Permit No. 16323-1 - City of Davis - South Fork Preserve Public Accessibility Improvements

SCH Number: 2019019011
Lead Agency: Davis, City of (City of Davis)
Document Title: Permit No. 16323-1 - City of Davis - South Fork Preserve Public Accessibility Improvements
Document Type: NOD - Notice of Determination
Received: 10/1/2020
Posted: 10/1/2020
Project Applicant: City of Davis

Document Description: Approval of Permit No. 16323-1, under California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Article 3, Section 6, for work within an adopted plan of flood control: To upgrade approximately 650 feet of existing pedestrian/bike trail and install approximately 2,500 feet of new pedestrian/bike trail as part of the public accessibility improvement in the Putah Creek South Fork Preserve. The proposed improvements also include constructing approximately 660-square-foot viewing deck with a 5-foot-wide boardwalk; installing benches, picnic tables, and upgrading an existing parking lot.

Contact Information: Itzia Rivera
Central Valley Flood Protection Board
3310 El Camino Avenue, Suite 170
Sacramento, CA 95826
Phone : (916) 480-5388
itzia.rivera@cvflood.ca.gov

Cities: Davis
Counties: Yolo
Other Location Info: The project is located at the Mace Boulevard crossing over Putah Creek, approximately 1.4 miles south from the intersection of Mace Boulevard and Montgomery Avenue, south east of the City of Davis, in Yolo County.

Final Environmental Document Available at: This Mitigation Negative Declaration, prepared by the lead agency for the project, is available to the general public at the lead agency's office listed above. CVFPB's administrative record of proceedings related to the encroachment permit is available for public review at CVFPB's office. Please note, the NOD is not attached. If you would like to request a signed copy of the NOD, please contact Board staff at: questions@cvflood.ca.gov.

(1) The project will have a significant impact on the environment: No
(2a) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA: No
(2b) A Mitigated or a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA: Yes
(2c) An other document type was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA: No
(3) Mitigated measures were made a condition of the approval of the project: No
(4) A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project: No
(5) A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project: No
(6) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA: Yes