, and Columbia well; HUC: 180400010805. The Middle Fresno River watershed and Root Creek-San Joaquin River watershed are both comprised of stormwater or snowmelt collected in upland areas which flows down into Rancheria Creek, China Creek, Miami Creek, Carter Creek, Peterson Creek, Crooks Creek, Spangle Gold Creek, Coarse Gold Creek, and Ashbrook Creek, which all flow into the Fresno River. The Fresno River then flows through Hensley Lake. Once the Fresno River flows out of Hensley Lake, it flows through the City of Madera and terminates into the San Joaquin River. The San Joaquin River terminates at the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA 2022).
Photographs of the Project Area are available in Appendix B.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 16
Soils
Three soil mapping units representing two soil types were identified within the Project Area using the online Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey mapping service, and they are listed in Table
2. The soils are displayed with their core properties in the table below, according to the Major Land Resource Area of California (MLRA) 19 map area. While riverwash, found within the channel of the Fresno River, is listed in the table as a soil type, NRCS considers it a “miscellaneous area” with essentially no identifiable soil, which results from active erosion or human activities (Soil Sciences Division Staff 2017). The Grangeville and Pachappa soils are found within the Project Area outside of the River, are primarily used for row crops and irrigated pasture.
Table 2. List of Soils Located Onsite and Their Basic Properties Soil Soil Map
Unit
Percent of
Project
Area
Hydric
Unit
Hydric
Minor
Units
Drainage Permeability Runoff
Grangeville
Fine sandy
loam, 0 to 1
percent slopes
38.2% Yes Yes
Somewhat
poorly
drained
Rapid
permeability
Very low
runoff
Fine sandy
loam, slightly
saline alkali, 0
to 1 percent
slopes
25.1% Yes Yes
Somewhat
poorly
drained
Moderate
permeability
Very low
runoff
Pachappa
Fine sandy
loam, slightly
saline-alkali, 0
to 1 percent
slopes
1.1% No No Well drained Moderate
permeability Low runoff
Riverwash - 35.6% Yes -
Excessively
drained -
Very low
runoff
Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions such that under sufficiently wet conditions, hydrophytic vegetation can be supported. Three of the four major soil components of the Project Area were identified as hydric. Three of the ten minor components were identified as hydric (United States Department of Agriculture 2023).
The complete NRCS Web Soil Survey report is available in Appendix D.
Project Site
The approximate 14.7-acre Project Area is comprised of a section of the Fresno River and two man-made, natural bottom irrigation channels. The Lateral 24.2-14.2 north canal is separated from the riparian area by a vegetated sandbar, and the Lateral 24.2 south canal is separated from the riparian area by a paved walking path (See Figure 3. for details). The River and north canal were dry during the first survey. During the second survey and delineation of the south canal, water was present and flowing. Details for each of the components of the Project Area are described below.
Riverine
Fresno River
The riverine habitat includes an approximate 1.06-acre section of the Fresno River. The River was dry at the time of the delineation and showed signs of heavy disturbance from vehicles, human disturbance, and excavation. The River can be characterized as having a bed and a bank, with the bed primarily composed of City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 17
coarse sand. The majority of the channel was devoid of vegetation, except for two islands within the channel which were densely vegetated with herbs, short shrubs/saplings, and reeds. Narrowleaf willow (Salix exigua, FACW) and giant reed (Arundo donax, FACW) were identified along the fringes of the sandy riverbed, but vegetation within the delineated boundaries of the River was essentially absent. Knickpoints, scouring, soil cracks, and a moderate break in slope indicated the location of the OHWM of the River. Below the OHWM were exposed root hairs, and drift and silt deposits along a distinct line were used to determine the location of the OHWM.
The islands within the River channel had almost complete vegetation coverage dominated by narrowleaf willow, giant reed, mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia, FAC), common goldenthistle (Scolymus hispanicus, No Indicator), Common cocklebur (Xanthium orientale, FAC), American licorice (Glycyrrhiza lepidota, FAC), brownplume wirelettuce (Stephanomeria pauciflora, No Indicator), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus, FACU), and telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora, No Indicator). Despite the heavy disturbance within the channel, the stark change in vegetation coverage, soil sloughing, and geomorphic position of the upland islands guided the delineation of the OHWM within the channel.
Lateral 24.2-14.2
The Lateral 24.2-14.2 canal to the north of the River is classified as riverine in the National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2022). The canal contains steep 50- to 60-degree slopes, and the bottom third of the canal is almost entirely vegetated. The canal is dominated by rat's-tail fescue (Vulpia myuros, FACU), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisifolia, FACU), and great brome (Bromus diandrus, UPL). Other species identified were dove weed (Croton setigerus, No Indicator), telegraph weed, foxtail (Hordeum murinum, FACU), and black mustard (Brassica nigra, UPL). The OHWM is discerned by visible line in the dirt slopes and a slight break in slope. Soil texture became finer towards the top of the canal banks. The National Wetlands Inventory and the MID district maps (Madera Irrigation District 2023) show this waterbody terminating in an agricultural field west of the Project Area and having no connection to the Fresno River. However, the EPA online database shows a connection with the Fresno River via a stream through an orchard. This is likely a mistake, as aerial imagery shows no inlet or outlet which would connect the canal to the River.
Lateral 24.2
Lateral 24.2 canal to the south of the River is also classified as riverine in the National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2022). The canal contains steep slopes and was nearly bare, having only sparse herbaceous vegetation.
Plant species above the OHWM included dwarf nettle (Urtica urens, No Indicator), seep monkeyflower (Mimulus guttatus, OBL), and California mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana, FAC). Species identified below the OHWM but above the water line were seep monkeyflower and great brome (Bromus diandrus, UPL). The OHWM is discerned by visible line in the dirt slopes and a slight break in slope. Soil texture became finer towards the top of the canal slopes. The National Wetlands Inventory and the MID district maps show this waterbody flowing east to west, parallel to the Fresno River, and then connects to Lateral 24.2-17.0 before spilling into the River.
Riparian
Riparian habitat directly adjacent to the River is sparsely vegetated sandbar riparian habitat. Vegetation coverage averaged at approximately 30 percent, compared to 2 to 3 percent within the streambed. While some facultativewetland plant species were established in this area (giant reed and narrowleaf willow), the banks of the river were dominated by non-indicator, facultative, facultative-upland, and upland species, including Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii, FACW), western sycamore (Platanus racemosa, FAC), telegraph weed, prairie sunflower (Helianthus petiolaris, No Indicator), sacred datura (Datura wrightii, UPL), and prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola, FAC). Indicators of wetland hydrology and wetland soils were also absent within the riparian habitat.
City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 18
Upland Areas
The upper banks and areas immediately beyond the top of the bank of the Fresno River consist of ruderal upland habitat that is mainly bare and has been highly disturbed by human activities and grading. The dominant plant species occurring in this habitat include great brome and coyote melon. There were no indicators of hydrology in this area.
Discussion
The potential USACE jurisdictional waters present within the Project Area included the Fresno River and Lateral 24.2-14.2. The linear and aerial extent of USACE’s potential jurisdiction is illustrated in the aquatic resource delineation map (Appendix A).
Table 3. Aquatic Resources Within the Project Area
Aquatic
Resource
Cowardin
Code
HGM Code
Area
(acres)
Water Type Coordinates Local Waterway
Fresno River R4SBJ* Riverine 1.06 Intermittent 36.966252, -120.101309 Fresno River
Lateral 24.2 R4SBCx** Riverine 0.26 Seasonally
Flooded
36.965460,
-120.101243 Fresno River
Lateral 24.2-
14.2 R5UBFx*** Riverine 0.07 Seasonally Flooded
36.967136,
-120.101102 Fresno River
*R4SBJ – Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed, Intermittently Flooded ** R4SBCx – Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed, Seasonally Flooded, Excavated *** R5UBFx – Riverine, Unknown Perennial, Streambed, Semi-permanently Flooded, Excavated Fresno River
Approximately 1.06 acres of the Fresno River were mapped within the Project Area (Appendix A). Two points within the streambed were chosen at opposite ends of the Project Area and evaluated for hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and indicators of an OHWM (See Appendix A for location of sampling points). A third sampling point was chosen along the north riparian bank of the River. The OHWM was nearly nonexistent within some sections of the Project Area, so secondary hydrologic indicators were used to delineate the boundaries of this aquatic resource. A moderate break in slope, changes in sediment size and texture, drift deposits, and changes in vegetation coverage were primarily used to identify the OHWM. Plant composition also delineated the OHWM throughout the channel. At the east wetland sampling, the channel was bare except for a some facultative-wetland species along the delineated OHWM. Shrubs and herbs were established prevalently directly above the OHWM. Other indicators identified at the east wetland sampling point include knickpoints and exposed root hairs at the OHWM. Conditions at the west wetland sampling were nearly identical to east, characterized by coarse sand within the streambed and loamy sand above the OHWM. Herbs and shrubs were once again growing directly above the OHWM and trees were established slightly set back on the banks.
Despite the lack of hydric soils, hydrologic indicators and hydrophytic vegetation are present within the River, as well as evidence of an OHWM. The River is also hydrologically connected to a known waters of the United States, flowing into the San Joaquin River before emptying into Suisun Bay. Therefore, it will likely be considered a water of the United States subject to regulation by the USACE, as well as the RWQCB. This section of the River within the Project Area is also characterized as having a defined bed and bank. Therefore, it would also likely be subject to the jurisdiction of the CDFW up to the top of bank or the edge of associated riparian vegetation, whichever is greater.
Lateral 24.2-14.2
A water line, soil cracks, changes in sediment size and texture, and changes in vegetation coverage and composition guided the delineation of the OHWM within the canal. However, the National Wetlands Inventory Mapper (USFWS 2022) and the MID District maps (Madera Irrigation District 2022) both indicate that the City of Madera
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project ARD Report
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 19
canal does not connect to the Fresno River downstream. Therefore, it is not a tributary to a waters of the United States. The canal itself is not a relocated tributary or excavated in a tributary. It is completely man-made.
Although the EPA database shows that the canal is connected to the River by a stream that crosses cropland, the connection is highly questionable and is likely a mistake. If there is no nexus, then the canal would not fall under state or federal jurisdiction and would not be subject to regulation.
Lateral 24.2
Although signs of an OHWM area apparent, the National Wetlands Inventory Mapper (USFWS 2022) shows this man-made canal flowing parallel to the Fresno River, but veers south and services farms and agricultural fields. A water line was visible and there was water present at the time of the survey, but a lack of a surface connection to a jurisdictional waterway would place this canal outside of the jurisdiction of USACE.
Summary
The Fresno River has a significant nexus to a known waters of the United States, the San Joaquin River. The River only flows seasonally when water is released from Hensley Lake. The OHWM was surveyed and identified from multiple field indicators including drift deposits, scouring, and exposed root hairs. Therefore, the Fresno River meets the regulatory definition of a waters of the United States under the jurisdiction of the USACE.
Indicators of an OHWM within Lateral 24.2-14.2 were observed, but hydrophytic vegetation was absent. In addition, the significant nexus to a known waters of the United States is absent, as the canal terminates into an agricultural field. The canal is man-made, excavated from and flows into uplands, and is not a rerouted tributary to a known waters of the United States. Flow data is not available to prove or disprove that water flows from the canal into the River, but the MID and EPA online maps show that this canal would not connect to a jurisdictional water. Without the significant nexus, the canal would not meet the regulatory definition of a waters of the Unities States.
The Madera Irrigation District online database shows that the south canal, Lateral 24.2, does flow into the Lateral 24.2-17.0 canal, which connects to the Fresno River downstream of the Project Area, placing it under the jurisdiction of state and federal agencies. Although it is an irrigation ditch, its connection to a jurisdictional water may indicate its inclusion as a waters of the United States. Indicators of an OHWM within Lateral 24.2 were observed such as parallel water marks and slight break of slope, but hydrophytic vegetation was absent.
Because of the potential to flow into the Fresno River, this canal may be considered jurisdictional.
The USACE has the sole authority to determine the jurisdictional status of waters on any given project site. If the USACE disclaims jurisdiction over the Fresno River or the two parallel irrigation canals, RWQCB under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the CDFW under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code may still take jurisdiction and regulate activities within the water bodies.
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 20
VI. References
Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, T. J. Rosatti, and D. H. Wilken, editors. 2012. vascular plants of California, second edition. . Berkeley: University of California Press.
CalFlora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation. 2023. The CalFlora Database. Accessed October 2022. Available: https://www.calflora.org/.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accessed November 2022.
Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2023. Jepson eFlora. June 16. Accessed November 2022. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.
Lichvar, R. W., and S.M. McColley. 2008. A field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Madera Irrigation District. 2023. District Maps. Accessed August 17, 2022. https://maderaid.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=12c622a78c6a403184620a043afd2da5.
National Weather Service. 2022. "National Weather Service, Past Weather." https://www.weather.gov/wrh/climate.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2019. "State Policy for Water Quality Control: State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State." https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/docs/2021/procedures.pdf.
United States Army Corps of Engineers and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USACE and. 2007a. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the United States Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. Accessed November 2001.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2020. National Wetland Plant List, Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regions (Version 3.4). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accessed November 2022. —. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delienation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). United States Army Corps of Engineers.
—. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region(Version 2.0). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accessed November 2021.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. n.d. 2007b. United States Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. Accessed November 2022.
United States Army Corps of Engineers: Sacramento District. 2016. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delienation Reports. Sacramento: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accessed November 2022.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2023. Custom Soil Resources Report. Accessed August 29, 2022. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. —. 2023. Natural Resources Conservation Services. Accessed November 2022. http://plants.usda.gov/.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed November 2022. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/index.html.
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 34
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix A. Aquatic
Resources Delineation
Maps
!(
!(
36.967°, -120.102°
36.964°, -120.101°
Lateral 24.2-14.2
Lateral 24.2
0 150 30075
Feet
º
Legend
!( Map Reference Point
Canals
Fresno River (1.80 ac surveyed)
Survey Area Boundary (14.66 ac)
Delineation of Wetlands
and Other Waters of the
U.S. for Cornerstone Structural
EngineeringWestberry Blvd Bridge
Coordinate System: NAD83 State Plane, Zone 3
Projection: Lambert Conformal
Datum: NAD 1983
1 inch = 150 feet
Created on 8/31/2022
Updated on 2/27/2023
Made in accordance with the
Updated Map and Drawing Standards
for the South Pacific Division Regulatory
Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by:
Philip Slater, GIS Specialist
455 W Fir Ave
Clovis. CA. 93611
Sampling Point Locations
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 35
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix B. Photographs
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-1
Photograph 1
View of the Fresno River
within the Project area from
the south bank facing northwest. In the foreground, evidence of tire tracks from frequent vehicular activity
within the channel.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 2
View of the Fresno River
within the Project area from
the north bank facing west.
Change in color and vegetation coverage distinguishes
the riparian areas from the
channel.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-2
Photograph 3
View of the Fresno River
within the Project area from
the north bank facing southeast. The two upland islands are visible within the riverbed.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 4
View of the Fresno River
within the Project area and
within the OHWM. The bed
is almost completely void of
vegetation and the sediment
texture is course sand.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-3
Photograph 5
View of the upland islands
within the River channel.
Visible in the photo running
from the bottom right towards the top left is a thin
braid of the River with evidence of a biotic crust.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 6
View of the north boundary
of the Fresno River. The
OHWM was essentially nonexistent for much of the jurisdictional boundary. However, secondary indicators of hydrology, distinctions in
sediment size and texture,
and percent of vegetation
coverage assisted in guiding
the delineation of the
OHWM.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-4
Photograph 7
View of a portion of the
northern delineated boundary of the Fresno River.
While the OHWM was not
always discernible, some
areas showed clear knickpoints and exposed root
hairs.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 8
View of the location of Sampling Point 1, shown in Attachment A of this document.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-5
Photograph 9
View of the location of Sampling Point 2, shown in Attachment A of this document.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 10
View of the location of Sampling Point 3, shown in Attachment A of this document.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-6
Photograph 11
View of the north canal
(Lateral 24.2-14.2) within
the Project area, facing east.
Photo taken August 2022
Photograph 12
Closer view of Lateral 24.2-
14.2 within the Project area.
Knickpoints are evident on
the steep slopes of the canal.
The right side of the pictures
seems to show that the canal
has been partly dug out.
Photo taken August 2022
Cornerstone Engineering
Westberry Boulevard Bridge Project Appendix B
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group B-7
Photograph 12
View of the south canal
(Lateral 24.2) within the
Project area, facing east.
Photo taken February 2023
Photograph 13
Closer view of Lateral 24.2
within the Project area. A
slight break in slope is observed at the OHWM.
Photo taken February 2023
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 36
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix C. OHWM Data
Sheets
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM ñ Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are ìNormal Circumstancesî present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ñ Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION ñ Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1
(Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1
(Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Westberry Blvd Bridge Project Madera, Madera County 8/26/22 Madera Irrigation District CA West Wetland
Kira McCall 22, 11S, 17E
Channel Flat 0
C 36.966783 -120.100892 WGS 84
Riverwash Riverine
✔
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
30 ft
15 Salix exigua 3 Yes FACW
Arundo donax 3 Yes FACW
Baccharis salicifolia 2 No FAC
5 5
Sample point was taken within the streambed. The area is experiencing a drought and the hydrology is controlled by a dam upstream.
92 2
2 100
0 0
6 12
2 6
0 0
0 0
8 18
2.25 ✔
✔
✔
Hydrophytic vegetation dominant.
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
West Wetland
0-12+ 2.5Y 5/4 100 Sand
Hydric soil indicators are absent.
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM ñ Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are ìNormal Circumstancesî present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ñ Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION ñ Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1
(Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1
(Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Westberry Blvd Bridge Project Madera, Madera County 8/26/22 Madera Irrigation District CA Upland
Kira McCall 22, 11S, 17E
Channel Flat 0
C 36.966973 -120.100912 WGS 84
Riverwash Riverine
✔
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
30 ft
Populus fremontii 6 Yes FACW
6 15
Salix exigua 2 No FACW
Arundo donax 7 Yes FACW
Baccharis salicifolia 2 No FAC
11 5
Hordeum murinum 5 Yes FACU
Xanthium strumarium 2 No FAC
Helianthus petiolaris 1 No NI
Lactuca serriola 1 No FAC
Bromus diandrus 12 Yes UPL
20 5
Sample point was taken within the streambed. The area is experiencing a drought and the hydrology is controlled by a dam upstream.
85 2
4 50
0 0
15 30
5 15
5 20
12 60
37 125
5.35 ✔
Hydrophytic vegetation is not dominant.
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Upland
0-3 2.5Y 4/2 100 Loamy Sand Loamy sand
3-12 2.5Y 4/3 100 Loamy Sand Loamy sand
Hydric soil indicators are absent.
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
No wetland hydrology indicators present
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM ñ Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are ìNormal Circumstancesî present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ñ Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
VEGETATION ñ Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Morphological Adaptations1
(Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1
(Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
6 Westberry Blvd Bridge Project Madera, Madera County 8/26/22 Madera Irrigation District CA East Wetland Point
Kira McCall 22, 11S, 17E
Channel Flat 0
C 36.966381 -120.102402 WGS 84
Riverwash Riverine
✔
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
30 ft
15 Salix exigua 3 Yes FACW
Arundo donax 3 Yes FACW
5 15
Sample point was taken within the streambed. The area is experiencing a drought and the hydrology is controlled by a dam upstream.
