HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 1985 - 0119RESOLUP]DN NJ.85-119
A RE~OLU~]DN OF THE BJARDS OF DIRECIORS OF (DUNPY
SANPITAT]DN DISIRICPS NJS.1,2,3,5,6,7,11
AND 13 CERTIFYINJ FINAL JVI~1~1ENPAL IMPACP REP)RT
FOR JOINP THEA~IME~T ~)RKS WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN
MPJKThE CERTAIN FINDThI3S IN (DNNECP]DN THEREWITH,
AND ALOPTINJ A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDI~
ODNSIDERAT]D1E.
********************
WHEREAS,the BDards of Directors of ODunty Sanitation Districts NDs.
1,2,3,5,6,7,11 and 13 of Orange O~unty,California,are presently QDn—
sidering the approval of the 1983 Master Plan for Joint W3rks Wastewater
Treatn~nt and Disposal Facilities,as amended,(the Project),and
WHEREAS,(~unty Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7,11 arid 13
(hereinafter “DIS’IRICIS”)are the lead agency for the preparation and ~n
sideration of environmental documents for projects aDntained within said Master
Plan,as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,as
amended,(hereinafter “C3~A”)and the State of California Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act as nodified and
adopted by the DIS’IRICI’S (hereinafter “CEQA Guidelines”);and
WHERES,in order to facilitate an objective assessment of the
individual arid ~llective environmental impacts associated with the improvements
to the t~o treatment plants,the DISTHIC1’S have caused to be prepared,a Draft
Environmental Impact Report “Joint Treatment *brks Wastewater Master Plan”to
address the significant environmental impacts,mitigation measures and project
alternatives associated with the Project;and
1
WHPREAS,the DISIRIC~S have oDnsulted with other public agencies,
and the general public and given them an opportunity to cx)Im~nt on said Draft
EIR as required by the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines;and
WHEREAS,on April 10,1984,a duly ~x)ticed public hearing was held
by the Boards of Directors of the DIS’IRICIS to provide a further opportunity for
the general public to ~rm~nt on and respond to the Draft EIR at whidi thr~
no person other than the DISTRICrS’ansultant spoke;and
WHEREAS,the DIS’IRICrS have evaluated the ~n~rents received from
public agencies and persons who revie~d the Draft EIR;and
WHEREAS,said ~mnents and recxnirendations received on the Draft EIR,
either verbatim or in sumnary and the responses of the DISThICPS to significant
environu~nta1 points raised in the review and c~nsultation process have been
included in and made part of said Draft EIR to form the Final EIR for said
Project as required by Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines;and
WHEREAS,said Final EIR has been presented to the nembers of the
Boards of Directors of DISTRICTS for review and cxnsideration prior to the
final approval of,and cxrrinitnent to,any Master Plan projects.
N3W,¶IHEREFORE,~IT RESJLVED by the Boards of Directors of ~unty
Sanitation Districts tsbs.1,2,3,5,6,7,11 and 13 of Orange ODunty,
California as follows:
1.That the Boards of Directors of said DIS’J.RICPS th hereby certify that
the Final Erivironnental Inpact Report,“Joint TreatiTent ‘brks Wastewater Master
2
Plan”has been completed in cxrnipliance with CEQ~and the CEQ~Guidelines and
that the DIS~1RIC~S have revies~d and considered the information contained in
said Final EIR prior to approval of,or cournitn~nt to,the Project.Said Final
Em is x)mpDsed of the following elei~nts:
P.Draft E~wironuental Lipact Report “Joint Treatment ‘brks Wastewater
Master Plan’t and all appendices thereto;
B.Carn~nts and responses to oDrm~nts on said Draft EIR;
2.That the Boards of Directors of DIS’IRICrS do hereby find that changes or
alterations have been required in,or incorporated into the Project which will
mitigate or avoid any significant adverse effects identified in the Final EIR as
specifically itemized in P~ttathTent A to this Resolution.
3.The Boards of Directors of DIS]RICI’S further find that although changes,
alterations or cxrnditions have been incorporated into the projects contemplated
in the Master Plan whidi will substantially mitigate or avoid significant
effects identified in the Final Em,certain of.the significant effects cannot
be mitigated to fully acceptable levels.The remaining inpacts identified below
may continue to be of significant adverse impact even when all feasibly krown
and identified mitigation measures are applied.
A.Continued population growth in Orange County will increase air
pollution emissions associated with transportation,fuel combistion,
and industrial production.
Findings The DIS’IRICPS provide facilities to acconnodate urban
growth planned and approved by cities and the County and do not
3
independently regulate or antrol planning and developnent.
Emissions o~ntrol neasures include vapor reo~very and reduction in
volatility:notor vehicle inspection and maintenance programs;
extended warranty on new cars;additional enission ~ntrols on notor
vehicles;and hone utility engine replaceirent.The Boards of
Directors find it infeasible to further mitigate the inpacts asso
ciated with urban growth.The projects outlined in the E~are
necessary to acoDxmxdate the wastewater flows generated by City and
County approved developrent plans following required environnental
reviews.If the projects are rot iznplenented,developient cx)uld be
curtailed or reliability of the wastewater system c~u1d be reduced.
