Draft subject to revision

• 
  The project is located in a rural agricultural area with light traffic;
  
• 
  Construction of the proposed project would result on only a maximum of 60 truck trips per day; this would represent an increase of about 8 vehicles per day on a road which carries only 70 vehicles per hour at peak conditions;
  
• 
  Roadway safety problems would be minimal. The roadways in the area have narrow shoulders, but they are adequate for automobiles and trucks. Existing traffic is light, and the project would not generate substantial new vehicle trips to make a difference in LOS conditions;
  
• 
  Existing accesses would be used to accommodate expected traffic;
  

• 
  The project would not have any effect on pedestrian or bicycle circulation;
  

• 
  The parking and staging area at the project site could adequately accommodate parking during the construction period (CH2M HILL 2004). The project would not create a parking demand in the project vicinity; and
  

• 
  The project area is not served by a transit system, and there is not sufficient demand to justify transit service to the area.
  

Upon project completion, no new trips would be created - existing personnel would operate the various project elements, using maintenance roads.

• 
  The existing site is highly disturbed. The change in visual character as a result of the proposed project would be changes in the size of facilities, not in the essential character of the site.
  

• 
  The interior levee slopes of the Sacramento River present a view of a riprapped channel, highly modified from its natural condition. The proposed project would not therefore affect a viewshed with natural aesthetic characteristics.
  

• 
  The project would not conflict with known protection requirements or design criteria of Federal, state and local agencies.
  

• 
  The proposed fish screen would be similar in appearance to the existing fish screen located at the RD 108 Wilkins Slough pumping plant sited approximately 3.0 miles upstream. The new fish screen would extend to elevation 51.6 with an additional 42 inches of concrete guardrail extending above the deck. When the river is at its lowest approximately 25 vertical feet of the structure would extend above the water line and be visible from the river. This higher concrete barrier would partially block views from the river. It would, however, present a high concrete face to boaters and fishermen that pass by. Based on recent observations near the site, the number of recreationists/fishermen (boats) passing the site typically ranged from 0 to 5 per day, with the greatest activity occurring by recreational fishermen during the spring, summer, and fall months.
  

• 
  The project would not require the use of lights; therefore it would not increase light and glare in the project vicinity.
  

• 
  The fish screen structure would result in shadows in the immediate area within the Sacramento River; however these shadows would be limited to the immediate vicinity of the fish screen and would be similar to shading caused by other structures located along the leveed banks of the river in the area.
  

• 
  Removal of existing diversion structures in the river would enhance the "naturalness" if the views at Boyers Bend, Howells Landing, and Tyndall Mound, somewhat offsetting the change in view caused by the Combined Pumping Plant/Fish Screen.
  

• 
  Canal levees are a routine feature of the project area, part of the agricultural environment. The new canal structure would not be particularly visible, and if visible, would be consistent with the existing visual character of the area.
  

In short, the proposed action would adversely and positively affect visual quality viewed by recreational boaters and those on the bank opposite from the screen, but they would not alter the essential, already highly disturbed, visual character of the riprapped channel levees that would continue to exist under the No-Action Alternative.

• 
  The fish screen and its ancillary functions would not create a noise that
  

• 
  The only noise associated with long-term operation of this project is that of electrical motors used to control the gates at the intake to the pumping plant and to operate the screen cleaning device and to operate lift station pumps and gates. The noise level would not violate any established law, regulation, or standard. The project is not expected to produce any noticeable vibrations.
  

• 
  Noise levels would not increase with implementation of the fish screen.
  

• 
  Short-term noise increases would occur with the onset of construction activities at the Combined Pumping Plant/Fish Screen, such as noise associated with truck traffic, pile driving, and grading activities. However, there are only a limited number of sensitive receptors in the area, the provision of a physical barrier (levee) separating the activities from the four residences, and construction contained to daytime hours, Monday through Friday.
  

• 
  Noise associated with canal construction would affect residents for only a short period of time (approximately 2 weeks) as canal construction will proceed at a rate of several hundred feet per day and will thus be within 500 feet of residences along the alignment for a limited time.