97 2
2 100
0 0
6 12
0 0
0 0
0 0
6 12
2 ✔
✔
✔
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West ñ Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1
Loc2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8) 3
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Hydric soil not present
Water was absent from the channel, but there were water marks and drift deposits indicating the location of the high water level.
East Wetland
0-12+ 2.5Y 5/4 100 Sand
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
OHWM Delineation Cover Sheet Page ____ of ____
Project: _____________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Location: ____________________________________ Investigator(s): ___________________________________ Project Description:
Describe the river or stream’s condition (disturbances, in-stream structures, etc.):
Off-site Information
Remotely sensed image(s) acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach image(s) to datasheet(s) and indicate approx. locations of transects, OHWM, and any other features of interest on the image(s); describe below] Description:
Hydrologic/hydraulic information acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach information to datasheet(s) and describe below.] Description:
List and describe any other supporting information received/acquired:
Instructions: Complete one cover sheet and one or more datasheets for each project site. Each datasheet should capture the dominant characteristics of the OHWM along some length of a given stream. Complete enough datasheets to adequately document up- and/or downstream variability in OHWM indicators, stream conditions, etc. Transect locations can be marked on a recent aerial image or their GPS coordinates noted on the datasheet.
Westberry Blvd Bridge Project
Madera, Madera County Kira McCall
Installation of a new bridge over Fresno River to connect the northern and southern segments of Westberry Blvd.
X
X
1 2
Manmade, natural bottom canal owned by Madera Irrigation District, evidence of being excavated, steep slopes, densely vegetated bed, slopes sparsely vegetated. 02/10/2023
Canal full at the time of delineation.
Datasheet # __________ OHWM Delineation Datasheet Page ____ of ____ Transect (cross-section) drawing: (choose a location that is representative of the dominant stream characteristics over some distance; label the OHWM and other features of interest along the transect; include an estimate of transect length) Break in Slope at OHWM: Sharp (> 60¡) | Moderate (30–60¡) | Gentle (< 30¡) | None Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sediment Texture: Estimate percentages to describe the general sediment texture above and below the OHWM Clay/Silt
<0.05mm
Sand
0.05 – 2mm
Gravel
2mm – 1cm
Cobbles
1 – 10cm
Boulders
>10cm
Developed Soil
Horizons (Y/N)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Vegetation: Estimate absolute percent cover to describe general vegetation characteristics above and below the OHWM Tree (%) Shrub (%) Herb (%) Bare (%)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other Evidence: List/describe any additional field evidence and/or lines of reasoning used to support your delineation 2 2
X
OHWM was difficult to discern in some sections. Most areas had moderate break in slope, with some gentle breaks observed.
N
N
Lateral 24.2 Canal
0 0
0 - - -
30 70
During the survey of this canal, there was water in the channel and any herbaceous vegetation on the bed could not be detected. There were no trees on the banks of the canal and areas above the OHWM had sparse vegetation within the fenced in area.
Although subtle, there was a water line indicating the location of the OHWM. The water level at the time was just below this mark . Very few indicators of the OHWM were present, but sediment size decreased and particles became finer above the OHWM. Vegetation was sparse above the OHWM 60 30 10 0 0
Finer particles were observed near the tops of the canal banks, while there was a larger ratio of sand and gravel sized particles observed below the OHWM just above the water level. 45 35 20 0 0
OHWM Delineation Cover Sheet Page ____ of ____
Project: _____________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Location: ____________________________________ Investigator(s): ___________________________________ Project Description:
Describe the river or stream’s condition (disturbances, in-stream structures, etc.):
Off-site Information
Remotely sensed image(s) acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach image(s) to datasheet(s) and indicate approx. locations of transects, OHWM, and any other features of interest on the image(s); describe below] Description:
Hydrologic/hydraulic information acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach information to datasheet(s) and describe below.] Description:
List and describe any other supporting information received/acquired:
Instructions: Complete one cover sheet and one or more datasheets for each project site. Each datasheet should capture the dominant characteristics of the OHWM along some length of a given stream. Complete enough datasheets to adequately document up- and/or downstream variability in OHWM indicators, stream conditions, etc. Transect locations can be marked on a recent aerial image or their GPS coordinates noted on the datasheet.
Westberry Blvd Bridge Project 8/26/2022
Madera, Madera County Kira McCall
Installation of a new bridge over Fresno River to connect the northern and southern segments of Westberry Blvd.
X
See photo page attachment and OHWM delineation maps
X
1 2
Manmade, natural bottom canal owned by Madera Irrigation District, evidence of being excavated, steep slopes, densely vegetated bed, slopes sparsely vegetated.
Datasheet # __________ OHWM Delineation Datasheet Page ____ of ____ Transect (cross-section) drawing: (choose a location that is representative of the dominant stream characteristics over some distance; label the OHWM and other features of interest along the transect; include an estimate of transect length) Break in Slope at OHWM: Sharp (> 60¡) | Moderate (30–60¡) | Gentle (< 30¡) | None Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sediment Texture: Estimate percentages to describe the general sediment texture above and below the OHWM Clay/Silt
<0.05mm
Sand
0.05 – 2mm
Gravel
2mm – 1cm
Cobbles
1 – 10cm
Boulders
>10cm
Developed Soil
Horizons (Y/N)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Vegetation: Estimate absolute percent cover to describe general vegetation characteristics above and below the OHWM Tree (%) Shrub (%) Herb (%) Bare (%)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other Evidence: List/describe any additional field evidence and/or lines of reasoning used to support your delineation 1 2 2
X
OHWM was difficult to discern in some sections. Most areas had moderate break in slope, with some gentle breaks observed.
N
N
15 85
75 25
Average sediment size decreased above OHWM. Sandy below, and loamy sand above.
Stark difference in vegetation coverage above and below OHWM. Steep slopes, minimal break in slope, just water line visible. Below OHWM - soil cracks, almost complete coverage of grass. Above OHWM - little vegetation coverage, mainly grass.
75% 25%
40% 50% 10%
% %
% %
OHWM Delineation Cover Sheet Page ____ of ____
Project: _____________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Location: ____________________________________ Investigator(s): ___________________________________ Project Description:
Describe the river or stream’s condition (disturbances, in-stream structures, etc.):
Off-site Information
Remotely sensed image(s) acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach image(s) to datasheet(s) and indicate approx. locations of transects, OHWM, and any other features of interest on the image(s); describe below] Description:
Hydrologic/hydraulic information acquired? Yes No [If yes, attach information to datasheet(s) and describe below.] Description:
List and describe any other supporting information received/acquired:
Instructions: Complete one cover sheet and one or more datasheets for each project site. Each datasheet should capture the dominant characteristics of the OHWM along some length of a given stream. Complete enough datasheets to adequately document up- and/or downstream variability in OHWM indicators, stream conditions, etc. Transect locations can be marked on a recent aerial image or their GPS coordinates noted on the datasheet.
Westberry Blvd Bridge Project 8/26/2022
Madera, Madera County Kira McCall
Installation of a new bridge over Fresno River to connect the northern and southern segments of Westberry Blvd.
X
See photo page attachment and OHWM delineation maps
X
1 2
Fresno River, highly disturbed, water is released from dam upstream, tire tracks and evidence of excavation.
Datasheet # __________ OHWM Delineation Datasheet Page ____ of ____ Transect (cross-section) drawing: (choose a location that is representative of the dominant stream characteristics over some distance; label the OHWM and other features of interest along the transect; include an estimate of transect length) Break in Slope at OHWM: Sharp (> 60¡) | Moderate (30–60¡) | Gentle (< 30¡) | None Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sediment Texture: Estimate percentages to describe the general sediment texture above and below the OHWM Clay/Silt
<0.05mm
Sand
0.05 – 2mm
Gravel
2mm – 1cm
Cobbles
1 – 10cm
Boulders
>10cm
Developed Soil
Horizons (Y/N)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Vegetation: Estimate absolute percent cover to describe general vegetation characteristics above and below the OHWM Tree (%) Shrub (%) Herb (%) Bare (%)
Above OHWM
Below OHWM
Notes/Description:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other Evidence: List/describe any additional field evidence and/or lines of reasoning used to support your delineation 2 2
X
OHWM was difficult to discern in some sections. Most areas had moderate break in slope, with some gentle breaks observed.
N
N
Average sediment size decreased above OHWM. Sandy below, and loamy sand above.
2 0%
10% 5% 20% 65%
0% 5% 95%
Channel was heavily disturbed, great amounts of refuse, cement chunks from old culverts. Bed was completely comprised of sand, some narrowleaf willow and giant reed along the edges of the bed. Two vegetated islands within the delineated channel, soil color much darker and vegetation coverage and composition changed significantly. OHWM - very few indicators, water marks and soil sloughing in some areas, moderate break in slope, soil texture difference above OHWM. Vegetation change noticeable.
100%
60% 30% 10%
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 37
Appendix D. NRCS Soils
Report
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Madera Area,
California Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
August 29, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Madera Area, California..................................................................................13 GaA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17.........13 GbA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes....................................................................................................14 PbA—Pachappa fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percen slopes....................................................................................................16 Rh—Riverwash........................................................................................... 17 References............................................................................................................18 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4094850 4094920 4094990 4095060 4095130 4095200 4095270 4095340 4095410 4094850 4094920 4094990 4095060 4095130 4095200 4095270 4095340 4095410 757860 757930 758000 758070 758140 758210 758280
757860 757930 758000 758070 758140 758210 758280
36° 58' 10'' N
120° 6' 13'' W
36° 58' 10'' N
120° 5' 54'' W
36° 57' 50'' N
120° 6' 13'' W
36° 57' 50'' N
N
120° 5' 54'' W
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 100 200 400 600
Feet
0 40 80 160 240
Meters
Map Scale: 1:3,020 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:20,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Madera Area, California
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 7, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 16, 2022—Mar 21, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI GaA Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0
to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17
3.3 37.1%
GbA Grangeville fine sandy loam,
slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1
percent slopes
1.7 18.6%
PbA Pachappa fine sandy loam,
slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1
percen slopes
0.0 0.1%
Rh Riverwash 3.9 44.2%
Totals for Area of Interest 8.9 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
Custom Soil Resource Report
11 The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Madera Area, California
GaA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes, MLRA 17 Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vncx
Elevation: 30 to 1,760 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 25 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 12 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 12 to 79 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 2 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 3.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.2 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2w
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Landform: Alluvial fans, flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: No
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, hydric
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood plains, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Unnamed, channeled
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Alluvial fans on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on alluvial fans, channels on flood plains on flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
GbA—Grangeville fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hk72
Elevation: 10 to 1,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 61 to 64 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 300 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Grangeville and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Description of Grangeville
Setting
Landform: Alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 11 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 11 to 20 inches: sandy loam
H3 - 20 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to silt loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 1 percent
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.3 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Ecological site: R017XY904CA - Subirrigated Deep Alluvial Fans Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Foster
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 PbA—Pachappa fine sandy loam, slightly saline-alkali, 0 to 1 percen slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hk8t
Elevation: 1,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 63 degrees F
Frost-free period: 270 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Pachappa and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Pachappa
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from granite
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 14 inches: fine sandy loam
H2 - 14 to 28 inches: loam
H3 - 28 to 45 inches: fine sandy loam
H4 - 45 to 60 inches: stratified loamy sand to fine sandy loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent
Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Custom Soil Resource Report
16 Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Traver
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Fresno
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Hanford
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Rh—Riverwash
Map Unit Composition
Riverwash: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Riverwash
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Parent material: Sandy and gravelly alluvium
Typical profile
H1 - 0 to 6 inches: sand
H2 - 6 to 60 inches: stratified coarse sand to sandy loam Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 3.0 inches) Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Ecological site: R017XY903CA - Stream Channels and Floodplains Hydric soil rating: Yes
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 18 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
19 Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group Page | 38
CITY OF MADERA
WESTBERRY BOULEVARD BRIDGE PROJECT
Appendix E. Vascular
Plant List
Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Indicator Status
Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort FAC
Acmispon americanus Spanish clover UPL
Ambrosia artemisifolia Common ragweed FACU
Arundo donax Giant reed FACW
Baccharis salicifolia Mule fat FAC
Brassica nigra Mustard UPL
Bromus diandrus Great brome UPL
Croton setigerus Doveweed No Indicator
Cucurbita foetidissima Buffalo gourd No Indicator
Datura wrightii Sacred datura UPL
Erigeron bonariensis Flax leaved horseweed FACU
Erigeron canadensis Horseweed FACU
Glycyrrhiza lepidota American licorice FAC
Helianthus petiolaris Prairie sunflower No Indicator
Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed No Indicator
Hordeum murinum Foxtail FACU
Pinus sp. Pine -
Pistacia chinensis Chinese pistache tree UPL
Platanus racemose Western sycamore FAC
Populus fremontii Freemont cottonwood FACW
Pseudognaphalium luteoalbum Jersey cudweed FAC
Quercus lobata Valley oak tree FACU
Salix exigua Narrowleaf willow FACW
Salix gooddingii Goodding's willow FACW
Salsola tragus Russian thistle FACU
Scolymus hispanicus Common goldenthistle No Indicator
Stephanomeria pauciflora Brownplume wirelettuce No Indicator Tribulus terrestris puncture vine UPL
Viscum album Mistletoe No Indicator
Vulpia myuros Rat's-tail fescue FACU
Xanthium strumarium Common cocklebur FAC+
Lactuca serriola Prickly lettuce FAC
Hirschfeldia incana Summer mustard UPL
October 31, 2023
Briza Sholars
City of Madera
Engineering Department
428 E. Yosemite Ave.
Madera, CA 93638
Project: Westberry Bridge Project Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration District CEQA Reference No: 20230884
Dear Ms. Sholars:
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) from the City of Madera (City) for the Westberry Bridge Project. Per the MND, the project consists of the construction of a vehicular bridge approximately 408 feet long by approximately 92 feet wide (Project). The Project is located in the City of Madera along the proposed Westberry Boulevard Alignment crossing the Fresno River.
The District offers the following comments at this time regarding the Project:
Project Related Emissions
Based on the analysis performed in the MND and provided to the District, Project specific annual criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation are not expected to exceed any of the significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI):
https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf.
Construction Emissions
The MND includes mitigation measure AIR-1 which requires the use of USEPA Tier 4 Final engines in construction equipment during construction activities.
To ensure implementation of the measure, the District recommends that the measure be amended to include a monitoring and reporting schedule or some other means of accountability.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 4 District Reference No: 20230884
October 31, 2023
Health Risk Screening/Assessment
The District reviewed the Health Risk Assessment (HRA) for the Project and has the following comments:
• The project’s construction emissions calculations do not include diesel engine emissions from any boring or cast-in-drill hole equipment for the bridge’s support.
The District recommends identifying any emissions associated with this phase of construction of the bridge. Including this source of construction emissions could result in a different risk significance determination.
• Variable emissions were used to limit the construction by season/hour/day and a scaler of 18 was used. The District has determined that the scaler should have been 8.4 [(4/2 seasons worked)*(24/8 hours of day worked)*(7/5 days per week worked)]. Additionally incorrect hours of day were input into the model for the proposed 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. workday, with no construction between 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. The hour field in AERMOD represents the end of the hour period, not the beginning.
• Receptor gridding for the air dispersion model included only a single tier of receptors at the boundary of the project. The District recommends including the additional receptors near the project site to ensure the maximally exposed individual residential risk is captured.
If the Project’s construction emissions are updated to include emissions from the drilling equipment, then the District recommends that the HRA be revised to address the deficiencies listed above as they have the potential to cause the Project to exceed District health risk thresholds.
District Rules and Regulations
The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 4 District Reference No: 20230884
October 31, 2023
The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: www.valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888.
District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)
Per section 2.2 of District Rule 9510, the Rule applies to any transportation or transit project where construction exhaust emissions equal or exceed 2.0 tons of NOx or 2.0 tons of PM10. Per the MND, the District determined construction exhaust emissions will be less than those thresholds; therefore, District Rule 9510 requirements and related fees do not apply to the Project.
District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)
The project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities.
Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). Also, should the project result in the disturbance of 5- acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional information regarding the written notification or Dust Control Plan requirements, please contact District Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950.
The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at:
https://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/forms/DCP-Form.docx Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at:
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/pm10/compliance_pm10.htm San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 4 of 4 District Reference No: 20230884
October 31, 2023
Other District Rules and Regulations
The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations).
If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Jacob Torrez by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 230-6558.
Sincerely,
Brian Clements
Director of Permit Services
For: Mark Montelongo
Program Manager
400 E Main St, Ste 300 • Visalia, CA 93291 • (559) 636-1166 www.provostandpritchard.com
\\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\Cornerstone Engr-1849\184922002-Westberry Blvd Bridge\200 Technical\215 Env Planning\Final ENV\SJVAPCD Response Memo.docx Engineering • Structural • Geostructural • Surveying • Planning • Environmental • GIS • Construction Services • Hydrogeology • Consulting Clovis • Visalia • Bakersfield • Modesto • Los Banos • Chico • Sacramento • Sonora • San Luis Obispo • Boise, ID
MEMORANDUM
To:
Steve Bettencourt
City of Madera
From: Jarred Olsen
Subject:
Westberry Bridge CEQA, SCH 2023090606
Response to SJVAPCD Comment Letter
Date: November 1, 2023
This memorandum is in response to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD or District) comment letter dated October 31, 2023 for the Westberry Bridge Project. The comment period ended on October 27, 2023, and was extended at the request of the SJVAPCD to October 30, 2023.
In summary, the SJVAPCD’s comments do not identify a new, avoidable significant effect nor are revisions to the Mitigated Negative Declaration warranted. Recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not warranted.
SJVAPCD Comment Response
1) Project Related Emissions
Based on the analysis performed in the MND and
provided to the District, Project specific annual criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation are not expected to exceed any of the significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI):
https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI.pdf.
This comment states that the air quality
analysis prepared indicates that the Project will
not exceed the District’s significance thresholds
for criteria air pollutants. We concur with the
District’s findings.
1a) Construction Emissions
The MND includes mitigation measure AIR-1 which
requires the use of USEPA Tier 4 Final engines in
construction equipment during construction activities. To ensure implementation of the measure, the District
recommends that the measure be amended to include a
monitoring and reporting schedule or some other means
of accountability.
The City has prepared a Mitigation and
Monitoring Reporting Program that sufficiently
addresses the District’s concern. The City is
capable of ensuring that this mitigation
measure is implemented during construction.
2) Health Risk Screening/Assessment
The District reviewed the Health Risk Assessment (HRA)
for the Project and has the following comments:
• The project’s construction emissions calculations
do not include diesel engine emissions from any
boring or cast-in-drill hole equipment for the
The most commonly-used air quality modeling
software, CalEEMod, was used in preparation
of the air quality analysis. Despite this software
having a multitude of land uses that it can
adequately analyze, there is no bridge land use.