B.Qntinu&developient will reduce agricultural land,open space and
wildlife habitat.Fish and other riparian fauna will be affected by
water resources developnent projects.Scenic views will be reduced.
Findings The DIS’IRICrS are a single purpose agency with the sole
function to provide regional alleclion,treatnent and disposal
of wastewater.The DIS’IRICI’S only provide facilities to accxmt~date the
developrent approved by local governing agencies,and do not inde
pendently regulate or aDntrol planning and developient.The DISIRICTS
will pronote the preservation of wildlife habitat,open space and
agricultural land to the extent possible and will en~urage reten
tion of open space for its scenic value.
C.Increased noise during oDnstruction.
4
Findings All construction activities will comply with the noise
limitations set by the individual cities or the County of Orange.
Proper use and maintenance of noise reduction devices on heavy
equi~nent will help to mitigate the problem and construction
activities will be limited to daylight hours in noise sensitive
areas.
D.Short term visual impacts from mathinery will occur during construc
tion.
Findings Efforts will be made to minimize the aesthetic impacts
during construction.Mitigations include reestablishuent of
landscaped areas after construction.The Boards of Directors find
the a1x~ve mitigation neasure will substantially reduce the impact
and that further neasures are not economically feasible for a short
term impact.
E.The outfall surge tower at Plant ~.2 will be raised to a height
of 85 feet and will be highly visible.The new outfall booster sta
tion will be visible from State Highway Route 1 and Costa ~sa bluffs.
Findings The proposed project will be constructed on an already
impacted site.The surge to~r appearance will be improved by the
use of texturing or paint.Further,an arthitect with experience in
reducing visual impacts from tall structures will be part of the
design team.A landscape plan will be developed and implenented.
F.During construction,~rker traffic will number 60—80 vehicles per
day at Plant N3.1.At certain stages of construction,temporary
5
local impacts will be significant.Onstruction of the headworks
will require transport of a significant anount of a)ncrete involving
large numbers of trucks.There will be approximately a ten percent
increase in truck and automDbile traffic over existing operations.
Findings A traffic manag~nt plan will be developed in a)opera—
tion with the selected oontractors,the DISIRICIS,CalTrans,and the
Cities of Huntington Beacth and P~~untain Valley.Plant ~.1 has
alnost direct access to the San Diego Freeway whith should minimize
local impacts.Relocation of the existing new service entrance and
access road has been proposed to provide direct signalized access to
and fran Plant t~.1.The Directors find it infeasible to further
mitigate the impacts associated with additional traffic.
G.Seoondary energy embodied in ooncrete,steel,equi~xr~nt and labor
cx)nstitute the largest oonrnitn~nts of energy during oonstruction.
Implen~ntation of the odor mitigation project will reduce the anount
of cthiorine used by the Districts;however,use of hydrogen
peroxide,sodium hydroxide,pol~ers and ferrous and ferric thloride
will increase.
Findings Minimize use of material through good design and one-tine
oonstruction of major structures to be fitted with equipnent when
needed.Proper handling and storage techniqiEs will minimize risk
of hazards associated with use of chemicals.
4.Certain changes or alterations (e.g.,mitigation measures)are required
in or inoorporated into the Project through the permitting responsibility and
6
jurisdiction of a public agency other than County Sanitation Districts tbs.1,
2,3,5,6,7,11 and 13.These changes will be included in permits obtained
from the applicable agency by DIS’IRICI’S or its contractor as itemized below:
A.Applicable rules of the Air Quality Management Plan will be applied
to the Projects when impleir~nted to provide partial mitigation for
short term air quality impacts.The South Coast Air Quality
Management District is responsible for insuring compliance with and
implementation of these rules.DISTRICPS’staff is ~rking closely
with that agency.
B.A California Coastal Permit will be required for any construction at
Treatment Plant ~.2 in Huntington Beach.The City of Huntington
Beach is responsible for issuance of’the permit and insuring imple
mentation of certain projects in accordance with the rules of the
IIDcal Coastal Plan.
C.Approval from CalTrans and the City of Ebuntain Valley will be
required for entrance nodifications at Plant T~b.1.CalTrans is
responsible for insuring compliance with such requirements.
D.A dewatering permit will be required for discharge of groundwater
encountered during construction.The Regional Water Quality
Control ~ard is responsible for insuring compliance with dewatering
permit requirements.
5.The Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts 1~bs.1,2,3,5,
6,7,11 and 13 have balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against its
unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve said Project.
7
The Boards do hereby further find,determine and state,pursuant to the provi
sions of Section 15093 of the State Guidelines,that the occurrence of those
certain significant environnental effects identified in the Final EIR and set
forth in paragraçIi 3 above have been found acceptable and will be permitted
without further mitigation due to the following overriding ccnsiderations:
A.The projects are necessary to acccimrdate wastewater flows from
ongoing deve1opi~nt approved by the local planning zoning authori
ties after required environnental reviews.The DISTRICTS are a
single purpose agency with the responsibility to aollect,treat and
dispose of wastewater generated within the DIS’]RICrS’service area.
