South Bay Salt Ponds: Eden Landing - Southern Eden Landing (Phase 2)
Status | Permitting | County | Alameda |
---|---|---|---|
Project Type | Non-mitigation | Location | 37.58889° N, -122.12778° W Map |
Project Area (Acres) | No Data | Last Updated | 24 September 2024 |
Project Abstract | Upcoming project activities include the restoration of over 1,375 acres of tidal wetlands between Old Alameda Creek and the Alameda Creek Flood Control Channel, the possible addition of 400 acres of enhanced pond habitat, construction of innovative flood protection elements, and around 4 miles of new Bay Trail. | ||
Project Groups | San Francisco Bay Adaptation | San Francisco Bay Joint Venture | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Eligible) | San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority (Funded) | South Bay Salt Ponds | South Bay Salt Ponds: Phase 2 | ||
Administrative Region | San Francisco Bay Joint Venture - Jemma Williams, SFBJV |
Project Identification
ID | Type |
---|---|
731 | JV - Record Number |
RA-005 | SFBRA - Project ID |
Habitat Plan
Site Name | Phase | Activity | SubActivities | Habitat | SubHabitat | Acres | Activity Status | Water Regime |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pond E1 | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Tidal marsh | 297.2 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E1C | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 65.37 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E2 | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Tidal marsh | 691.8 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E2C | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Tidal marsh | 32.09 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E4 | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 202.0 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E4C | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Estuarine Wetland | Marsh | 167.8 | Planning in-progress | Muted tidal | |
Pond E5 | None | Grey Infrastructure | Levees and dikes | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | No Data | Planning in-progress | |
Pond E5 | None | Restoration/Rehabilitation | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 171.8 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E5C | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 96.96 | Planning in-progress | Muted tidal | |
Pond E6 | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 183.1 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E6 | None | Grey Infrastructure | Levees and dikes | None | None | No Data | Planning in-progress | |
Pond E6C | None | Grey Infrastructure | Levees and dikes | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | No Data | Planning in-progress | |
Pond E6C | None | Restoration/Rehabilitation | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Salt pond | 84.64 | Planning in-progress | ||
Pond E7 | None | Restoration/Re-establishment | Bay Habitat (SFBJV Only) | Tidal marsh | 217.3 | Planning in-progress |
Related Habitat Impacts
Impact Project Name | Habitat | Acres Lost | Type of Loss |
---|---|---|---|
No Data |
Sites
Name | Status | Acres |
---|---|---|
Pond E1 | Permitting | 297.2 |
Pond E1C | Permitting | 65.37 |
Pond E2 | Permitting | 691.8 |
Pond E2C | Permitting | 32.09 |
Pond E4 | Permitting | 202.0 |
Pond E4C | Permitting | 167.8 |
Pond E5 | Permitting | 171.8 |
Pond E5C | Permitting | 96.96 |
Pond E6 | Permitting | 183.1 |
Pond E6C | Permitting | 84.64 |
Pond E7 | Permitting | 217.3 |
Events
People
Type | Name | Organization | Department |
---|---|---|---|
Contact | Brenda Buxton | State Coastal Conservancy | Not applicable/Unknown |
Contact | John Krause | California Department of Fish and Wildlife | Bay Delta Region |
Contact | Dave Halsing | State Coastal Conservancy | Not applicable/Unknown |
Funding
Funding Need: $59,400,000
Phase | Activity | Funder | Amount |
---|---|---|---|
None | Restoration/Re-establishment | SFBRA San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority - Measure AA | $600,000 |
Related CRAM Assessments
Visit Date | Version | Site Name | Wetland Type | Index Score |
---|---|---|---|---|
2024-09-05 | 6.1 | 2024WRMP_CargillMitigationMarshA | estuarine perennial saline | 80 |
2024-09-05 | 6.1 | 2024WRMP_CargillMitigationMarshB | estuarine perennial saline | 79 |
2021-05-04 | 6.1 | CA-10047 | estuarine perennial saline | 64 |
Performance Measures
Plan Name | Plan Goal | Performance Measure | Measure Value | Status | Evaluation Date |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Benefits economically disadvantaged communities | 0 yes | in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Has significant youth involvement component | 0 yes | in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of unique volunteers expected to participate | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of volunteer hours expected to be contributed | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Community Engagement | Number of youth participants expected to be engaged | 0 count | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Flood Protection | Miles of levee to be constructed | 0 miles | in-progress/partially achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Public Access | Miles of Bay Trail to be constructed | 0 miles | measure achieved | |
San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority | Public Access | Number of public access facilities to be constructed | 0 count | measure achieved |
Name | File Type | Submitted On | Submitted By |
---|---|---|---|
EPA - Interactive Project Map (SF Bay Delta) | Other | 2020-06-16 | Emma Railey, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
South Bay Salt Ponds Restoration Project Website | Other | 2020-06-16 | Emma Railey, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
Staff Recommendation | Other | 2019-06-26 | Emma Railey, San Francisco Bay Joint Venture |
How to Use the Habitat Development Curve
Habitat Development Curves (HDCs) are used to determine the developmental status and trajectory of on-the-ground projects to create, restore, or enhance California wetland and stream habitats. Each HDC is based on assessments of habitat condition for different age areas of one habitat type that in aggregate represent the full spectrum of habitat development. The assessments of condition are provided by expert applications of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Visit the CRAM website for more information about CRAM.
For each HDC, reference condition is represented by areas of a habitat that consistently get very high CRAM scores, have not been subject to disruptive management practices, and exist within landscapes that are protected and managed for their natural conditions. The horizontal lines intersecting the top of an HDC represent the mean CRAM score and standard deviation of scores for 25 qualifying reference areas.
The age of a project is estimated as the elapsed time in years between the groundwork end date for the project and the date of the CRAM assessment. To add or update a groundwork end date, use the Project Events form in Project Tracker (ptrack.ecoatlas.org). The minimum age in years of a non-project area, including any natural reference area, is estimated from all available local information, including historical maps and imagery, historical written accounts, and place-specific scientific studies of habitat development.
An HDC can be used to address the following questions:
- At what time in the future will the area of assessed habitat achieve the reference condition or other milestones in habitat development? The HDC can answer this question if the CRAM score for the assessed area is within the confidence interval of the HDC. The answer is the time in years along the HDC between the current age of the assessed area and the future date corresponding to the intersection of the HDC and the reference condition or other milestone.
- Is the area of assessed habitat likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace as most other areas of the same habitat type? The habitat area is likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace if the CRAM score for the area is above, below, or within the confidence interval of the HDC, respectively.
- What can be done to improve the condition of the habitat area or to increase its rate of development? HDCs by themselves cannot answer this question. Possible answers can be inferred by the following analysis that involves HDCs:
- Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
- Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
- For any low-scoring Attribute, examine the component Metric Scores (note: the Metric Scores for any public CRAM assessment in the CRAM database can be obtained through EcoAtlas);
- Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
- Consider modifying the design or management of the habitat area in ways that will sustainably increase its score(s) for the low-scoring Metric(s).
For more information about CRAM Attributes and Metrics, including their scientific rationale, see the CRAM Manual.