Therefore, the decision to analyze the
structure as an unenclosed parking structure
was appropriate as it reflected a similarly
City of Madera November 1, 2023
Westberry Bridge CEQA, SCH 2023090606 Response to SJVAPCD Comment Letter Page 2 of 4 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\Cornerstone Engr-1849\184922002-Westberry Blvd Bridge\200 Technical\215 Env Planning\Final ENV\SJVAPCD Response Memo.docx SJVAPCD Comment Response
bridge’s support. The District recommends
identifying any emissions associated with this
phase of construction of the bridge. Including this
source of construction emissions could result in a
different risk significance determination.
• Variable emissions were used to limit the
construction by season/hour/day and a scaler of
18 was used. The District has determined that
the scaler should have been 8.4 [(4/2 seasons
worked)*(24/8 hours of day worked)*(7/5 days
per week worked)]. Additionally incorrect hours
of day were input into the model for the proposed
8 a.m. to 5 p.m. workday, with no construction
between 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. The hour field in
AERMOD represents the end of the hour period,
not the beginning.
• Receptor gridding for the air dispersion model
included only a single tier of receptors at the
boundary of the project. The District
recommends including the additional receptors
near the project site to ensure the maximally
exposed individual residential risk is captured.
• If the Project’s construction emissions are
updated to include emissions from the drilling
equipment, then the District recommends that
the HRA be revised to address the deficiencies
listed above as they have the potential to cause
the Project to exceed District health risk
thresholds.
assumed intensity of construction as a bridge.
Parking structures, like bridges, require a
significant amount of steel and concrete. While
a parking structure is likely to not have boring
or hole equipment, a bridge is likely not to
utilize grading equipment, and therefore it is
assumed that the emissions analyzed are
equivalent or conservative. For this reason, the
construction emissions are not reanalyzed.
Variable emissions were analyzed using the
SHRDOW (Season by Hour-of-Day by Day-ofWeek (M-F,Sa,Su) parameter (n=288), not the SHRDOW7 (Season by Hour-of-Day by Day-ofWeek (M,Tu,W,Th,F,Sa,Su) parameter (n=672).
The decision to use SHRDOW was based on the
fact that the air quality model analysis did not
assume a variation in daily emissions. As such,
a scalar of 18 is appropriate. The HRA was reran using the corrected hours, and the results did not change.
Sensitive receptors were gridded not simply at
the Project boundary site but rather the fence
line of the residential subdivisions nearest to
the Project site. The decision to analyze the
nearest receptors was based on the lack of
elevation change beyond the Project site. Due
to this situation, it is assumed that the nearest
receptors would be the most likely to be
significantly affected by construction
emissions. Therefore, analysis of receptors
further from the Project site would report
lower risk than those nearest the site and
would not change the mitigation necessary.
3) District Rules and Regulations
The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through
compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010
(Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified
Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally
Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules
pertaining to District permitting requirements and
processes.
This comment is intended to inform the City of
the permits, rules, and regulations that may be
applicable to the Project. This comment does
not address the adequacy of the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and no
further response is necessary.
City of Madera November 1, 2023
Westberry Bridge CEQA, SCH 2023090606 Response to SJVAPCD Comment Letter Page 3 of 4 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\Cornerstone Engr-1849\184922002-Westberry Blvd Bridge\200 Technical\215 Env Planning\Final ENV\SJVAPCD Response Memo.docx SJVAPCD Comment Response
The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive.
Current District rules can be found online at:
www.valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit
requirements, the project proponents are strongly
encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business
Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888.
3a) District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)
Per section 2.2 of District Rule 9510, the Rule applies to any transportation or transit project where construction exhaust emissions equal or exceed 2.0 tons of NOx or 2.0 tons of PM10. Per the MND, the District determined
construction exhaust emissions will be less than those
thresholds; therefore, District Rule 9510 requirements
and related fees do not apply to the Project.
3b) District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) The project proponent may be required to submit a
Construction Notification Form or submit and receive
approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition,
Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities.
Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant
to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition,
Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving
Activities). Also, should the project result in the
disturbance of 5-acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional
information regarding the written notification or Dust
Control Plan requirements, please contact District
Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950.
The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at:
https://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/PM10/forms/
DCP-Form.docx
Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at:
City of Madera November 1, 2023
Westberry Bridge CEQA, SCH 2023090606 Response to SJVAPCD Comment Letter Page 4 of 4 \\ppeng.com\pzdata\clients\Cornerstone Engr-1849\184922002-Westberry Blvd Bridge\200 Technical\215 Env Planning\Final ENV\SJVAPCD Response Memo.docx SJVAPCD Comment Response
http://www.valleyair.org/busind/comply/pm10/complia
nce_pm10.htm
3c) Other District Rules and Regulations
The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance
Operations).
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by:
_________________________________
Council Meeting of: November 15, 2023
Agenda Number: C-2
Alicia Gonzales, City Clerk
_________________________________
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing No. 1 for Updating of City Councilmember District Boundaries for Annexed Property
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Receive a report from staff on the redistricting process and permissible criteria to be considered to redraw district boundaries; and
2. Conduct a Public Hearing to receive public input on district boundaries to account for property annexed to the City.
SUMMARY:
The subject matter has been scheduled to provide the City Council with a report on the districting process for properties annexed into the City and the permissible criteria to be considered to modify district boundaries, as well as to conduct a Public Hearing to receive public input on district boundaries.
BACKGROUND:
Every 10 years, pursuant to Election Code section 21601, cities with by-district election systems are required to redraw their district boundary maps to ensure compliance with the California and federal Voting Rights Acts. This process, called redistricting, ensures that all districts have a nearly equal population. The City adopted its current district boundaries in 2022 based on 2020 census data as required by law.
Between October 20, 2021 and March 16, 2022, the Council held five public hearings to complete the redistricting requirements and dedicated public outreach to ensure minority populations and communities of interest were aware of the redistricting effort and were provided with options to participate. On April 6, 2022, Council adopted an Ordinance Amending Section 2-1.21 of Chapter 1 of Title II of the Madera Municipal Code Regarding By-District Elections, Adjusting the Boundaries of City Council Election Districts and Confirming Such Revised Council Boundaries.
Since the adoption of the current boundary maps, there has been significant annexation (Villages at Almond Grove) in the northwest portion of the City, adjacent to Council District 1.
The annexed area is currently predominately agricultural land with several homes. While the area is in the City, it is not within a Council district, thus the Council District Boundary Maps must be modified to incorporate the annexed area. Per the Elections Code, the redistricting of this area must occur by April 2024, 205 days prior to the next regular election on November 5, 2024.
DISCUSSION:
Process:
The City Council typically chooses where the district lines will be drawn every 10 years based on the latest U.S. Census. Between these regular 10-year updates, changes to district boundaries are typically not allowed under the Elections Code. However, there is an exception for the circumstances here, as new territory has been annexed into the City and the total annexed territory contains less than 25 percent of the City's population. In such cases, the City Council may update the district boundaries to allow for the new members of the community to vote in City elections, etc.
State laws set strict criteria for the updates of the district boundaries in such circumstances.
Specifically, the City Council is required to add the new territory "to the nearest existing Council district” without changing the boundaries of other Council district boundaries. As a result, the City’s discretion is limited regarding the present annexation.
Even though the criteria for setting the boundaries for annexed property is constrained by State law, the default procedures for redistricting boundaries still apply. Under these procedures the public will have the opportunity to draw and submit district maps for the Council's consideration, and the City may develop its own maps for consideration. By law, the City must hold at least four public hearings that enable community members to provide input on the drawing of district maps per the following:
One Public Hearing will be held to invite public input regarding the composition of the City's voting districts before any draft maps are drawn. The hearing this evening meets this criteria and is considered one of the required public hearings. Three Public Hearings will be held to invite public input regarding the composition of the City's proposed modifications to the voting districts after the draft maps are drawn.
These hearings will be scheduled for dates to be determined. After the Public Hearings, the City Council will introduce an ordinance establishing a map with the modified voting division boundaries at a scheduled meeting date of the City Council to be determined, and the ordinance will then be presented for final adoption at the subsequent regularly scheduled meeting.
Mandatory Criteria for Creating Districts:
While public input concerning the composition of the City's voting divisions will be considered, as noted above there are several mandatory criteria that the City must comply with when the actual divisions are created:
1. Any annexed property must be added to the nearest existing Council district; and
2. No other changes to existing Council districts can occur.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact to modifying the boundaries other than staff time to prepare the necessary staff reports and modify the district boundary maps.
ALTERNATIVES:
Decline to hold a Public Hearing at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Council Districts Map with Annexations
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Districts Map with Annexations
AVE 12
AVE 13
AVE 17
STATE RTE 99
STATE HWY 99
RD 29
RD 24
STATE RTE 145 STATE HWY 145
RD 23
RD 28
AVE 16
N D ST
ELLIS ST
AVE 15 1/2
RD 25
RD 27
RD 28 1/2
HWY 99
RD 26 1/2
RD 26
W PECAN AVE
AVE 15
N LAKE ST
RAYMOND RD
AVE 18
SUNSET AVE
AVE 13 1/2
W CLEVELAND AVE
DALEY RD
COUNTRY CLUB DR
MARTIN ST
AUSTIN ST
AVE 14
RD 22 1/2
S GRANADA DR
S C ST
RD 25 1/2
S D ST
RD 23 1/2
N GRANADA DR
S E ST
N I ST
AVE 18 1/2
LAKE ST
AVE 14 1/2
N SCHNOOR AVE
S A ST
HOWARD RD
N GATEWAY DR
RD 28 1/4
ADELL ST
AVE 12 1/2 PECAN LN
S PINE ST
S I ST
E 6TH ST
RIVERVIEW DR
S G ST
N G ST
SHARON BLVD
W 4TH ST
VARDEN DR
CLINTON ST
RODEO DR
OWENS ST
S MADERA AVE
W 6TH ST
ALMOND AVE
E YOSEMITE AVE
LILLY ST
FAIRFIELD DR
RD 29 1/2
LANE DR
STADIUM RD
S H ST
SONORA ST
WALDEN DR
E 5TH ST
MONTEREY ST
E OLIVE AVE
N H ST
N E ST
OREGON AVE
TROPICAL DR
AVE 13 1/4
W 5TH ST
S B ST
RD 24 1/2
WILLIS AVE
W OLIVE AVE
SHERWOOD WAY
CAMDEN DR
GARDENA DR
TULARE ST
S K ST
E LINCOLN AVE
E CLEVELAND AVE
WILLIAMS AVE
BROOK DR
AVE 29
W 3RD ST
TREMAINE AVE
E GARY LN
FIG ST
S GATEWAY DR
HILL DR
WATT ST
S L ST
HARPER BLVD
N N ST
SUNRISE AVE
E 4TH ST
N C ST
S J ST
SANTA FE DR
BALDWIN ST
ARIZONA AVE
CLARK ST
FAIRVIEW ST
MAPLE ST
RD 29 1/4
RD 27 3/4
AVE 17 1/2
MELBA DR
N B ST
ELM ST
E RUSH ST
W YOSEMITE AVE
CREST DR
N O ST
TULIP RD
FONDA AVE
RIDGEDALE DR
EL VADO DR
E ADELL ST
N PINE ST
N WESTBERRY BLVD
S LAKE ST
AVE 11 3/4
AVE 13 3/4
N A ST
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
NATIONAL AVE
E ALMOND AVE
SIERRA ST
MELBA DR E
MATTINGLY ST
CHAPIN ST
ROTAN AVE
HULL ST
NORWALK DR
CONDOR RD
HALEY WAY
FALCON DR
CRESCENT DR
MAINBERRY DR
RIVERSIDE DR
VINEYARD AVE
DAVIS ST
WATSON ST
E KENNEDY ST
E SHERWOOD WAY
CROSS ST
VINE RD
E 3RD ST
N L ST
GREENTREE AVE
E 11TH ST
GARY LN
HULL AVE
BOLES ST
AIRPORT DR
PARKWOOD AVE
S N ST
SHARON AVE
CARDWELL ST
BORDEN ST
KREST ST
SHELL DR
ORCHARD AVE
HILTON ST
FAIRVIEW AVE
AVE 15 3/4
N M ST
W ADELL ST
PERKINS RD
CONRAD ST
FRESNO ST
CIRCLE DR
SEABRIGHT DR
ROOSEVELT ST
S SCHNOOR ST
COLUMBIA ST
VENTURI AVE
LA BREA AVE
AVELLAR DR
S KNOX ST
MERRIL AVE
E 9TH ST
W DAVIS ST
E 12TH ST
E PECAN AVE
STOREY RD
W ALMOND AVE
AVE 18 1/4
KROHN ST
OPHIR DR
LACRETA AVE
ADELAIDE ST
ROGERS ST
SAN JOSE AVE
E 10TH ST
14 AVE
GREEN WAY
BROOK DR W
NEBRASKA AVE
E SOUTH ST
NILE ST
TANFORAN DR
PEAR ST
FOXGLOVE WAY
AVIATION DR
BROOK DR E
E CENTRAL AVE
TOZER ST
SENECA DR
GLADE AVE
HANOVER DR
MERCED ST
EL PASO RD
STANFORD AVE
CAITLAN DR
WESSMITH WAY
DELLAVALLE AVE
RD 27 1/2
S O ST
VALENCIA AVE
W 7TH ST
SAN BRUNO AVE
W 8TH ST
ADANAC WAY
UNIVERSITY AVE
KIWI ST
SHERWOOD ST
COMMERCE DR
TEMPLE DR
WESTBERRY BLVD
OAK ST
ARDILLA DR
OSO DR
SHANNON ST
WARD ST
SHORE DR
AVE 18A
OLD MILL DR
W INDUSTRIAL AVE
13 1/2 AVE
SAN CARLOS AVE
LADA AVE
BERKELEY DR
AVE 12 1/4
BLOKER ST
N K ST
WOOD ST
N P ST
MAGNOLIA ST
ASPEN LN
AMADOR ST
EAST LOOP
NOBLE ST
FRISCO WAY
E 13TH ST
KNOX AVE
DESHA ST
PAMELA DR
FERN ST
N Q ST
PICKFORD DR
MIDLAND WAY
RAYMOND THOMAS ST
SAUNDERS RD
MONOCOTT DR
TANGERINE AVE
WALLACE ST
WALDEN AVE
E 14TH ST
LAGUNA WAY
JEFFERSON AVE
FARALLON RD
CUTTING ST
DOUBLETREE WAY
GROVE ST
STEPHANIE LN
REGAL DR
HONDA RD
GRANT AVE
EMILY WAY
SUNDANCE LN
BERRY DR
GAMAY AVE
RHINE DR
PARK ST
PINEWOOD DR
CRONIN ST
WALLACE AVE
E 2ND ST
HAI LN
PLUMAS ST
TAMARISK DR
MISSION ST
KENT DR
E CLARK ST
ZAK WAY
MACADAMIA AVE
MADISON DR
W PARK DR
WALNUT ST
WEST LOOP
BEECHWOOD WAY
ENCANTADA AVE
DEBORAH LN
CO RD 29
COLOMBARD DR
YEAGER RD
W LEWIS ST
ROBERTS AVE
BEDFORD DR
FLUME ST
LINDEN ST
LAUREL ST
REN WAY
NOREEN WAY
CONCORD AVE
W 9TH ST
DRIFTWOOD DR
DUTRA WAY
S P ST
PROSPECT DR
REXFORD DR
TAYLOR LN
MALONE ST
JENNINGS ST
E ELLIS ST
LIBERTY LN
GEORGIA AVE
PIED PIPER LN
JOYA DR
DILLON WAY
HIGH ST
MARIE DR
S PARK DR
DUNHAM AVE
KNOLL WAY
PAPAYA ST
W WILSON ST
DAULTON AVE
AMERINE AVE
AVON WAY
STINSON AVE
RIDGE WAY
AUTUMN RD
GILL AVE POSEY AVE
SANARITA WAY
HILLSBORO AVE
GARFIELD AVE
STEVEN LN
LA JOLLA WAY
SHANNON AVE
11TH ST
N PARK DR
PHILLIP ST
ECHO ST
MERLOT AVE
W ROBERTS AVE
ST MONTELENA DR SANTA CRUZ ST
MOORE ST
GAMAY ST
CHOLLA AVE
HAZEL AVE
DE CESARI AVE
SCOTT WAY
TREVOR WAY
AVE 18 3/4
BARNETT WAY
AVE 17 3/4
ARNOLD WAY
PARK LN
FAIRWAY AVE
TOSCHI DR
S TANGERINE AVE
CANAL WAY
JAMES WAY
DIAMOND WAY
JOY ST
QUADY LN
CAMINO LN
WESTGATE DR
HAZELNUT LN
BEND ST
TUOLUMNE ST
COYOTE LN
HOLIDAY WAY
GLENVILLE AVE
ASILOMAR DR
TRAGON ST
W 1ST ST
SEGOVIA WAY
FOSTER AVE
ALPINE ST
VIA CERIONI
BURGUNDY DR
BARSTOW DR
CRYSTAL DR
SMITHWOOD DR
W 2ND ST
JESSIE DR
S BERRY DR
SUMMER LN
MODOC ST
ASHLAN WAY
WOODWARD WAY
TOLUCA WAY
FICKLIN DR
MC RAE RD
CORPARATE AVE
TYLER LN
SUBURBAN AVE
EDDY WAY
FAIRFIELD WAY
RIVER POINTE
WABASH RD
SILK OAK LN
CYPRESS ST
FLORENCE WAY
SCHNOOR ST
TODD ST
JUDITH WAY
BONNIE WAY
SANTA BONITA ST
MADRONE RD
PISTACHIO DR
SULTANA DR
ROBBINS LN
CAMBRIA AVE
CAMDEN WAY
LIME AVE
PIERCE LN
SANTA LUCIA DR
AZURE DR
STATE ST
ROCKY BOTTOM ST
DEVON WAY
BRIDGE WAY
CHIANTI AVE
MADRID LN
HAMPTON DR
PAUL AVE
INGOMAR DR
DWYER ST
ALICANTE WAY
INDIGO DR
BO TREE LN
N J ST
WRENWOOD WAY
THIRD ST
FUTURE ST
LYNN WAY
JERICHO DR
WAYSIDE DR
ARBELLA LN
S M ST
RANCHO MIRAGE RD
ACTON WAY
TORONADO DR
LA QUINTA WAY
PLUMWOOD WAY
JAZLEE LN
LYONS ST
LINDA MESA DR
JOSEPHINE AVE
PRINCETON AVE
BARON ST
VALLEY WAY
RD 28 3/4
N R ST
MONARCH RD
ULA ST
LINDA VISTA CIR
MICHOACAN CT
GARLAND ST
LARWOOD DR
VARABELLA PARK
MONTE VISTA AVE
FILLMORE AVE
N AUTUMN RD
PEACH TREE DR
KELSEY LN
SASSAFRAS DR
DOUBLE TREE WAY
MARIPOSA ST
W LINCOLN AVE
GRAPEWOOD WAY
DIANE WAY
CROWN LN
DRYSDALE WAY
SAN RAMON RD
W CENTRAL AVE
BARCELONA WAY
GREENWOOD DR
CLAREMONT DR
WHITWORTH DR N
HOOVER AVE
W PARK
AUBURN WAY
WILLOW DR
MEADOWREST WAY
DESERT RANCH WAY
TAOS WAY
LILLIAN ST
SEPIA CT
HOWARD ST
BURTON WAY
WINDING DIRT RD
AVALON AVE
LUCIA WAY
LANSING ST
LYNN PL
CHESTNUT AVE
ARAM AVE
SAN GABRIEL DR
BRIARGATE RD
MACE ST
MATEO WAY
GREEN CT
MANZANA CT
ST MICHELLE DR
PERCY ST
MALTA ST
KATHRYN AVE
TERRA FIRMA RD
HARBOR DR
CENTRAL PL
ROBINWOOD WAY
TIMBERLINE DR
CONDOR DR
BAY CT
DARBY WAY
TRUMAN DR
PHILBERT LN
