SFPUC 2001 Alameda Watershed Management Plan

I. SUMMARYpotential impacts associated with construction-related hazardous materials and hazardous waste toa less than significant level through remediation requirements.D. MANAGEMENT PLAN ALTERNATIVESPrior to preparation of the Alameda Watershed Management Plan, the SFPUC conducted anextensive analysis of water quality, natural resources, cultural resources, and fire hazard data andconducted a series of public and agency workshops. This analysis resulted in a set of resourcevulnerability/sensitivity maps and defined areas of the Watershed where resources are mostsensitive to disturbance. The analysis of data was combined with public comments and publicsurvey results to form three watershed management alternatives. Alternative A provides for thehighest improvement in water quality and emphasizes ecological resource protection andenhancement. Public access would be very limited under Alternative A. Alternative B providesfor moderate improvement in water quality and balanced ecological resource protection andpublic access and activity. Alternative C provides a slight improvement in water quality andemphasizes increased public access and activity. Based on input from the public, agencies, theproject consultant team, and the SFPUC Watershed Planning Committee, the SFPUC developedthe preferred alternative. The preferred alternative combines Alternative B with some componentsof Alternative A. Alternative A is the environmentally superior alternative and avoids mining northof I-680 and mining of San Antonio Creek.As part of the planning process, the SFPUC prepared the Sunol Valley Resources ManagementElement. The element addresses the management of water resources, mineral resources, SFPUCfacilities, cultural resources, agriculture, economic resources, recreation and park facilities, andfisheries in the Alameda Creek corridor within the SFPUC-owned Watershed lands. Based on thegoals and subgoals of the element and the results of public and agency workshops, sevenalternatives (Alternatives A through F and Alternative S) for the management of Sunol Valleyresources were formulated. From these alternatives, a preferred alternative that includes twooptions relative to mining south of I-680 was included in the Management Plan.Chapter VII of this EIR provides a comparison between the impacts of the preferred alternativeand those of the No Action Alternative, Alternatives A, B, and C, and the Sunol Valleyalternatives.E. UNRESOLVED ISSUES AND AREAS OF CONTROVERSYThe primary area of controversy involves the Sunol Valley Element’s preferred alternative thatcalls for mining north of I-680, in the area covered by Alameda County’s SMP-32, approved inDecember 1994. To date, all mining in the Valley has occurred south of I-680. Mining north ofI-680 would be closer to the town of Sunol, the Sunol Glen School, and the historic Sunol WaterTemple. Residents of Sunol are concerned that quarrying north of I-680 could cause significantimpacts involving noise, dust, biotic resources, visual quality, and historic resources, and wouldbe inconsistent with the County’s General Plan. Alameda County found that potentiallysignificant effects in all of the above listed areas of concern had been avoided or mitigated byNOP 96.223E: Alameda Watershed Management Plan I-9 ESA / 930385January 2001