My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
8F Consent 2007 0618
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2007
>
Packet 2007 0618
>
8F Consent 2007 0618
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2007 10:11:37 AM
Creation date
6/15/2007 10:11:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
6/18/2007
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2007 0618
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2007\Packet 2007 0618
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Response 3-3: As indicated on Figure 5 in the Draft ISIMND, a fence would be located on <br />either side of the proposed trail alignment. The fence along the City of San Leandro side of <br />the trail would be about six feet high. The fence along the Port of Oakland side would be <br />lower, but of sufficient height to prevent unwanted incursions into adjacent marshes. <br /> <br />The proposed trail alignment near the bridge abutment is above the 1 DO-year flood elevation <br />defined by FEMA (9.69 feet NA VD 88) or the V.S Army Corps of Engineers IOO-year high <br />tide elevation (9.59 feet NA VD 88) at elevation about 11.8 feet. <br /> <br />The Final ISIMND has been amended on page 24 to indicate that the area to the north of the <br />trail alignment is a diked marsh. <br /> <br />Comment 3-4: The Port of Oakland would need to be a co-applicant for the BCDC permit, since <br />portions of the proposed trail are located on Port property. <br /> <br />Response 3-4: This comment is noted for the record and will be considered during the <br />permitting process for this project. Refer also to Response 2-2. <br /> <br />Comment 3-5: If Alternative 1 cannot be implemented, the other alternatives, while creating <br />conflicts with City of San Leandro's maintenance vehicles, could be viable alternatives. <br /> <br />Response 3-5: This comment is noted for the record and will be considered during the <br />project approval process. Please also refer to the draft ISIMND discussing the rejection of <br />Alternatives 3, 4, and 5. Alternative 2 may still be considered as a viable alternative. <br /> <br />Y 4204.00693.rtc.doc-4/5/07 <br /> <br />A-6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.