RUNNING BROOK ST
ABBY ST
GRENACHE AVE
CARREY AVE
ROSE CT
SUSAN LN
MORRIS LN
PACIFICA DR
SPRING WAY
SAQURO AVE
PINA ST
IMPERIAL DR
10TH ST
E DUNHAM AVE
WINTER WAY
Q ST
JOSEPH LN
SHORT RD
E 7TH ST
SEASONS CT
S POMERS PL
ALONZO CT
N AVON PL
EL DORADO DR
HACIENDA ST
SCARLET DR
CANAL ST
JONATHAN WAY
W SOUTH ST
GABLE WAY
W KENNEDY ST
LOMA LINDA LN
SANDPIPER WAY
SUNNYDALE ST
POPPY ST
DE SANTI AVE
PICKFAIR WAY
HELENA WAY
MUNRAS AVE
ROSE ST
SANTA CLARA ST
VALERIE AVE
CLIFTON WAY
RAMONA ST
RENEE WAY
W 12TH ST
HILLCREST CT
APOLLO CT
PARK DR
W CLARK ST
EL MONTE ST
EL MONTE WAY
SYCAMORE ST
BREEZE WAY
MAKENNA DR
FIFTH ST
SARAH ST
EL PASO PL
TOLEDO WAY
FOREST LN
HARVARD AVE
COVE WAY
CARMEN AVE
LEMON AVE
DEERWOOD DR
CLEMMENSEN AVE
PRINCE LN
BERNARDI AVE
LOS ARCOS LN
HAWKS PEAK DR
EL RANCHO DR
DOVEWOOD WAY
PACIFIC CT
CEDAR ST
GREYSTONE
EAGLE WAYST TROPEZ DR
WHITE SANDS DR
JULIUS ST
FALL DR
S AVON PL
APRICOT LN
POINTE W
PACIFIC ST
PESCARA WAY
TRES AMIGOS LN
SAN ANGELO AVE
CHERRY TREE DR
EL MONTE CT
MAPLE CT
ASTI WAY
VARDEN CT
E LEWIS ST
BILBAO CT
MISSION BELL DR
PEAR TREE DR
POPOLI WAY
EL MONTE AVE
POINT SUR DR
ARIES CT
MONO ST
CREEEKSIDE DR
MAJESTIC CT
12TH ST
FRESHET ST
JADEN CT
DUCOR RD
BART PL
LANE PL HARBOR CT
FIRST ST
PERSIMMON ST
13TH ST
LA JOLLA CT
LOS OSOS CT
RHINE CT
E LEMON AVE
SOQUEL CT
AVE 18
ADELL ST
ROBERTS AVE
SAN ANGELO AVE
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
MERLOT AVE
RD 27
WESSMITH WAY
AVE 16
AVE 12 1/4
AVE 15 1/2
CLINTON ST
OAK ST
CONRAD ST
S PARK DR
CUTTING ST
ELLIS ST
AVE 18
ADELL ST
RD 28 1/4
E CENTRAL AVE
MAPLE ST
11TH ST
14 AVE
RD 24
RD 28
RIVERVIEW DR
MAGNOLIA ST
HONDA RD
W 3RD ST
W 5TH ST
S B ST
TREMAINE AVE
RD 24 1/2
W 5TH ST
SONORA ST
N J ST
AVE 12 1/4
RAMONA ST
AVE 16
AVE 18 1/4
WAYSIDE DR
SUMMER LN
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
SHERWOOD WAY
MERCED ST
FIG ST
RIVERSIDE DR
CLINTON ST
AUSTIN ST
E ALMOND AVE
SUNNYDALE ST
RD 24
E CLARK ST
AVE 17
ASHLAN WAY
SUMMER LN
RD 28 3/4
AVE 12 1/2
ELLIS ST
SHARON AVE
E CLARK ST
REGAL DR
SAN JOSE AVE
GEORGIA AVE
S A ST
RIVERVIEW DR
JAMES WAY
MAPLE ST
NATIONAL AVE
W 4TH ST
W 8TH ST
RD 29
STATE RTE 99
MAPLE ST
W 5TH ST
AVE 11 3/4
TRAGON ST
HWY 99
N WESTBERRY BLVD
RD 24 1/2
SHANNON ST
RD 28 1/4
AVE 12 1/2
PACIFIC CT
NATIONAL AVE
PICKFAIR WAY
SAN CARLOS AVE
EL PASO RD
SHANNON AVE
AVE 18
GREEN WAY
N PINE ST
TREMAINE AVE
SUNDANCE LN
AVE 16
PLUMAS ST
E 9TH ST
CANAL WAY
RD 28
MERLOT AVE
RD 29
GAMAY AVE
ASHLAN WAY
AVE 18 1/2
W 3RD ST
RD 25
AVE 14
RD 25
WOOD ST
AVE 18 1/2
GREEN WAY
VALLEY WAY
AVE 14 1/2
ADELL ST
SAN BRUNO AVE
W ALMOND AVE
CONDOR RD
FRESNO ST
AVE 13 1/2
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
MALONE ST
RD 26 1/2
AVE 17 1/2
W 7TH ST
W 3RD ST
CHIANTI AVE
REN WAY
W 7TH ST
WINTER WAY
CONCORD AVE
AVE 18 1/4
E SOUTH ST
REN WAY
PLUMAS ST
OWENS ST
10TH ST
SHARON BLVD
W CENTRAL AVE
LILLY ST
E ADELL ST
AVE 18 1/2
AVE 14
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
W ADELL ST
FALCON DR
RD 28 1/2
AVE 18
SONORA ST
RD 29 1/4
BROOK DR W
W 4TH ST
13 1/2 AVE
RD 25 1/2
Fresno River
Fresno River
·|}˛99
·|}˛99
·|}˛145
·|}˛145
0 1 20.5 Miles
Railroads
Legend
Madera City Limits
Assessors Parcels
State Routes
DISTRICT MEMBER AREA (ACRES) ELECTION YEAR
MAYOR SANTOS GARCIA
1 CECE GALLEGOS
2 3
4 5
JOSE RODRIGUEZ
STEVE MONTES
ANITA EVANS
ELSA MEJIA
6 ARTEMIO VILLEGAS
AT LARGE
3,342.7 AC.
2,328.0 AC.
1,394.4 AC.
587.2 AC.
1,246.0 AC.
1,719.9 AC.
2020
2022
2020
2022
2020
2022
2020
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 City of Madera
City Council
Election Districts
l
I
T
I
i
-
I
IL
I
I
I
I
I,
11 r
C ' '
-
' I
11 '
I
J
I
L~
L
1 \
--~I
I l
'I
\,
1 1----_.___
I ----~~ /\
I I ,
ii I I
........... -.. ,
-
-
-
I
l
t=
I
=~ !
!
i
I
;
I J
1 I
7 r
I
I
I
!
i I
i
i
I I I
I I 1 ,~-
\ I I I I I'
7 __ .,_,.,, .............. I, ........ _ ............. l
l
I
_J
Jw=r-1 I, I
I I
f I fl
-
i
L_
Ill
_\
' '
T
t
I~
L
7 -,
,
J
J
J
I
=-<:_ ::::: - I
...
I l
T
J,~
l
7 I
'
I
I
I
r--- I,
I
......... I
J-nl
I~
I
r T
l
-
7 t
I I
\ 1
l
'
' '
' '
I t
I I
s;==+ f j I , I .un_[f
rr~" » l Ir--~~
I ~ >) l lt __
I rr1~ {1q~7
'1 ! 0 ; 11
I
I -1 'f', '
I , < - ~
Y,
- II __ -,:c-- r
1 J'1"jT·"-"-rt-L, i 1:R ;2 I - I I .
l
I
I
'
' '
'
' '
'
'
, ' 1 IJ I
~T I
I _T
, _______ _.JLl?_7I ~- H r===-- I
_l
I
I
,,\
I I
I ,
I
I I
;
....... 1
J ,i i
/
_J~ I 11{,,
~""=-II~ I'I
l l
TI
r
LLi ~11 r rr: ' \\
r" 1S_ T ,
n ,~ , I~
L
I ft J I i'l'I
i
i --
i
i
L
i
I
I
'
__Jb
- -
/
IL
I
'
T
(
I
I
I
I
I
II
i
\-;
·----- \,,
'-'
\
\ :
;
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by:
_________________________________
Council Meeting of: November 15, 2023
Agenda Number: D-1
Keith Helmuth, City Engineer
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:
New Police Department Parking Lot, City Project PD-01
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the contract award for the New Police Department Parking Lot, City Project PD-01 for $ 518,700to Terra West Construction Inc. and a contingency of 10 percent of the contract amount, and a CEQA Class 1 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities) SUMMARY:
On June 20, 2018 the City Council (Council) approved an agreement for the purchase and sale of real property for the Police Department from the Fred and Diane Family Trust of 2008. The property is approximately 0.33 acre and is located at the southerly intersection of E. 7th Street and S. C Street. The prior use of the property was a used car lot. The Police Department is currently using the property for unsecured employee parking.
The City prepared engineered construction plans and specifications for the purposes of upgrading the parking lot with new pavement, sidewalk, landscaping, slatted chain link fence, automatic gates, new LED light standards, and security monitoring.
On September 26, 2023 the construction plans and specifications were released for public bidding through the City’s Website portal, PlanetBids. An Advertisement for Bid was placed in the Madera Tribune on September 27 and October 4, 2023. The City received six bids on November 2, 2023.
Terra West Construction Inc (Terra) submitted the lowest, responsive bid for $518,700.00. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 Capital Projects Budget includes funding for the project. for
BACKGROUND:
With growth of the City, the need for additional police facilities and equipment has also increased correspondingly. As a result, the City acquired additional property immediately adjacent to the Police Department for operational needs and parking. This property is dedicated for secured employee parking only.
There are currently 50 standard employee parking stalls and 4 ADA compliant parking stalls on the existing police property. The new parking lot will add 26 standard parking stalls, 11 compact parking stalls, 2 ADA compliant parking stalls, and 2 EV (electric vehicle capable) ADA compliant parking stalls. There are 3 parking stalls that will have infrastructure constructed for EV capability.
The new parking lot will also have new landscaping installed on S. C Street and E. 7th Street.
There is a 65-foot-wide Madera Irrigation District (MID) Easement with dual 54-inch pipelines running diagonally through the property. The MID has approved the new parking lot use within the easement. The new parking lot will not affect the operations and maintenance of the pipelines.
Access will be through two 20-foot-wide, 8-foot tall, slatted chain link sliding access gates on the alley side and are only accessible with a wireless key fob. There will be no public access.
The Planning Commission approved the Site Plan (SPR 2023-19) and a Variance (VAR 2023-03, 8’ tall, slatted chain link fence) for the New Police Department Parking Lot, City Project PD-01 on September 12, 2023.
Terra submitted the lowest, responsive, and responsible bid that meets the contract requirements. It is therefore recommended for award.
Measure K Sales Tax (Police Department) 10252500 funds are programed in the FY 2023/24 CIP as PD-01.
DISCUSSION:
The general scope of work consists of the following:
New AC Pavement within the property and adjacent alley. New concrete valley gutter and a channel through walk will drain rainwater to S. C Street and an adjacent drain inlet. New 8 foot high slatted chain link fence will be installed along the street perimeter of the property. There will be no barbed or razor wire installed. Two 20-foot wide, 8-foot tall, slatted chain link sliding access gates will be installed on the alley side. They are only accessible with a wireless key fob. They will match the existing gates already on the property. There will be no public access. A new 5-foot-wide sidewalk will be constructed on E. 7th Street with 7 feet width of landscaping. The existing sidewalk on S. C Street will be modified to include a 6 foot wide landscaping and 8 feet wide sidewalk.
Landscaping trees and shrubs will be installed along the frontage streets. Minor landscape improvements will be installed onsite, but outside of the MID easement. All new landscaping will match existing species along S. C Street. LED lighting and security cameras will be installed onsite on two poles.
On September 26, 2023 the City released the project for public bidding on the PlanetBids web portal. Also, a “Notice Inviting Bids” was duly published in the Madera Tribune Newspaper on September 27 and October 4, 2023.
On November 2, 2023 six bids were received. The bids were checked for accuracy against bidding requirements, validity of licenses, and bid security. Table 1 presents a summary of the bids received.
Table 1: Bid Overview
Bidder Total Base Bid
1. Terra West Construction Inc. $518,700.00
2. JJT@ Inc dba Todd Companies $571,195.72
3. The Design Build Inc. $571,590.00
4. Heavy Road & Rail, Inc. $605,000.00
5. JPB Designs, Inc. $648,980.00
6. B & M Builders, Inc $703,390.00
Engineer’s Opinion of Cost $549,565.00
Terra submitted the lowest, responsive, and responsible bid that meets the contract requirements and is therefore recommended for award.
Staff performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and determined that it falls within the Class 1 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities) set forth in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15301, as this contract is for the replacement of existing pavement, fencing, and landscaping. There will be no expansion of existing facilities or change in use. None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply to this project. As such, staff recommends that Council adopt a Class 1 Categorical Exemption for this project.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact on the City’s General Fund.
Measure K Sales Tax (Police Department) 10252500 are programed in the FY 2023/24 CIP as PD-
01. Funding is also being provided by grants from the California Office of Emergency Services ALTERNATIVES:
Reject all bids. Rebidding the project adds financial and operational risk by potentially increasing the construction cost and delay in construction.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution approving Contract
a. Exhibit A – Contract
Attachment 1
Contract Award Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 23-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MADERA,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT PARKING LOT, CITY PROJECT PD-01 IN THE AMOUNT OF $518,700.00 TO TERRA WEST CONSTRUCTION INC AND AUTHORIZING
CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCIES RELATING TO THE CONTRACT AND A CEQA CLASS 1 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (EXISTING FACILITIES) WHEREAS, on September 26, 2023, the City of Madera (City) Engineering Department advertised a solicitation for construction bids for the New Police Department Parking Lot, City Project PD-01 hereinafter referred to as “the Project”; and WHEREAS, six sealed bids were received on November 2, 2023, and opened by the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, Terra West Construction Inc was selected as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and
WHEREAS, the Project is programmed in the Capital Improvement Projects Budget for Fiscal Year 2023/24 under CIP Projects PD-01 using Measure K Sales Tax funds; and WHEREAS, a CEQA Class 1 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities) was prepared.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MADERA HEREBY finds, orders and resolves as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct.
2. The City Council (Council) has reviewed and considered all of the information presented including the report to Council from the Engineering Department.
3. The City finds that Terra West Construction Inc is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder.
4. The contract for the Project in the Amount of $518,700.00 to Terra West Construction Inc, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and referred to for particulars, is approved.
5. Council authorizes Construction Contingencies of up to 10 percent as approved by the City Engineer
6. A CEQA Class 1 Categorical Exemption (Existing Facilities) was prepared.
7. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. *******
Exhibit A
Contract Agreement
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 15th day of November, 2023, between the City of Madera, hereinafter called “OWNER”, and Terra West Construction Inc, doing business as a corporation, hereinafter called “CONTRACTOR”.
WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinafter mentioned:
1. The CONTRACTOR shall commence and complete all WORK required for the “New Police Department Parking Lot, City Project PD-01”
2. The CONTRACTOR shall furnish all of the material, supplies, tools, equipment, labor and other services necessary for the construction and completion of the WORK described herein.
3. The CONTRACTOR shall commence the WORK required by the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS within 10 calendar days after the date of the NOTICE TO PROCEED and will complete the same within the time period set forth in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The CONTRACTOR shall submit a Payment Bond and Performance Bond in the amount of $ 518,700.00, each and Insurance Certificates as specified in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS prior to commencing any WORK.
4. The CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all of the WORK described in the DOCUMENTS for the unit and lump sum prices set forth in the Bid Schedule.
5. The term “CONTRACT DOCUMENTS” means and includes the following:
(A) Advertisement for Bids
(B) Information for Bidders
(C) Bid Proposal
(D) Bid Bond
(E) Agreement
(F) Payment Bond
(G) Performance Bond
(H) Insurance Requirements for Contractors
(I) General Conditions
(J) Special Conditions
(K) City of Madera Standard Specifications and Drawings (N) State Standard Plans and Specifications
(O) Plans and Specifications prepared or issued by City of Madera entitled “New Police Department Parking Lot”, City Project PD-01
Addenda Nos. 1, dated October 19, 2023
6. In the event the CONTRACTOR does not complete the WORK within the time limit specified herein or within such further time as authorized, the CONTRACTOR shall pay to the OWNER liquidated damages in the amount of Three Thousand six Hundred Dollars ($3,600.00) per day for each and every calendar day delay in finishing the WORK beyond the completion date so specified.
7. The OWNER will pay to the CONTRACTOR in the manner and at such times as set forth in the General Conditions such amounts as required by the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. For any moneys earned by the CONTRACTOR and withheld by the OWNER to ensure the performance of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR may, at his request and expense, substitute securities equivalent to the amount withheld in the form and manner and subject to the conditions provided in Division 2, Part 5, Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code of the State of California.
8. In the event of a dispute between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR as to an interpretation of any of the specifications or as to the quality or sufficiency of material or workmanship, the decision of the OWNER shall for the time being prevail and the CONTRACTOR, without delaying the job, shall proceed as directed by the OWNER without prejudice to a final determination by negotiation, arbitration by mutual consent or litigation, and should the CONTRACTOR be finally determined to be either wholly or partially correct, the OWNER shall reimburse him for any added costs he may have incurred by reason of work done or material supplied beyond the terms of the contract as a result of complying with the OWNER’S directions as aforesaid. In the event the CONTRACTOR shall neglect to prosecute the work properly or fail to perform any provisions of the CONTRACT, the OWNER, after three days written notice to the CONTRACTOR, may, without prejudice to any other remedy it may have, make good such deficiencies and may deduct the cost thereof from the payment then or thereafter due to the CONTRACTOR, subject to final settlement between the parties as in this paragraph herein above provided. 8A. CLAIMS RESOLUTION PROCESS FOR DISPUTES.
It is the intent of this Contract that disputes regarding the Contract be resolved promptly and fairly between the Contractor and the Owner. However, it is recognized that some disputes will require detailed investigation and review by one or both parties before a determination and resolution can be reached.
For the protection of the rights of both the Contractor and the Owner, the following provisions are provided for the resolution of disputes which cannot be resolved by the Owner and the Contractor within three business days after either party gives verbal notice of dispute or potential dispute to the other's attention and prior to the commencement of such work.
