Environmental Impact Statement - Sonoma Land Trust

Sonoma Land Trust
Chapter 4. Consultation and Other Requirements
Public Health
Implementation of the restoration alternatives would increase the potential for
mosquito production but would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact
because mosquito abatement practices would be implemented as deemed
necessary and would be expected to be incorporated on any new mosquito habitat
areas that might be created as the part of the project. This With implementation
of mitigation measure PH-MM-1 neither action alternative would eliminate the
potential for the project to contribute considerably to a significant cumulative
public health impacts.
Biological Resources
While significant construction impacts on special status plant, fish, and wildlife
species could occur due to the proposed project, mitigation is available to reduce
any potential contributions to cumulative impacts to a less-than-significant level.
With implementation of mitigation measures BIO-MM-1, BIO-MM-2a and 2b,
BIO-MM-3a and 3b, BIO MM-4 through BIO-MM-12, and WQ-MM1 and WQ-
MM-3, the construction of the project would not contribute to a cumulatively
considerable impact on most biological resources.
The restoration alternatives would ultimately increase the acreages of tidal marsh
habitat available for sensitive wildlife species. Although existing tidal and
nontidal wetlands would be lost due to construction and/or fill activities at these
sites, the cumulative effect of restoration throughout San Pablo Bay is expected
to result in a large net overall increase in habitat value, particularly for tidalmarsh-dependent
species in the diked baylands portions of the project site.
Therefore, the proposed project is expected to contribute considerably to a
cumulative beneficial impact for biological resources.
Population, Housing, and Environmental Justice
Cumulative impacts related to population, housing, and environmental justice
could occur where Bay development patterns would result in population
displacement or disproportionate adverse impacts on disadvantaged communities.
None of the action alternatives would contribute to a cumulative impact on
population or housing, since the restoration alternatives would not displace
people or housing. Although the surrounding rural community is identified as
low income, persons potentially affected by the construction of the restoration
alternatives are limited to motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians on SR 37 and
Lakeville Highway-Reclamation Road and the residences located immediately
east of the project site. As such, potential human exposure to any project-related
adverse impacts would be short term and would occur over a limited duration.
Sears Point Wetland and Watershed Restoration
Project Final Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement
4-13
April 2012