The following provisions are intended by Contractor and Owner to comply with Public Contract Code Sections 9204 and 20104 et. seq.
A. Claims:
The term “claim” refers to a separate demand by Contractor sent by registered mail or certified mail with return receipt requested, for one or more of the following:
1. A time extension, including, without limitation, for relief from damages or penalties for delay assessed by Owner under this Contract.
2. Payment by the Owner of money or damages arising from work done by, or on behalf of, the Contractor pursuant to the Contract and payment for which is not otherwise expressly provided or to which the Contractor is not otherwise entitled.
3. Payment of an amount that is disputed by the Owner.
B. The Claim Must Be Timely and in Writing:
For all claims the claim must be in writing and include the documents necessary to substantiate the claim. A notice of potential claim must be filed within five (5) business days of Contractor’s completion of work that is a potential claim. Notice of an actual claim must be filed on or before the date of final payment.
C. Receipt of Claim by Owner:
Upon receipt of a claim pursuant to this section, the Owner will conduct a reasonable review of the claim and, within a period not to exceed 45 days from the date of receipt, will provide the Contractor with a written statement identifying what portion of the claim is disputed and what portion is undisputed. Upon receipt of a claim, Owner and Contractor may, by mutual agreement, extend the time period provided in this section.
The Contractor shall furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim. If additional information is thereafter required, it shall be requested and provided upon mutual agreement by the Owner and the Contractor. The District's written response to the claim, as further documented, shall be submitted to the claimant within 30 days after receipt of the further documentation, or within a period of time no greater than that taken by the Contractor in producing the additional information or requested documentation.
D. City Council Approval:
If the Owner needs approval from the City Council to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion of the claim, and the City Council does not meet within the 45 days or within the mutually agreed to extension of time following receipt of a claim sent by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, the Owner shall have up to three days following the next duly publicly noticed regular meeting of the City Council after the 45-day period or extension expires to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion.
E. Payment of Claim:
Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the Owner issues its written statement. If the Owner fails to issue a written statement, paragraph F below shall apply.
F. Meet and Confer:
If the Contractor disputes the Owner’s written response, or if the Owner fails to respond to a claim issued pursuant to this section within the time prescribed, the Contractor may demand in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute.
Upon receipt of a demand in writing sent by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, the Owner shall schedule a meet and confer conference within 30 days for settlement of the dispute.
Within 10 business days following the conclusion of the meet and confer conference, if the claim or any portion of the claim remains in dispute, the Owner shall provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the portion of the claim that remains in dispute and the portion that is undisputed. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the Owner issues its written statement. Any disputed portion of the claim, as identified by the contractor in writing, shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation, with the Owner and the Contractor sharing the associated costs equally. The Owner and Contractor shall mutually agree to a mediator within 10 business days after the disputed portion of the claim has been identified in writing. If the parties cannot agree upon a mediator, each party shall select a mediator and those mediators shall select a qualified neutral third party to mediate with regard to the disputed portion of the claim. Each party shall bear the fees and costs charged by its respective mediator in connection with the selection of the neutral mediator. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parts of the claim remaining in dispute shall be subject to applicable procedures outside this section.
Under this Contract, mediation includes any nonbinding process, including, but not limited to, neutral evaluation or a dispute review board, in which an independent third party or board assists the parties in dispute resolution through negotiation or by issuance of an evaluation. Any mediation utilized shall conform to the timeframes in this section.
Unless otherwise agreed to by the Owner and the Contractor in writing, the mediation conducted pursuant to this section shall excuse any further obligation under Public Contract Code Section 20104.4 to mediate after litigation has been commenced.
If mediation as set forth above does not resolve the parties’ dispute, the parties will proceed to arbitration of disputes under private arbitration or the Public Works Contract Arbitration Program.
G. Filing a Government Code Written Claim Notice:
Following the meet and confer conference, if the claim or any portion remains in dispute, the Contractor may file a claim under the Torts Claims Act as provided in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 900) and Chapter 2 commencing with Section 910) of Part 3 of Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code Section 900.
H. Owner’s Failure to Respond to Claim:
Failure by the Owner to respond to a claim from Contractor within the time periods described above or to otherwise meet the time requirements set forth above shall result in the claim being deemed rejected in its entirety. A claim that is denied by reason of the Owner’s failure to have responded to a claim, or its failure to otherwise meet the time requirements of this section, shall not constitute an adverse finding with regard to the merits of the claim or the responsibility or qualifications of the Contractor.
I. Interest:
Amounts not paid in a timely manner as required by this section shall bear interest at 7 percent per annum.
J. Subcontractor Claims:
If a subcontractor or a lower tier subcontractor lacks legal standing to assert a claim against Owner because privity of contract does not exist, the Contractor may present to the Owner a claim on behalf of a subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “subcontractor’ means any type of subcontractor within the meaning of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code who either is in direct contract with the Contractor or is a lower tier subcontractor. A subcontractor may request in writing, either on his or her own behalf or on behalf of a lower tier subcontractor, that the Contractor present a claim for work which was performed by the subcontractor or by a lower tier subcontractor on behalf of the subcontractor. The subcontractor requesting that the claim be presented to the Owner shall furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim. Within 45 days of receipt of this written request, the Contractor shall notify the subcontractor in writing as to whether the contractor presented the claim to the Owner and, if the original contractor did not present the claim, provide the subcontractor with a statement of the reasons for not having done so.
K. Filing of Action on Unresolved Claims:
The parties shall follow the procedures set forth in Public Contracts Code Section 20104.4 if an action is filed to resolve claims under the foregoing provisions. Any action shall be filed in Madera County.
9. Attention is directed to Section 1735 of the Labor Code, which reads as follows:
“No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of the race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical conditions, marital status, or sex of such persons except as provided in Section 12940 of the Government Code, and every contractor for public works violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for by violation of this chapter”.
10. In accordance with the provisions of Article 5, Chapter l, Part 7, Division 2 (commencing with Section 1860) and Chapter 4, Part l, Division 4 (commencing with Section 3700) of the Labor Code of the State of California, the CONTRACTOR is required to secure the payment of compensation to his employees and shall for that purpose obtain and keep in effect adequate Worker’s Compensation Insurance.
The undersigned CONTRACTOR is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against Liability for Worker’s Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions before commencing the performance of the WORK of this Agreement.
11. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with Part 7, Chapter l, Article 2, Section 1775 of the Labor Code of the State of California. The CONTRACTOR shall, as a penalty to the OWNER, forfeit fifty dollars ($50.00) for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each workman paid less than the prevailing rates for such work or craft in which such workman is employed for any public work done under the Contract by him or by any SUBCONTRACTOR under him. The difference between such prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each workman for each calendar day or portion thereof for which each workman was paid less than a prevailing wage rate, shall be paid to each workman by the CONTRACTOR.
12. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with Part 7, Chapter l, Article 2, Section 1776 of the Labor Code of the State of California. The CONTRACTOR shall keep and require that all SUBCONTRACTORS keep accurate payroll records showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice worker or other employee employed by him in connection with public work. Such payroll records shall be certified and shall be available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of the CONTRACTOR by the OWNER, its officers and agents and to the representatives of the Division of Labor Law Enforcement of the State Department of Industrial Relations. In the event of non-compliance with the requirements of Section 1776, the CONTRACTOR shall have 10 days in which to comply subsequent to receipt of written notice specifying in what respects the CONTRACTOR must comply. Should non-compliance still be evident after the ten (10) day period, the CONTRACTOR shall, as a penalty to the OWNER forfeit twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker until strict compliance is effectuated. Upon the request of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards or the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, these penalties shall be withheld from progress payments then due.
13. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the CONTRACTOR or any SUBCONTRACTOR under him. It is the CONTRACTOR’S responsibility to ensure compliance by both itself and all SUBCONTRACTORS.
Section 1777.5 provides, in part, as follows:
The CONTRACTOR or SUBCONTRACTOR, if he is covered by this section, upon the issuance of the approval certificate, or if he has been previously approved in the craft or trade, shall employ the number of apprentices or the ratio of apprentices to journeyman stipulated in the apprenticeship standards. Upon proper showing by the CONTRACTOR that he employs apprentices in the craft or trade in the State on all of his/her contracts on an annual average of not less than one hour of apprentice work for every five hours of labor performed by a journeyman, or in the land surveyor classification, one apprentice for each five journeyman, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards may grant a certification exempting the CONTRACTOR from the one (1) to five (5) hourly ratio as set forth in this section. This section shall not apply to contracts of general CONTRACTORS or to contracts of specialty contractors not bidding for work through a general or prime CONTRACTOR, when the contracts of general CONTRACTORS, or those specialty CONTRACTORS involve less than thirty thousand dollars ($30,000). Any work performed by a journeyman in excess of eight hours per day or forty (40) hours per week shall not be used to calculate the hourly ratio required by this section.
Apprenticeable craft or trade, as used in this section, shall mean a craft or trade determined as an apprenticeable occupation in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the Apprenticeship Council. The joint apprenticeship committee shall have the discretion to grant a certificate, which shall be subject to the approval of the Administrator of Apprenticeship, exempting a CONTRACTOR from the 1 to 5 ratio set forth in this section when it finds that any one of the following conditions is met:
(a) In the event unemployment for the previous three-month period in such area exceeds an average of 15 percent, or
(b) In the event the number of apprentices in training in such area exceeds a ratio of 1 to 5, or (c) If there is a showing that the apprenticeable craft or trade is replacing at least one-thirtieth of its journeymen annually through apprenticeship training, either (1) on a statewide basis, or (2) on a local basis, or
(d) If assignment of an apprentice to any work performed under a public works contract would create a condition which should jeopardize his life or the life, safety, or property of fellow employees, or the public at large or if the specific task to which the apprentice is to be assigned is of a nature that training cannot be provided by a journeyman.
When such exemptions are granted to an organization which represents CONTRACTORS in a specific trade from the 1 to 5 ratio on a local or statewide basis the member CONTRACTORS will not be required to submit individual applications for approval to local joint apprenticeship committees, provided they are already covered by the local apprenticeship standards.
The CONTRACTOR is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in apprenticeable trade on such contracts and if other CONTRACTORS on the public work site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR, and any SUBCONTRACTOR under him, shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code in the employment of apprentices.
Information relative to number of apprentices, identifications, wages, hours of employment and standards of working conditions shall be obtained from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards. Consult the white pages of your telephone directory under California, State of, Industrial Relations, Apprenticeship Standards, for the telephone number and address of the nearest office. Willful failure by the CONTRACTOR to comply with the provisions of Sections 1777.5 will subject the CONTRACTOR to the penalties set forth in Section 1777.7 of the Labor Code.
14. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1813, eight hours in any one calendar day and forty (40) hours in any calendar week shall be the maximum hours any workman is required or permitted to work, except in cases of extraordinary emergency caused by fires, flood, or danger to life and property.
The CONTRACTOR doing the work, or his duly authorized agent, shall file with OWNER a report, verified by his oath, setting forth the nature of the said emergency, which report shall contain the name of said worker and the hours worked by him on the said day, and the CONTRACTOR and each SUBCONTRACTOR shall also keep an accurate record showing the names and actual hours worked of all workers employed by him in connection with the work contemplated by this Agreement, which record shall be open at all reasonable hours to the inspection of the OWNER, or its officer or agents and to the Chief of all Division of Labor Statistics and Law Enforcement of the Department of Industrial Relations, his deputies or agents; and it is hereby further agreed that said CONTRACTOR shall forfeit as a penalty to the OWNER the sum of Twenty-Five Dollars ($25.00) for each laborer, workman or any SUBCONTRACTOR under him for each calendar day during which such laborer, workman or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of this stipulation.
Overtime and shift work may be established as a regular procedure by the CONTRACTOR with reasonable notice and written permission of the OWNER. No work other than overtime and shift work established as a regular procedure shall be performed between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. nor on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays except such work as is necessary for the proper care and protection of the work already performed or in case of an emergency.
CONTRACTOR agrees to pay the costs of overtime inspection except those occurring as a result of overtime and shift work established as a regular procedure. Overtime inspection shall include inspection required during holidays, Saturdays, Sundays and weekdays. Costs of overtime inspection will cover engineering, inspection, general supervision and overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the overtime work. CONTRACTOR agrees that OWNER shall deduct such charges from payments due the CONTRACTOR.
15. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with Division 2, Chapter 4, Part 1 of the Public Contract Code relating to subletting and subcontracting, specifically included but not limited to Sections 4104, 4106, and 4110, which by this reference are incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein.
16. The CONTRACTOR and the OWNER agree that changes in this Agreement or in the work to be done under this Agreement shall become effective only when written in the form of a supplemental agreement or change order and approved and signed by the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR. It is specifically agreed that the OWNER shall have the right to request any alterations, deviations, reductions or additions to the contract or the plans and specifications or any of them, and the amount of the cost thereof shall be added to or deducted from the amount of the contract price aforesaid by fair and reasonable valuations thereof.
This contract shall be held to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original plans and specifications as amended by such changes. No such change or modification shall release or exonerate any surety upon any guaranty or bond given in connection with this contract.
17. Contractor shall indemnify, defend with legal counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, and cost (including without limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Contractor's negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this AGREEMENT, except such loss or damage caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Should conflict of interest principles preclude a single legal counsel from representing both City and Contractor, or should City otherwise find Contractor’s legal counsel unacceptable, then Contractor shall reimburse the City its costs of defense, including without limitation, reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees, and all other costs and fees of litigation.
The Contractor shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City (and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) with respect to claims determined by a trier of fact to have been the result of the Contractor’s negligent, reckless, or wrongful performance. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.
Contractor obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such claim, charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment, civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee. However, without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this agreement, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City for liability attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between the parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In instances where City is shown to have been actively negligent and where City’s active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Contractor will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of City.
Contractor agrees to obtain or cause to be obtained executed defense and indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth in this Section from each and every Subcontractor and Subconsultant, of every Tier. In the event the Contractor fails to do so, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible to provide such defense and indemnification according to the terms of this Section.
18. Contractor must comply with the insurance requirements as described in the section “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTRACTOR”, pages 37-38 of the Contract Documents.
19. Amendments- Any changes to this Agreement requested by either City or Terra West Construction Inc. may only be effected if mutually agreed upon in writing by duly authorized representatives of the parties hereto. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended or any rights of a party to it waived except by such writing.
20. Termination.
A. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by either party upon fifteen (15) calendar days written notice. In the event the Agreement is terminated by either party, Terra West Construction Inc shall be compensated for services performed to the date of termination based upon the compensation rates and subject to the maximum amounts payable agreed to together with such additional services performed after termination which are authorized in writing by the City representative to wind up the work performed to date of termination.
B. City may immediately suspend or terminate this Agreement in whole or in part by written notice where, if in the determination of City, there is:
1. An illegal use of funds by Terra West Construction Inc;
2. A failure by Terra West Construction Inc to comply with any material term of this Agreement;
3. A substantially incorrect or incomplete report submitted by Terra West Construction Inc to City.
In no event shall any payment by City or acceptance by Terra West Construction Inc constitute a waiver by such party of any breach of this Agreement or any default which may then exist on the part of either party. Neither shall such payment impair or prejudice any remedy available to either party with respect to such breach or default. City shall have the right to demand of Terra West Construction Inc the repayment to City of any funds disbursed to Terra West Construction Inc under this Agreement which, as determined by the appropriate court or arbitrator, were not expended in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
Notice of termination shall be mailed to the City:
City of Madera
Engineering Department
428 E. Yosemite Avenue
Madera, Ca 93638
To the Contractor Terra West Construction Inc.
21. Notices. All notices and communications from the Terra West Construction Inc shall be to City's designated Project Manager or Principal-In-Charge. Verbal communications shall be confirmed in writing. All written notices shall be provided and addressed as soon as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days after termination.
22. Compliance With Laws- City shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws, ordinances, regulations and provisions applicable in the performance of City’s services.
Wherever reference is made in this Agreement to standards or codes in accordance with which work is to be performed or tested, the edition or revision of the standards or codes current on the effective date of this Agreement shall apply, unless otherwise expressly stated.
23. Attorneys’ Fees/Venue- In the event that any action is brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the party found by the court to be in default agrees to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees to the successful party in an amount to be fixed by the Court. The venue for any claim being brought for breach of this Agreement shall be in Madera County or as appropriate in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, located in the City of Madera.
24. Governing Law- The laws of the State of California shall govern the rights and obligations of the parties under the Agreement, including the interpretation of the Agreement. If any part of the Agreement is adjudged to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity shall not affect the full force and effect of the remainder of the Agreement.
25. City’s Authority- Each individual executing or attesting to this Agreement on behalf of the City hereby covenants and represents: (i) that he or she is duly authorized to execute or attest and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such corporation in accordance with a duly adopted resolution of the corporation’s articles of incorporation or charter and bylaws; (ii) that this Agreement is binding upon such corporation; and (iii) that Contractor is a duly organized and legally existing municipal corporation in good standing in the State of California.
26. Contractor’s Legal Authority - Each individual executing or attesting this Agreement on behalf of Terra West Construction Inc hereby covenants and represents: (i) that he or she is duly authorized to execute or attest and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such corporation in accordance with such corporation’s articles of incorporation or charter and by-laws; (ii) that this Agreement is binding upon such corporation; and (iii) that Terra West Construction Inc is a duly organized and legally existing corporation in good standing in the State of California.
27. Remedies for Default. Failure by a party to perform any term, condition or covenant required of the party under this Agreement shall constitute a “default” of the offending party under this Agreement. In the event that a default remains uncured for more than ten (10) days following receipt of written notice of default from the other party, a "breach" shall be deemed to have occurred. Any failure or delay by a party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any rights or remedies associated with a default.
28. Independent Contractor. In performance of the work, duties, and obligations assumed by the Contractor under this Agreement, it is mutually understood and agreed that the City, including any and all of City’s officers, agents and employees will, at all times, be acting and performing as an independent contractor, and shall act in an independent capacity and not as an officer, agent, servant, employee, joint venture, partner, or associate of City. Furthermore, City shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which City shall perform its work and functions. The City shall comply with all applicable provisions of law and the rules and regulations, if any, of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the subject matter hereof.
Because of its status as an independent contractor, City shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to City employees. City shall be solely liable and responsible for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees all legally required employee benefits. In addition, City shall be solely responsible and hold City harmless from all matters relating to payment of City’s employees, including compliance with Social Security, withholding and all other regulations governing such matters. It is acknowledged that during the term of this Agreement, City may be providing services to others unrelated to City or to this Agreement.
29.Sole Agreement- This instrument constitutes the sole and only Agreement between City and Terra West Construction Inc in connection to the Project and correctly sets forth the obligations of the City and Terra West Construction Inc to each other as of its date. Any Agreements or representations in connection with the Project, not expressly set forth in this instrument are null and void.
30. Assignment-Neither the Terra West Construction Inc nor City will assign its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other.
31 This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in THREE copies, each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first above written.
City of Madera
Herein Called OWNER
By:
Santos Garcia, Mayor
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Shannon L. Chaffin, City Attorney
ATTEST:
Alicia Gonzales, City Clerk
BY: Terra West Construction Inc
Herein Called CONTRACTOR
BY:
Ramon Medina, Secretary
Federal Tax I.D. No. 45-0933619
Contractor License Number = 924631
DIR Registration Number = 1000712658
NOTE: This Notary Acknowledgment on the following page is required for verification of Contractor’s signature.
Acknowledgment
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
California Notary acknowledgement required to be attached.
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by: Council Meeting of: November 15, 2023
_________________________________ Agenda Number: ___________ Joseph Hebert, Parks & Community Services Director
_________________________________
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Agreement for Vernon McCullough River Trail Restoration Project RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution awarding a contract under Invitation for Bids (IFB) No. 202324-07 to Witbro Inc. dba Seal Rite Paving and Grading for trail seal coating and repairs at the Vernon McCullough River Trail in the amount of $190,116
SUMMARY:
On October 16, 2023, the City received three bidsin response to the IFB requesting complete seal coating and repairs at the Vernon McCullough River Trail.
Funding for the seal coating and repairs of the Vernon McCullough River Trail comes from the Clean California Local Grant Program. The City was awarded $832,350 for litter abatement and capital improvements along the Fresno River and Vernon McCullough River Trail. The initial grant application requested funding for the enhancement of the trail’s pavement and enhanced walking and recreational opportunities for the public.
DISCUSSION:
The Vernon McCullough River Trail spans runs parallel to the Fresno River beginning at Tulare Street and terminating just west of Caitlan Drive. It measures approximately 17,000 linear feet and covers a total approximate surface area of roughly 204,211 square feet. The project will include crack fill, pothole repair, and a seal coat on the existing asphalt trail surface. The trail is a City gem, providing access to a cross-city trail system, allowing residents access to a desirable, no-cost wellness amenity. The trail encourages active recreation through walking, running, and bicycling.
D-2
Staff prepared IFB No. 202324-07 for the complete trail seal coating and repairs at the Vernon McCullough River Trail. The IFB was released on September 16, 2023, with bids due on Monday, October 16, 2023. The IFB notice was duly published in the Madera Tribune on September 16, 2023 and again on September 23, 2023. In addition, IFB was published on the following platforms:
City of Madera PlanetBids Vendor Portal
Construction Bidboard (Ebidboard)
Dodge Data & Analytics
Placer Country Contractors Association & Builders Exchange Builders’ Exchange of San Joaquin
Central California Builders Exchange
City staff would like to note, 96 vendors were notified through PlanetBids. A total of 10 vendors downloaded the project bid items. Bids were ultimately received from three firms: 1) Witbro, Inc. dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading, (2) Anderson Striping & Construction, Inc, and (3) MBS Engineering, Inc. The three bids received were evaluated by City staff for responsiveness and cost.
Table 1 shows vendors ranked by cost, with staff recommendation for awarding the contract to Seal Rite, being the lowest responsive, responsible bid per the requirements set forth in the project’s contract documents.
Table 1: Bids Received Ranked by Cost
Rank Firm Bid Amount
1 Witbro, Inc. dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading $190,116.00 2 Anderson Striping & Construction, Inc. $232,434.16
3 MBS Engineering, Inc. $288,318.74
Seal Rite is an experienced seal coating contractor with over 25 years of experience.
The City has worked with Seal Rite under previous agreements, including sidewalk improvement and larger street repair projects at various locations.
It is noted that the engineer’s estimate placed the project cost at $208,529. With a bid of approximately $190k, the project is under budget and the remaining funds will be allocated to other improvements along the Fresno River.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
A portion of the Clean California Local Grant Program award of $832,350 will fund the Vernon McCullough River Trail seal coating and repairs, as intended by the grant application. Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the City’s Fiscal Year 2023/24 Parks Grant Fund #41096357 for expenses associated with the grant scope of work.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternative to awarding this project is to reject all bids. Rebidding the project could result in higher bids or a lack of additional bids received. In addition, failure to proceed with the project promptly could jeopardize the City’s ability to complete the project within the grant performance period ending June 30, 2024.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Awarding RFQ No. 202324-07 to Witbro, Inc. dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading for Seal Coating and Repairs of the Vernon McCullough River Trail a. Exhibit A: Construction Agreement
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution Awarding RFQ No. 202324-07 to Witbro Inc., dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading RESOLUTION NO. 23-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MADERA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING AWARDING IFB NO. 202324-07 TO WITBRO INC., DBA SEAL RITE PAVING & GRADING FOR SEAL COATING & REPAIR OF THE VERNON MCCULLOUGH RIVER TRAIL FOR $190,116.00
WHEREAS, the City of Madera released an Invitation for Bids (IFB) No. 202324-07 calling for complete seal coating and repairs of the Vernon McCullough River Trail; and WHEREAS, the IFB No. 202324-07 was released on September 16, 2023; and WHEREAS, the IFB No. 202324-07 was duly noticed and published accordingly; and WHEREAS, a total of three bids were received as of October 16, 2023; and WHEREAS, one bid was received from Witbro, Inc. dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading (Seal Rite); and
WHEREAS, Seal Rite submitted the lowest responsible bid at $190,116.00; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter into a Construction Agreement with Seal Rite for the completion of the work; and
WHEREAS, the Construction Agreement is to be for $190,116.00; and WHEREAS, the work to be completed is part of the Clean California Local Grant Program award of $832,350 the City received for litter abatement capital improvements along the Fresno River and Vernon McCullough River Trail.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MADERA HEREBY finds, orders, and resolves as follows:
1. The above recitals are true and correct.
2. The City Council of the City of Madera does hereby accept the three bids received for this project, finds that Witbro, Inc. (dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading), is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, and awards a construction contract for the IFB 202324-07 Vern McCullough River Trail Surface Restoration Project in the amount of $190,116.00 to Witbro, Inc. Said contract is attached hereto as Exhibit A and approved as to its material terms, and the Mayor is authorized to execute the same on behalf of the City subject as to legal form by the City Attorney.
3. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. *******
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
IFB 202324-07 Vern McCullough River Trail Seal Coating and Repair This Construction Agreement (“Agreement”) is made between the City of Madera, hereinafter called “OWNER,” and Witbro Inc., dba Seal Rite Paving & Grading, doing business as a corporation, hereinafter “CONTRACTOR” and collectively called “Parties.” The Agreement is effective on the last date signed by the Parties at the end of this Agreement.
WITNESSETH: The Parties agree as follows:
1. Project. The CONTRACTOR shall commence and complete all WORK required for the “IFB 202324-07 Vern McCullough River Trail Surface Restoration.”
2. Materials, Supplies, Equipment. The CONTRACTOR shall furnish all of the material, supplies, tools, equipment, labor, and other services necessary for the construction and completion of the WORK described in this Agreement.
3. Commencement of Work; Term of Agreement. The CONTRACTOR shall commence the WORK required by the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS within ten (10) calendar days after the date of the NOTICE TO PROCEED and will complete the same within 30 calendar days per assigned location. The CONTRACTOR shall submit a Payment Bond and Performance Bond in the amount of $190,116.00, each and Insurance Certificates as specified in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS prior to commencing any WORK within fifteen (15) working days after being notified of the award of the contract, and before OWNER executes this AGREEMENT.
This Agreement shall be effective on _____________ , after approval by the City Council at a duly scheduled meeting thereof and shall continue in full force and effect through __________ , unless otherwise terminated earlier by one of the parties pursuant to Section 21 of this Agreement. The term may be extended by the City Manager in writing, if extension limited to term only, and if mutually agreed to at least 90 days in advance of expiration, for a period not to exceed one (1) additional one-year extension. An extension which includes compensation modifications will be submitted to the Council for approval.
4. The Contract Amount. OWNER agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, the sum not to exceed One Hundred Ninety Thousand, One Hundred Sixteen Dollars and Zero Cents ($190,116.00) (“Contract Price”) subject to adjustments for changes in work as may be directed in writing by OWNER as payment in full for the WORK described in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. WORK performed at unit prices proposed in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS will be paid based on actual quantities of work performed and accepted.
5. Contract Documents. The CONTRACTOR shall commence and complete all WORK required in accordance with the following CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, attached hereto as Exhibit A:
(A) CONTRACTOR Bid Schedule, Unit Prices
Nov. 15, 2023
April 15, 2024
(B) Signed Non-Collusion Affidavit
(C) Signed Conflict of Interest Disclosure
(D) Addenda No. 1, dated 09/21/2023
(E) Addenda No. 2, dated 09/21/2023
(F) CONTRACTOR Evidence of Insurance
(G) Payment Bond
(H) Performance Bond
(I) IFB 202324-07 Vern McCullough River Trail Seal Coating and Repair
6. Liquidated Damages. In the event the CONTRACTOR does not complete the WORK within the time limit specified in Section 3 or within such further time as authorized, the CONTRACTOR shall pay to the OWNER liquidated damages in the amount of two hundred dollars ($200.00) per day for each and every calendar day delay in finishing the WORK beyond the completion date so specified.
7. Payment to Contractor. The OWNER will pay to the CONTRACTOR in the manner and at such times as set forth in the General Conditions such amounts as required by the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. For any moneys earned by the CONTRACTOR and withheld by the OWNER to ensure the performance of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR may, at his request and expense, substitute securities equivalent to the amount withheld in the form and manner and subject to the conditions provided in Division 2, Part 5, Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code of the State of California.
8. Disputes. In the event of a dispute between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR as to an interpretation of any of the specifications or as to the quality or sufficiency of material or workmanship, the decision of the OWNER shall for the time being prevail and the CONTRACTOR, without delaying the job, shall proceed as directed by the OWNER without prejudice to a final determination by negotiation, arbitration by mutual consent or litigation, and should the CONTRACTOR be finally determined to be either wholly or partially correct, the OWNER shall reimburse him for any added costs he may have incurred by reason of work done or material supplied beyond the terms of the contract as a result of complying with the OWNER’S directions as aforesaid. In the event the CONTRACTOR shall neglect to prosecute the work properly or fail to perform any provisions of the CONTRACT, the OWNER, after three days written notice to the CONTRACTOR, may, without prejudice to any other remedy it may have, make good such deficiencies and may deduct the cost thereof from the payment then or thereafter due to the CONTRACTOR, subject to final settlement between the parties as in this paragraph herein above provided.
8A. Claims Resolution Process For Disputes.
It is the intent of this Contract that disputes regarding the Contract be resolved promptly and fairly between the Contractor and the Owner. However, it is recognized that some disputes will require detailed investigation and review by one or both parties before a determination and resolution can be reached. For the protection of the rights of both the Contractor and the Owner, the following provisions are provided for the resolution of disputes which cannot be resolved by the Owner and the Contractor within three business days after either party gives verbal notice of dispute or potential dispute to the other's attention and prior to the commencement of such work.
The following provisions are intended by Contractor and Owner to comply with Public Contract Code Sections 9204 and 20104 et. seq.
1) Claims:
The term “claim” refers to a separate demand by Contractor sent by registered mail or certified mail with return receipt requested, for one or more of the following:
a) A time extension, including, without limitation, for relief from damages or penalties for delay assessed by Owner under this Contract. b) Payment by the Owner of money or damages arising from work done by, or on behalf of, the Contractor pursuant to the Contract and payment for which is not otherwise expressly provided or to which the Contractor is not otherwise entitled.
c) Payment of an amount that is disputed by the Owner.
2) The Claim Must Be Timely and in Writing:
For all claims the claim must be in writing and include the documents necessary to substantiate the claim. A notice of potential claim must be filed within five (5) business days of Contractor’s completion of work that is a potential claim. Notice of an actual claim must be filed on or before the date of final payment. 3) Receipt of Claim by Owner:
Upon receipt of a claim pursuant to this section, the Owner will conduct a reasonable review of the claim and, within a period not to exceed 45 days from the date of receipt, will provide the Contractor with a written statement identifying what portion of the claim is disputed and what portion is undisputed.
Upon receipt of a claim, Owner and Contractor may, by mutual agreement, extend the time period provided in this section.
The Contractor shall furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim. If additional information is thereafter required, it shall be requested and provided upon mutual agreement by the Owner and the Contractor. The District's written response to the claim, as further documented, shall be submitted to the claimant within 30 days after receipt of the further documentation, or within a period of time no greater than that taken by the Contractor in producing the additional information or requested documentation.
4) City Council Approval:
If the Owner needs approval from the City Council to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion of the claim, and the City Council does not meet within the 45 days or within the mutually agreed to extension of time following receipt of a claim sent by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, the Owner shall have up to three days following the next duly publicly noticed regular meeting of the City Council after the 45-day period or extension expires to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion. 5) Payment of Claim:
Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the Owner issues its written statement. If the Owner fails to issue a written statement, paragraph F below shall apply. 6) Meet and Confer:
If the Contractor disputes the Owner’s written response, or if the Owner fails to respond to a claim issued pursuant to this section within the time prescribed, the Contractor may demand in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute. Upon receipt of a demand in writing sent by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, the Owner shall schedule a meet and confer conference within 30 days for settlement of the dispute.
Within 10 business days following the conclusion of the meet and confer conference, if the claim or any portion of the claim remains in dispute, the Owner shall provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the portion of the claim that remains in dispute and the portion that is undisputed. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the Owner issues its written statement. Any disputed portion of the claim, as identified by the contractor in writing, shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation, with the Owner and the Contractor sharing the associated costs equally. The Owner and Contractor shall mutually agree to a mediator within 10 business days after the disputed portion of the claim has been identified in writing.
If the parties cannot agree upon a mediator, each party shall select a mediator and those mediators shall select a qualified neutral third party to mediate with regard to the disputed portion of the claim. Each party shall bear the fees and costs charged by its respective mediator in connection with the selection of the neutral mediator. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parts of the claim remaining in dispute shall be subject to applicable procedures outside this section.
Under this Contract, mediation includes any nonbinding process, including, but not limited to, neutral evaluation or a dispute review board, in which an independent third party or board assists the parties in dispute resolution through negotiation or by issuance of an evaluation. Any mediation utilized shall conform to the timeframes in this section.
Unless otherwise agreed to by the Owner and the Contractor in writing, the mediation conducted pursuant to this section shall excuse any further obligation under Public Contract Code Section 20104.4 to mediate after litigation has been commenced.
If mediation as set forth above does not resolve the parties’ dispute, the parties will proceed to arbitration of disputes under private arbitration or the Public Works Contract Arbitration Program.
7) Filing a Government Code Written Claim Notice:
Following the meet and confer conference, if the claim or any portion remains in dispute, the Contractor may file a claim under the Torts Claims Act as provided in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 900) and Chapter 2 commencing with Section 910) of Part 3 of Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code Section 900.
8) Owner’s Failure to Respond to Claim:
Failure by the Owner to respond to a claim from Contractor within the time periods described above or to otherwise meet the time requirements set forth above shall result in the claim being deemed rejected in its entirety. A claim that is denied by reason of the Owner’s failure to have responded to a claim, or its failure to otherwise meet the time requirements of this section, shall not constitute an adverse finding with regard to the merits of the claim or the responsibility or qualifications of the Contractor.
9) Interest:
Amounts not paid in a timely manner as required by this section shall bear interest at 7 percent per annum.
10) Subcontractor Claims:
If a subcontractor or a lower tier subcontractor lacks legal standing to assert a claim against Owner because privity of contract does not exist, the Contractor may present to the Owner a claim on behalf of a subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “subcontractor’ means any type of subcontractor within the meaning of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code who either is in direct contract with the Contractor or is a lower tier subcontractor. A subcontractor may request in writing, either on his or her own behalf or on behalf of a lower tier subcontractor, that the Contractor present a claim for work which was performed by the subcontractor or by a lower tier subcontractor on behalf of the subcontractor. The subcontractor requesting that the claim be presented to the Owner shall furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim. Within 45 days of receipt of this written request, the Contractor shall notify the subcontractor in writing as to whether the contractor presented the claim to the Owner and, if the original contractor did not present the claim, provide the subcontractor with a statement of the reasons for not having done so. 11) Filing of Action on Unresolved Claims:
The parties shall follow the procedures set forth in Public Contracts Code Section 20104.4 if an action is filed to resolve claims under the foregoing provisions. Any action shall be filed in Madera County.
9. No Discrimination in Employment. Attention is directed to Section 1735 of the Labor Code, which reads as follows:
“No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of the race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical conditions, marital status, or sex of such persons except as provided in Section 12940 of the Government Code, and every contractor for public works violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for by violation of this chapter”.
10. Workers Compensation. In accordance with the provisions of Article 5, Chapter l, Part 7, Division 2 (commencing with Section 1860) and Chapter 4, Part l, Division 4 (commencing with Section 3700) of the Labor Code of the State of California, the CONTRACTOR is required to secure the payment of compensation to his employees and shall for that purpose obtain and keep in effect adequate Worker’s Compensation Insurance.
The undersigned CONTRACTOR is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against Liability for Worker’s Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions before commencing the performance of the WORK of this Agreement.
11. Prevailing Wages. This Agreement is subject to California Labor Code Sections 1720, et seq., and Contractor and subcontractor shall pay not less than the specified prevailing rates of wage to all workers employed in performance of the Work. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1770 of the California Labor Code, OWNER has obtained the general prevailing rate of wages and employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pension, and similar purposes, as determined by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, a copy of which is on file in the office of OWNER, and shall be made available for viewing to any interested party upon request. The Contractor and each subcontractor shall forfeit as a penalty to OWNER not more than Two Hundred Dollars ($200) for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker paid less than the stipulated prevailing wage rate in violation of the Labor Code. In addition, the difference between the prevailing wage rate and the amount paid to each worker for each calendar day or portion thereof for which each worker was paid less than the stipulated prevailing wage rate shall be paid to each worker by the Contractor.
12. Public Works Contractor Registration. Pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, all contractors and subcontractors that wish to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, or enter into a contract to perform public work must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relation. No bid will be accepted, nor any contract entered into without proof of the Contractor’s and subcontractors’ current registration with the Department of Industrial Relations to perform public work. Contractor and its subcontractors, of any tier, shall maintain active registration with the Department of Industrial Relations for the duration of the Project. In addition, Contractor shall provide the registration number for each listed subcontractor in the space provided in the Designation of Subcontractors Form.
This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Relations. In executing this contract, Contractor acknowledges that it has reviewed all applicable labor compliance requirements and included the cost of complying with such requirements in its bid.
13. Payroll Records. The CONTRACTOR shall comply Section 1776 of the California Labor Code. The CONTRACTOR shall keep and require that all SUBCONTRACTORS keep accurate payroll records showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice worker or other employee employed by him in connection with public work. Such payroll records shall be certified and shall be available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of the CONTRACTOR by the OWNER, its officers, and agents and to the representatives of the Division of Labor Law Enforcement of the State Department of Industrial Relations. In the event of non-compliance with the requirements of Section 1776, the CONTRACTOR shall have 10 days in which to comply subsequent to receipt of written notice specifying in what respects the CONTRACTOR must comply. If CONTRACTOR or subcontractor does not comply after such ten (10) day period, the CONTRACTOR shall, as a penalty, forfeit one hundred dollars ($100) for each day or portion thereof for each worker until strict compliance is effectuated. Upon the request of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards or the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, these penalties shall be withheld from progress payments then due.
In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1771.4 Section 1771.4, CONTRACTOR and each subcontractor shall furnish the certified payroll records directly to the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) on a weekly basis and in the format prescribed by the DIR which may include electronic submission. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable requirements and regulations from the DIR relating to labor compliance monitoring and enforcement.
14. Apprentices. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the California Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the CONTRACTOR or any SUBCONTRACTOR. It is the CONTRACTOR’S responsibility to ensure compliance by both it and all SUBCONTRACTORS.
Section 1777.5 provides, in part, as follows:
The CONTRACTOR or SUBCONTRACTOR, if he is covered by this section, upon the issuance of the approval certificate, or if he has been previously approved in the craft or trade, shall employ the number of apprentices or the ratio of apprentices to journeyman stipulated in the apprenticeship standards. Upon proper showing by the CONTRACTOR that he employs apprentices in the craft or trade in the State on all of his/her contracts on an annual average of not less than one hour of apprentice work for every five hours of labor performed by a journeyman, or in the land surveyor classification, one apprentice for each five journeyman, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards may grant a certification exempting the CONTRACTOR from the one (1) to five (5) hourly ratio as set forth in this section. This section shall not apply to contracts of general CONTRACTORS or to contracts of specialty contractors not bidding for work through a general or prime CONTRACTOR, when the contracts of general CONTRACTORS, or those specialty CONTRACTORS involve less than thirty thousand dollars ($30,000). Any work performed by a journeyman in excess of eight hours per day or forty (40) hours per week shall not be used to calculate the hourly ratio required by this section.
Apprenticeable craft or trade, as used in this section, shall mean a craft or trade determined as an apprenticeable occupation in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the Apprenticeship Council. The joint apprenticeship committee shall have the discretion to grant a certificate, which shall be subject to the approval of the Administrator of Apprenticeship, exempting a CONTRACTOR from the 1 to 5 ratio set forth in this section when it finds that any one of the following conditions is met:
(a) In the event unemployment for the previous three-month period in such area exceeds an average of 15 percent, or
(b) In the event the number of apprentices in training in such area exceeds a ratio of 1 to 5, or
(c) If there is a showing that the apprenticeable craft or trade is replacing at least onethirtieth of its journeymen annually through apprenticeship training, either (1) on a statewide basis, or (2) on a local basis, or
(d) If assignment of an apprentice to any work performed under a public works contract would create a condition which should jeopardize his life or the life, safety, or property of fellow employees, or the public at large or if the specific task to which the apprentice is to be assigned is of a nature that training cannot be provided by a journeyman.
When such exemptions are granted to an organization which represents contractors in a specific trade from the 1 to 5 ratio on a local or statewide basis the member contractors will not be required to submit individual applications for approval to local joint apprenticeship committees, provided they are already covered by the local apprenticeship standards.
The CONTRACTOR is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registered apprentices or journeymen in apprenticeable trade on such contracts and if other contractors on the public work site are making such contributions. The CONTRACTOR, and any SUBCONTRACTOR under him, shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to number of apprentices, identifications, wages, hours of employment and standards of working conditions shall be obtained from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards. Consult the white pages of your telephone directory under California, State of, Industrial Relations, Apprenticeship Standards, for the telephone number and address of the nearest office. Willful failure by the CONTRACTOR to comply with the provisions of Sections 1777.5 will subject the CONTRACTOR to the penalties set forth in Section 1777.7 of the Labor Code.
15. Hours of Work. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1813, eight hours in any one calendar day and forty (40) hours in any calendar week shall be the maximum hours any worker is required or permitted to work, except in cases of extraordinary emergency caused by fires, flood, or danger to life and property or except as authorized under the overtime provisions in California Labor Code 1815.
Overtime and shift work may be established as a regular procedure by the CONTRACTOR with reasonable notice and written permission of the OWNER. No work other than overtime and shift work established as a regular procedure shall be performed between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. nor on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays except such work as is necessary for the proper care and protection of the work already performed or in case of an emergency.
CONTRACTOR agrees to pay the costs of overtime inspection except those occurring as a result of overtime and shift work established as a regular procedure. Overtime inspection shall include inspection required during holidays, Saturdays, Sundays, and weekdays. Costs of overtime inspection will cover engineering, inspection, general supervision, and overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the overtime work. CONTRACTOR agrees that OWNER shall deduct such charges from payments due the CONTRACTOR.
16. Subcontracting. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with Division 2, Chapter 4, Part 1 of the Public Contract Code relating to subletting and subcontracting, specifically included but not limited to Sections 4104, 4106, and 4110, which by this reference are incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein.
17. Change Orders. The CONTRACTOR and the OWNER agree that changes in this Agreement or in the work to be done under this Agreement shall become effective only when written in the form of a change order and approved and signed by the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR. It is specifically agreed that the OWNER shall have the right to request any alterations, deviations, reductions or additions to the contract or the plans and specifications or any of them, and the amount of the cost thereof shall be added to or deducted from the amount of the contract price aforesaid by fair and reasonable valuations thereof.
This Agreement shall be held to be completed when the work is finished in accordance with the original plans and specifications as amended by such changes. No such change or modification shall release or exonerate any surety upon any guaranty or bond given in connection with this contract.
18. Indemnification. Contractor shall indemnify, defend with legal counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, and cost (including without limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Contractor's negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except such loss or damage caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Should conflict of interest principles preclude a single legal counsel from representing both City and Contractor, or should City otherwise find Contractor’s legal counsel unacceptable, then Contractor shall reimburse the City its costs of defense, including without limitation, reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees, and all other costs and fees of litigation.
The Contractor shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City (and its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers) with respect to claims determined by a trier of fact to have been the result of the Contractor’s negligent, reckless, or wrongful performance. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.
Contractor obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such claim, charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment, civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee. However, without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this Agreement, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City for liability attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between the parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In instances where City is shown to have been actively negligent and where City’s active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of Contractor will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of City.
Contractor agrees to obtain or cause to be obtained executed defense and indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth in this Section from each and every Subcontractor and Subconsultant, of every Tier. In the event the Contractor fails to do so, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible to provide such defense and indemnification according to the terms of this Section.
19. Contractor must comply with the insurance requirements as described in the section “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS” of the Contract Documents.
20. Amendments. Any changes to this Agreement requested by either City or CONTRACTOR may only be effected if mutually agreed upon in writing by duly authorized representatives of the parties hereto. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended or any rights of a party to it waived except by such writing.
21. Termination.
A. Termination of the Contract for Default.
1. General: If, prior to the acceptance of the Work, the CONTRACTOR:
(a) Becomes insolvent, assigns its assets for the benefit of its creditors, or is otherwise financially unable to complete the Work; (b) Abandons the Work by failing to report to the Work site and diligently prosecute the Work to completion;
(c) Disregards written instructions from the City Engineer or materially violates provisions of the Contract Documents;
(d) Fails to prosecute the Work according to the schedule approved by the City;
(e) Disregards laws or regulations of any public body having jurisdiction; or
(f) Commits continuous or repeated violations of regulatory or statutory safety requirements, then the OWNER will consider the Contractor in default of the Contract.
2. Notices: Notices and other written communications regarding default between the CONTRACTOR, the OWNER, and the SURETY shall be transmitted as follows:
(a) Personal delivery with proof of delivery which may be made by declaration under penalty of perjury by any person over the age of 18 years. The proof of delivery shall show that delivery was performed in accordance with these provisions. Service shall be effective on the date of delivery. Notices given to the Contractor by personal delivery may be made to the Contractor’s authorized representative at the Work site; or
(b) Certified mail addressed to the mailing address of the recipient postage prepaid; return receipt requested. Service shall be effective on the date of the receipt of the mailing.
Simultaneously, the OWNER may send the same notice by regular mail. If a notice that is sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then delivery shall be effective pursuant to regular mail, provided that the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned.
3. Notice to Cure: The OWNER will issue a written notice to cure the default to the Contractor and its Surety. The Contractor shall commence satisfactory corrective actions within 5 Working Days after receipt.
4. Notice of Termination for Default: If the Contractor fails to commence satisfactory corrective action within 5 Working Days after receipt of the notice to cure, or to diligently continue satisfactory and timely correction of the default thereafter, then the Owner will recommend to the City Council that the Contractor be found in default of the Contract and upon such finding by the City Council will terminate the Contractor’s right to perform under the Contract by issuing a written notice of termination for default to the Contractor and its Surety;
The provisions of this subsection shall be in addition to all other legal rights and remedies available to the Owner.
5. Responsibilities of the Surety: Upon receipt of the written notice of termination for default, the Surety shall immediately assume all rights, obligations, and liabilities of the Contractor under the Contract. If the Surety fails to protect and maintain the Work site, the Owner may do so, and may recover all costs incurred. The Surety shall notify the Owner that it is assuming all rights, obligations, and liabilities of the Contractor under the Contract and all money that is due, or would become due, to the Contractor shall be payable to the Surety as the Work progresses, subject to the terms of the Contract.
Within 15 Working Days of receipt of the written notice of termination for default, the Surety shall submit to the Owner a written plan detailing the course of action it intends to take to remedy the default. The Owner will review the plan detailing and notify the Surety if the plan is satisfactory. If the Surety fails to submit a satisfactory plan, or if the Surety fails to maintain progress according to the plan accepted by the Owner, the Owner may, upon 48 hours written notice, exclude the Surety from the premises, take possession of all material and equipment, and complete the Work in any way the Owner deems to be expedient. The cost of completing the Work by the Owner shall be charged against the Surety and may be deducted from any monies due, or which would become due, the Surety. If the amounts due under the Contract are insufficient for completion, the Surety shall pay the Owner, within 30 Days after the Owner submits an invoice, all costs in excess of the remaining Contract Price.
6. Payment: The Surety will be paid for completion of the Work in accordance less the value of damages caused to the Owner by the acts of the Contractor.
B. Termination of the Contract for Convenience.
The OWNER may terminate the Contract if it becomes impossible or impracticable to proceed, or because of conditions or events beyond the control of the OWNER.
1. Notice: The Owner will issue a written notice of termination for convenience as follows:
Personal delivery, with proof of delivery which may be made by declaration under penalty of perjury by any person over the age of 18 years. The proof of delivery shall show that delivery was performed in accordance with these provisions. Service shall be effective on the date of delivery. Notices given to the Contractor by personal delivery may be made to the Contractor’s authorized representative at the Work site; or Certified mail addressed to the mailing address of the recipient postage prepaid; return receipt requested. Service shall be effective on the date of the receipt of the mailing.
Simultaneously, the Owner may send the same notice by regular mail. If a notice that is sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then delivery shall be effective pursuant to regular mail, provided that the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned.
2. Cessation of Work: Upon receipt, the Contractor shall immediately cease work, except work the Contractor is directed to complete by the Engineer or required to complete for public safety and convenience. The Contractor shall immediately notify Subcontractors and suppliers to immediately cease their work.
3. Payment: The Contractor will be paid without duplication for:
(a) Work completed in accordance with Contract Documents prior to the effective date of termination for convenience;
(b) Reasonable costs incurred in settlement of terminated contracts with Subcontractors, suppliers, and others; and
(c) Reasonable expenses directly attributable to termination.
Notice of termination shall be mailed to the City:
Arnoldo Rodriguez
City of Madera
205 West 4th Street
Madera, CA 93637
Notice of Termination shall be mailed to the Contractor:
Seal Rite Paving & Grading
4237 W Swift Avenue
Fresno, CA 93722
All notices and communications from shall be to City's designated Project Manager or Principal-In-Charge. Verbal communications shall be confirmed in writing. All written notices shall be provided and addressed as soon as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days after termination.
22. Warranty. Contractor warrants to OWNER that all materials and equipment furnished shall be new, free from faults and defects and of good quality and conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents. Contractor hereby warrants its work against all deficiencies and defects for the period required by the Contract Documents or the longest period permitted by California Law, whichever is greater. Unless otherwise stated in the Contract Documents, warranty periods shall begin upon the filing of the Notice of Completion and shall be for one year.
This section shall not limit OWNER’s rights under this Agreement or with respect to latent defects, gross mistakes, or fraud. OWNER specifically reserves all rights related to defective work, including but not limited to defect claims pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 337.15.
23. Compliance with Laws. City shall at all times observe and comply, and shall cause all of its agents, subcontractors, and employees to observe and comply with all with all Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and provisions applicable in the performance of City’s services. Wherever reference is made in this Agreement to standards or codes in accordance with which work is to be performed or tested, the edition or revision of the standards or codes current on the effective date of this Agreement shall apply unless otherwise expressly stated.
24. Attorneys’ Fees/Venue. In the event that any action is brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the party found by the court to be in default agrees to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees to the successful party in an amount to be fixed by the Court. The venue for any claim being brought for breach of this Agreement shall be in Madera County or as appropriate in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, located in the City of Madera.
25. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern the rights and obligations of the parties under the Agreement, including the interpretation of the Agreement.
If any part of the Agreement is adjudged to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity shall not affect the full force and effect of the remainder of the Agreement.
26. City’s Authority. Each individual executing or attesting to this Agreement on behalf of the City hereby covenants and represents: (i) that he or she is duly authorized to execute or attest and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such corporation in accordance with a duly adopted resolution of the corporation’s articles of incorporation or charter and bylaws; (ii) that this Agreement is binding upon such corporation; and (iii) that Contractor is a duly organized and legally existing municipal corporation in good standing in the State of California.
27. Contractor’s Legal Authority. Each individual executing or attesting this Agreement on behalf of CONTRACTOR hereby covenants and represents: (i) that he or she is duly authorized to execute or attest and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such corporation in accordance with such corporation’s articles of incorporation or charter and by-laws; (ii) that this Agreement is binding upon such corporation; and (iii) that CONTRACTOR is a duly organized and legally existing corporation in good standing in the State of California.
28. Remedies for Default. Failure by a party to perform any term, condition or covenant required of the party under this Agreement shall constitute a “default” of the offending party under this Agreement. In the event that a default remains uncured for more than ten (10) days following receipt of written notice of default from the other party, a "breach" shall be deemed to have occurred. Any failure or delay by a party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any rights or remedies associated with a default.
29. Independent Contractor. In performance of the work, duties, and obligations assumed by the Contractor under this Agreement, it is mutually understood and agreed that the City, including any and all of City’s officers, agents and employees will, at all times, be acting and performing as an independent contractor, and shall act in an independent capacity and not as an officer, agent, servant, employee, joint venturer, partner, or associate of City. Furthermore, City shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which City shall perform its work and functions. The City shall comply with all applicable provisions of law and the rules and regulations, if any, of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the subject matter hereof.
Because of its status as an independent contractor, CONTRACTOR shall have absolutely no right to employment rights and benefits available to City employees. City shall be solely liable and responsible for providing to, or on behalf of, its employees, all legally required employee benefits. In addition, City shall be solely responsible and hold City harmless from all matters relating to payment of City’s employees, including compliance with Social Security, withholding and all other regulations governing such matters. It is acknowledged that during the term of this Agreement, City may be providing services to others unrelated to City or to this Agreement.
30. Sole Agreement. This instrument constitutes the sole and only Agreement between City and CONTRACTOR in connection to the Project and correctly sets forth the obligations of the City and CONTRACTOR to each other as of its date. Any Agreements or representations in connection with the Project, not expressly set forth in this instrument are null and void.
31. Assignment. Neither the CONTRACTOR nor City will assign its interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the other.
32. Caltrans Authority. Caltrans is required by 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 200, Section 200.9 (b)(7) to conduct reviews of sub-recipients (Local Agencies) of federal-aid to ensure compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the relates statues (Title VI) through the requirements under the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the U.S.
Department of Transportation (USDOT), and the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) regulations and guidance materials related to the implementation of Title VI.
The scope of the process reviews conducted by Caltrans focuses on the Local Agency’s adherence to the FHWA’s Title VI Program (Race, Color and National Origin) and the related statues protecting additional classes as required under • Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 (Sex)
• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (Age), and
• The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)(Disability) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Disability).
33. Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon all parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed, or caused to be executed by their duly authorized officials, this Agreement in TWO copies, each of which shall be deemed an original on the date first above written.
CITY OF MADERA (OWNER)
By: _________________________________
Santos Garcia, Mayor
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
Shannon Chaffin, City Attorney
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Alicia Gonzales, City Clerk
WITBRO, INC. DBA SEAL RITE PAVING &
GRADING
By: _________________________________
Contractor (signature)
_________________________________
Printed Name and Title
___________________________
Federal Tax I.D. No.
___________________________
Contractor License Number
___________________________
DIR Registration Number
Exhibit A:
(A) CONTRACTOR Bid Schedule, Unit Prices
(B) Signed Non-Collusion Affidavit
(C) Signed Conflict of Interest Disclosure
(D) Addenda No. 1, dated 09/21/2023
(E) Addenda No. 2, dated 09/21/2023
(F) CONTRACTOR Evidence of Insurance
(G) Payment Bond
(H) Performance Bond
(I) IFB 202324-07 Vern McCullough River Trail Seal Coating and Repair NOTE: This Notary Acknowledgment on the following page is required for verification of Contractor’s signature.
Acknowledgment
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California )
County of ______________ )
On ______________, 2023 before me, ______________________________________ (insert name and title of officer)
Personally appeared __________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ___________________________________ (Seal)
01425.0005/937094.1
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by: Council Meeting of: November 15, 2023
_________________________________ Agenda Number: ___________ Will Tackett, Community Development Director
_________________________________
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Consideration of Special Meeting dates and Phase IV City Council Interviews and Final Decision Procedures for Commercial Cannabis Business Permits in the City of Madera.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a summary report and provide direction on the scheduling of Special Meeting(s) of the City Council, as well as the final procedures and steps to conduct the Phase IV City Council interviews to make final determinations pertaining to the award of Commercial Cannabis Business Permits in the City of Madera.
SUMMARY:
In accordance with the provisions of Section 6-5.13(A) of the City Municipal Code (CMC), the Madera City Council (Council) on December 1, 2021, adopted Resolution No. 21-169 establishing Procedure Guidelines and Review Criteria (Guidelines) to govern the application and selection process for various types of Commercial Cannabis Business (CCB) permits. Pursuant to Section 6-
5.14(A) of the CMC, applications (for CCB Permits) will be reviewed per the procedure guidelines and review criteria and will be either denied or approved.
The City of Madera has received applications and completed Phases I through III of the adopted Guidelines for Standard Retail or Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Business Permit Applications. These phases included: (I) Determination of Eligibility; (II) Application Evaluation and Review; and, (III) Public Meetings. Phase IV comprises City Council Interviews and Final Decisions.
Phase IV of Madera’s adopted Guidelines provides, upon the completion of Phase III the City Manager will present to the City Council the top Applicants from the Phase II process together with a summary report of the Public Meeting(s) to the City Council. The City Council will interview E‐1
01425.0005/937094.1
those top Applicants and make a final determination as to which Applicant(s) will be awarded a CCB permit.
In addition, Section 6-5.11 et seq. of the CMC requires the application procedure process to include a component on community benefits. Accordingly, and in accordance with the provisions of the CMC, the Guidelines provide that any community benefits that a commercial cannabis agrees to provide will be made a condition of issuance of the regulatory (CCB) permit; and, upon successful negotiations in the Phase IV process, the Applicant will then be authorized to proceed to apply for any required land use permits and a business license and related approvals.
Finally, the Guidelines further provide that each Applicant should be prepared to conduct a brief presentation in order to be interviewed by the City Council as part of the Phase IV process.
Further details as to date, time, place, and length of presentation will be provided prior to the City Council interviews.
It is for these reasons that staff is seeking additional direction from the City Council relative to desired or preferred proceedings for the Phase IV process.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Madera received a total of 26 Standard Retail or Microbusiness applications; all applications were deemed complete (Phase I). The Applications were then scored by the City’s selected cannabis consultant (HdL) with all applications excepting one scoring over 90 percent.
The Phase II Guidelines provide, at minimum, the top ten (10) Applicants who score a minimum of 90% or higher (2,700 points) in Phase II may be eligible to advance to Phase III. However, the City may at its sole discretion select more than ten (10) Applicants based on the quantity and overall quality of applications the City receives.
Of the 25 Applicants scoring above 90% in Phase II:
• Eight Applicants were awarded a score of 3,000 points/100%. • The top 10 Applicants were awarded a score above 99%, a less than 0.07% deviation (with only a 0.04% deviation between the 10th and 11th place scores). • The top 20 Applicants were awarded a score of 2,850 points/95% or higher. • The total deviation in Applicant scores was less than eight percent.
These statistics represent a very competitive pool of quality Applicants with minimal distinction able to be distinguished from scores. In consultation with HdL, and with principal interest focused on providing an equitable process with benefit of community input to assist in the consideration of Applicants, the City therefore selected, in its sole discretion, the top 20 scoring Applicants to proceed to the Phase III Public Meeting portion of the process.
Phase III Public Meeting Summary:
01425.0005/937094.1
Phase III Public Meetings were held in the Madera City Hall Council Chambers during the month of August 2023. Given the large number of Applicants selected for the Phase III portion of the process, a total of four public meetings were originally scheduled and noticed (five Applicants per public meeting). A fifth meeting was ultimately scheduled and noticed to accommodate a communication error with one Applicant and rescheduling for another Applicant due to the occurrence of a force majeure type event (resultant from summer storms and flooding at existing facilities elsewhere), which prevented the respective Applicant from attending the originally scheduled meeting.
At the public meetings, each Applicant was given five minutes to provide a presentation. Each Applicant’s presentation was followed by an invitation to receive public comment or testimony from the public (three minutes per person), and then the Applicants were given an additional three minutes to respond/rebut any public commentary.
Earlier meetings were well attended by the public with attendance waning slightly toward the latter scheduled meetings. Each meeting (excepting the fifth scheduled meeting with only two Applicants) required approximately 90-120 minutes in duration.
Public testimony was at times provided and repeated at separate meetings by the same individuals with similar comments or concerns pertaining to the retail sale of cannabis, in general.
For this reason, staff conducting the meetings later provided reminders to the public in attendance that the decision to allow for the retail sale of cannabis had already been enacted through ordinance and requested that public comments be limited to Applicants’ specific presentations, applications or proposed operations or locations in order to best assist the City in vetting the Applications. Public commentary received in protest of retail cannabis sales in general should not be considered relevant to the selection and award of CCB permits to applicants in the manner previously set forth and enacted pursuant to City ordinance and Council adopted Guidelines. However, this is not to discount or discredit personal or negative experiences that were shared. Suggested issues which may be perceived to stem from the social environment, concentrations, exposure, perceived lack of safety and/or quality of life or neighborhood health may wish to be considered at the discretion of the Council respective to individual applications, operations and/or locations.
Public commentary received respective to individual/specific applications were primarily limited to considerations such as the availability of parking (a requirement identified by codified Zoning Regulations) and proximity of locations to sensitive uses or specific neighborhoods. Specific public comment was also provided requesting that attention be given to leased Federal facilities located in the downtown area due to the affect proximity to new cannabis business operations may have on the ability to extend existing, or secure future, lease agreements (based upon existing Federal regulations).
Specific public commentary in support of individual Applicants was also received; typically, in support of operators with a history of living, operating businesses, or participating/volunteering in or contributing to community benefit and/or charitable or non-profit work in Madera. 01425.0005/937094.1
Testimony and personal experiences were also presented in support of increased access to cannabis goods for medicinal or therapeutic use.
Further Considerations and Discussion:
Appendix A to the adopted Guidelines sets forth the Evaluation Criteria and maximum number of points allocated to each criterion on which Phase II evaluation and scoring was predicated.
Presentations from Applicants during the Phase III Public Meetings were appropriately focused on elements of the Evaluation Criteria. Respective Phase II criteria scores for each Applicant/Application are included in Attachment 2 to this report and will not be summarized in the body of this report.1 However, in addition to the adopted Guidelines Evaluation Criteria the Council may wish to consider the following in its final decisions:
Concentration vs. Distribution.
As depicted in Attachment 1 to this report, a substantial number of Applications received proposed locations within or near the Downtown Area. During the Phase III Public Meeting process, staff heard testimony regarding the potential for new investment to contribute to revitalization of the downtown area. The benefits of potential synergy as a catalyst for further investment or activity which may be created from a concentration of awards in any given area should be weighed and considered vis-à-vis the benefits of accessibility which may be created through a more dispersed geographic distribution of awards.
New Development vs. Redevelopment.
There are arguments in favor of the benefits of both new development as well as the sustainable practice of adaptive reuse, rehabilitation, or redevelopment of existing buildings and properties.
Specific buildings and/or properties may be assigned or deemed to hold greater value to the community due to visibility, aesthetic, history or heritage. Staff opines the best planned and often most successful cities include a mixture of investment in both. Beyond the location considerations of the Phase II scoring Evaluation Criteria, which are primarily focused on neighborhood compatibility and site adequacy, staff suggests the Council may wish to also consider other locational factors in its final determination such as locational improvement value.
Size and Organizational Structure.
The Phase II scoring Evaluation Criteria includes provisions relative to Labor, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. These criteria include considerations relative to the provision of living wages, available benefits and compensation, the number of employment opportunities created, the creation of a diverse work force, and local ownership. Staff suggest the Council may wish to consider the extent to which prospective employees will be hired from local sources. In addition, the Council may wish to consider both the potential viability (or example) a larger Applicant/ownership group 1 Note that these are the original evaluation reports; subsequent corrections have not been made but are instead reflected in the ranking report in Attachment 1. Additionally, the evaluation reports have been partially redacted to address non-public items related to public safety, deliberative process, trade secret, and similar items. 01425.0005/937094.1
with a greater number of existing locations or years of experience may bring as well as the potential to create equal opportunities for smaller or more recent startups or business owners in its final decision of awards.
Unionization.
Section 6-5.13(G) of the CMC provides, for applicants with ten or more employees, the applicant shall attest that the applicant has entered into a labor peace agreement and will abide by the terms of the agreement.
While all public participation and testimony received to date is greatly valued and appreciated, it is not staff’s opinion that the nature of public commentary received during the Phase III Public Meeting process afforded any further substantial distinction between Applicants; and, is therefore not considered to be influential to an extent necessary to justify a further reduction of the number of Applicants to be considered and interviewed by Council as part of the Phase IV process.
In addition, while Community Benefits were included in the original application submittal and represented to varying degree within the Applicants’ presentations during the Phase III Public Meeting process, final proposed commitments have not yet been “negotiated” as intended through the Phase IV Guidelines.
Staff has therefore provided an outline of considerations and potential alternatives respective to proceedings for the Phase IV process for Council consideration. All alternatives are considered compliant and consistent with the provisions of the adopted Guidelines.
ALTERNATIVES:
It should be noted that neither the City Municipal Code nor adopted Guidelines require the Phase IV process to be conducted as a public hearing. At minimum, a presentation of top applicants from the Phase II process, a summary report of the Phase III Public Meeting, and interview of the top applicants for consideration of applications by the City Council is required.
All presentations should be received, and interviews of selected top applicants conducted prior to making any final determinations pertaining to an award of a Commercial Cannabis Business Permit(s).
Staff is requesting the Council receive this summary report and provide direction/determinations regarding the following procedural considerations and alternatives for conducting the Phase IV City Council interviews and for purposes of making final determinations pertaining to the award of Commercial Cannabis Business Permits in the City of Madera. The City Council may, at its discretion, select or modify any of these alternatives in its direction to staff:
• Determine the length of Applicant presentations.
01425.0005/937094.1
Staff Recommendation: Applicants should be given, at-minimum, the same five-minute length of time afforded during the Phase III Public Meetings to present to the Council during the Phase IV process. HdL staff have opined that five minutes is not sufficient time for final presentations however and has recommended that Applicants be given 10 minutes to provide final presentations. Staff agrees with this opinion and recommendation. It is also recommended that all Applicants be required to provide final presentations in PowerPoint format and provide final PowerPoint slides to City staff either 48 or 72 hours in advance of the scheduled meeting.
• Determine whether the City Council wishes to interview all top Applicants at the same Special Meetings of the City Council at which presentations will be given; or, following receipt of all top Applicant presentations, invite all or a reduced number of top Applicants to return to Council at a later Special or Regular meeting date to participate in the interview process (please note, if a reduced number of top Applicants is selected to be interviewed, subsequent interviews of additional Applicants could be requested on an asneeded basis).
Staff Recommendation: “Interviewing” all 20 top applicants at the same Special Meetings at which presentations are given ensures all Applicants are afforded an opportunity to be interviewed. Nothing would prevent the Council from asking Applicants questions or from deliberating following Applicant presentations. The Council may wish to consider these type of question & answer sessions to constitute the entirety of the “interview” process.
However, this approach may limit the focus or depth of “interviews” unless a greater number or longer Special Meetings are scheduled.
Alternatively, inviting a reduced number of top Applicants to interview at a later date following presentations: ensures certain time assumptions (or constraints) for the conduct of Special Meetings; may afford greater potential to minimize the number of Special Meetings required to expedite scheduling and the decision-making process; afford the Council with greater opportunity to digest information received, formulate more focused interview questions for selected Applicants and/or consider and negotiate terms relative to community benefit agreements. This approach may also allow all interviews to be conducted in one Special Meeting (or interviews to be conducted in isolation, thereby removing or minimizing any potential advantages resulting from the scheduling order of Applicants). This option would however require the Council to “make a cut” and announce invitations to interview a reduced number of top Applicants following receipt of all Applicant presentations (reserving the right to ask questions and/or deliberate following the presentations).
In order to retain and reward Phase II score advantages, HdL staff have recommended that the order of the final Applicant presentations be scheduled beginning with the lowest Phase II scoring Applicant and ending with the highest. Staff supports this recommendation and suggests the order for Applicants who achieved the same/tied Phase II scores be selected at random.
01425.0005/937094.1
• Determine whether public participation, comment and/or testimony will be allowed to be received either after each group of presentations for each meeting, or after all presentations have been provided.
Staff Recommendation: Public participation is a valuable resource in any public decisionmaking process and can provide additional perspective and insight to decision-makers.
The Phase III Public Meeting process has already afforded opportunity to the public to provide public comment and testimony pertaining to individual Applications. However, the public also has a right to comment during the Phase IV process.
The manner win which public testimony is received may have potential to dictate the number and/or length of Special meetings necessary. Based upon the nature of public comment and testimony received to date, Staff opines that it is unlikely that new substantive issues or concerns will be brought to the attention of the Council through additional public participation; unless, in response or reaction to comments, questions or concerns raised from Council representatives.
As such, one option to streamline the process may be to provide an opportunity for public comment after all applicants have made their presentations (which could be at a continued Special Meeting), but before the City Council makes any decision to either select a reduced number of top Applicants for additional interviews and/or prior to approving a permit for any Applicant. Alternatively, public comment could be allowed after each individual presentation. However, this alternative approach may result in repetitive or redundant commentary and extend the length of public testimony unnecessarily and without potential to yield additional information pertinent to the decision-making process.
Regardless of approach, the public has a right to comment on the individual application and interviews once they take place. If a reduced number of top Applicants are selected for final interviews at a separate scheduled meeting, the same considerations will need to be made respective to accommodating public participation at the separately scheduled meeting.
• Determine the number of Special Meetings desired by the City Council in order to receive presentations from and interview the top Applicants:
Assuming the top 20 Applicants are each afforded a five-minute presentation, the Council will need to assume, at-minimum, an approximately 2-hour meeting to accommodate all presentations (not including Council questions, interviews or public participation which may be allowed). If final presentations are allowed to be 10 minutes, then approximately 4-hours would be need to accommodate all presentations (not including Council questions, interviews or public participation which may be allowed).
Staff Recommendation: The Commercial Cannabis Business permit application process has been a long one. Staff supports efforts to minimize the number of Special Meetings 01425.0005/937094.1
of the City Council and to expedite completion of the Phase IV interview and decisionmaking process. Whether interviews will be conducted concurrent with presentations or be limited to a reduced number of applicants at a later date, efforts should be made to limit the number of Special Meetings to the extent possible. If the Council desires to complete the Phase IV process and provide CCB Permit award decisions in the 2023 calendar year, it is likely that no more than two Special Meetings may be able to be accommodated prior to the last Regular Meeting of the City Council in the calendar year (e.g., one Special Meeting for presentations and another subsequent Special Meeting for interviews; or, two Special Meetings with presentations and interviews conducted concurrently at the same meetings; and, with awards announced at the conclusion of the Special Meetings or with the option to announce awards at the Regular Meeting of the City Council scheduled for December 20, 2023). While time should not be the principal factor in considerations, minimizing the number of Special Meetings (and/or combining the Phase IV Special Meetings process with the Council’s Regular Meeting schedule) will help ensure CCB Permit award decisions may be able to be made by the end of the calendar year.
• Determine terms for negotiation of Community Benefits Agreements.
Staff Recommendation: Community Benefits, as originally proposed with initial complete Applications are included as Attachment 3 to this report for Council consideration. The Council may elect to allow Applicants to amend and/or submit final or best proposals at or prior to the Special Meeting in which presentations will be provided; or, the Council may choose to receive and base subsequent decisions only on the Community Benefit proposals submitted with initial Applications and defer final agreements to the negotiation process.
Regardless of preferred alternative, staff suggests “negotiations” are typically best facilitated directly and solely between the individual parties involved. Staff recommends caution that negotiations occurring within an open forum and respective to a competitive process, as instead of a “best and final” approach from all Applicants, it could instead result in a lop-sided “bidding war” that provides an unfair advantage to Applicants based upon the order in which they are given opportunity to present or interview with the Council. Furthermore, consideration should be given to all the applicable Evaluation Criteria holistically in order to identify the best candidates. The consideration of awards should not substantially value any individual Evaluation Criterion to an extent disproportionate with the scoring methodology identified in the adopted Guidelines.
City Council Resolution No. 21-167 sets forth the number and type of CCB Permits that may be issued in the City of Madera. A total of six (6) Standard Retail or Microbusiness CCB Permits (in any combination thereof) may be granted in the City of Madera.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 6-5.14(H) & (I) of the CMC, the City Council may either deny or approve the final candidates relating to Standard Retail Microbusiness Applications and shall select the top candidates of the cannabis businesses pursuant to review criteria established by 01425.0005/937094.1
City Council Resolution No. 21-169 establishing Procedure Guidelines and Review Criteria (Guidelines) to govern the application and selection process for various types of Commercial Cannabis Business (CCB) permits. The City Council’s decision as to the selection (denial or approval) of the prevailing candidates shall be final and shall not be subject to further administrative or City Council review or appeal.
The City will issue a notice to the prevailing applicants that the City will issue an official Cannabis Business Permit(s) upon the prevailing Applicant(s) obtaining all required land use approvals.
Once all required land use approvals are secured, the City will issue an official Cannabis Business Permit.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
At the time of application filing, each Applicant paid the application fee established by resolution of the City Council (to cover all costs incurred by the City in the application process). While additional Special Meetings of the City Council will result in additional staff resource costs, the application fee was anticipated to cover the Phase IV process and any additional resource costs resultant from any of the presented Alternatives are considered nominal and recoverable through benefit of the respective awards.
There is no significant fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Locations Maps
2. Phase II Application Scores & Summary
3. Application Community Benefit Proposals
ATTACHMENT 1
Application Locations Maps
Application Locations Map
1 mi
N
➤
Application Locations Map
1000 ft
N
➤
Application Locations Map
1000 ft
N
➤
Application Locations Map
2000 ft
N
➤
ATTACHMENT 2
Phase II Application Scores & Summary
# Tracking No. Applicant Name
License
Type
Points
Possible
Points
Awarded Score
1. * CAN 2022-09 Cali Oz Madera LLC Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-27 GBH Retail LLC Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-17 Lavish West Coast Madera Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-11 Madera Erudite Ventures Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-20 Madera Has Culture Inc Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-10 Mainstream Madera LLC Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-04 Responsible and Compliant Retail Madera LLC Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
1. * CAN 2022-03 Shryne Madera LLC Retail 3,000 3,000 100.00%
2. CAN 2022-13 Haven Madera LLC Retail 3,000 2,993 99.77%
3. CAN 2022-25 Sugarpine 559 Inc Retail 3,000 2,992 99.73%
4. CAN 2022-18 DSPO-Madera LLC Retail 3,000 2,975 99.17%
5. CAN 2022-19 Zen Garden of Madera Inc Retail 3,000 2,932 97.73%
6. * CAN 2022-28 E7 LA LLC Retail 3,000 2,900 96.67%
6. * CAN 2022-05 GFC Central LLC Retail 3,000 2,900 96.67%
6. * CAN 2022-24 Jiva MAE LLC Retail 3,000 2,900 96.67%
6. * CAN 2022-07 OTC Madera LLC Retail 3,000 2,900 96.67%
6. * CAN 2022-06 Retail NM LLC Retail 3,000 2,900 96.67%
7. CAN 2022-01 NMG CA 1 LLC Retail 3,000 2,895 96.50%
8. CAN 2022-21 Herbz LLC Retail 3,000 2,892 96.40%
9. CAN 2022-23 HBF2 Inc Retail 3,000 2,889 96.30%
10. CAN 2022-02 Perfect Union - Madera LLC Retail 3,000 2,874 95.80%
11. CAN 2022-12 Gateway Canna Groups Retail 3,000 2,840 94.67%
12. CAN 2022-22 Dime Bagz LLC Retail 3,000 2,836 94.53%
13. * CAN 2022-14 Bluefire of Madera Inc Retail 3,000 2,765 92.17%
13. * CAN 2022-15 Phenos of Madera Retail 3,000 2,765 92.17%
14. CAN 2022-26 Maderijuana LLC Retail 3,000 2,504 83.47% * Businesses that tied in score are listed in alphabetical order # Tracking No. Applicant Name
License
Type
Points
Possible
Points
Awarded Score
1. CAN 2022-08 Nebrina Madera LLC Retail 2,700 2,700 100.00%
2. CAN 2022-16 California Cannoisseur LLC Retail 2,700 2,698 99.93% Phase II
CITY OF MADERA
(STANDARD) Application Evaluation and Review
Phase II
(SOCIAL EQUITY) Application Evaluation and Review