Construction of the Project identified in the EIR is necessary to
provide sewerage facilities to serve developitent approved by the
Cities and County after separate environrrental review try the
approving entity as identif led in local land use plans.
B.The Boards of Directors find that iinplenentation of the project
alternatives identified in the Final.EIR are infeasible as follows:
(1)Anaheim Fbrebay Reclamation Project
This project ~u]~include the ccnstruction of a wastewater reclama
tion facility to treat wastewater from Sanitation District No.2
near the basin retharge area in the City of Anaheim.Eventually
this facility aui~be enlarged to treat up to 50 M~D.The primary
reason the project has rot been iinplenented is the very high ccsts
associated with it and the lack of firm regulatory guidance on water
quality levels needed for groundwater rectharge.
8
(2)Seal Bead~Water Reclamation Plant
This project includes the oDnstruction of a reclamation plant that
would treat up to 5.6 ~D of flow for augrrenting the los Alamitos
groundwater barrier project near the San Diego River.This project
has limited capacity reduction and has rot yet been identified as
e~romical1y feasible.
(3)Wastewater Reclamation from the Ebuntain Valley Plant
The E~discussed several projects whith ~uld result in greater use
of wastewater from the Fbuntain Valley plant.Included within the
study is the current Water Factory 21 project;however,~ns truct ion
of edditional reclamation projects at the Fbuntain Valley Plant
would rot alleviate the need for treatirent facilities.
(4)Specific Project Alternatives Affecting the Sizing and Sitting of
Related Facilities
During the developi~nt of the Master Plan a number of alternatives
were evaluated regarding certain project objectives.These included
varying the size and location of major facilities.Alternatives
whith were discussed included the following.
a •!‘b project alternative.This is the do-roth ing alternative
whidi would result in an increase in flow without building any
facilities for treating,or handling or dis~xsing of sazre.
b.N3 headworks anstruction.This alternative would result in
eliminating the oDnstruction of the punping facilities whicth
9
lift the wastewater from the low in~ning trunk sewers to the
plant for treatment and disposal.Elimination of the heads~Arks
will result in nore freqt~nt filling of the sewers with
resulting flooding of raw sewage.
c.Qnstructing ro new primary clarifiers.This s.~uld result in
increasing the rate at which the sewage is processed through the
plants.If the rates are increased,the level of treatnent is
proportionately reduced.
d.(bnstructing ro new digesters.The digesters are used to pro
vide treatn~nt and sludge storage capacity as well as to reduce
the volume of solids.This ~uld result in an increase in the
an~ount of sludge to be disposed of in landfills and certain
other problems associated with disposal of raw sludge.
e.N3t undertaking operational improvements.This v~uld result in
degradation of the effluent quality as well as degradation of
air pollution standards.
f.!bt undertaking environn~ntal mitigation projects.This ~uld
increase the objectional odors on the residents near the t~
treatment plant sites if the odor mitigation measures are not
inoorporated.If the oo-generation facility proposed is not
oonstructed,the DISTRICtS will be unable to use the digester gas
as a fuel source and be in oompliance with air pollution oontrol
requirements.Electrical energy use ~uld increase and digester
gas ~uld be flared.
10
g.N3t ~nstructing outfall booster station or extending the surge
tower.Without the additional punping capacity,the DIS’IRICrS
will rot be able to discharge the treated effluent at certain
tidal and peak cx)nditions.Overflows of effluent into the Santa
Ana River ~uld occur.This oould oontaminate the river as well
as nearby beaches.
h.Other alternatives.Other possible alternatives which were a)n—
sidered incinde the following.
(1)Construction of raw sewage storage basins at Plant rb.1 to
equalize flows was rejected because punping is still
required and odor oontrol bea~ries a problem.
(2)Construction of effluent storage facilities at Plant ~.,
rejected for the sazie reasons as at Plant r~.1.
(3)Initiation of a rn~ratorium on new oonstruction was rejected
because it does rot solve ciirrent needs and further,the
DISTRICPS do not independently exercise land use oontrol and
regulation,that function being reserved to the County and
cities.
(4)Instituting a massive mandatory retroactive low flow toilet
program was rot (x)nsidered practical because it ~uld take
years to oonplete,no existing legal authority appears to
exist,and there ~uld be no reduction in solids or sulfide
generation or odors.
11
C •For the reasons set forth above it is r~t e~r~tnica1ly feasible to
further mitigate or avoid the environnental effects hereinabove
identified.
PASSED AND AIX)P~ED ~T A REXUI?IR MEE’rn~HELD JULY 10,1985
12
Attachment A
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASIJRES*
rea of Concern/
~pact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
~eology/Soi1s/
~~isinicity
itigable
PRIMARY:Construction
The existing soil profile at Plant
*1 would be destroyed to a depth of up
to 15 feet to construct the facilities.
Foundations and structures would be
built to withstand a maximum expected
earthquake
Soil and geological studies will be
conducted to evaluate foundation resistance
During construction,soil subject to wind
blowing will be watered to minimize dust
dtigable The Plant *2 site will be excavated to
a depth of up to 15 feet to construct
the proposed facilities.The excavation
will alter the existing remaining soil
profile to a depth already modified by
sludge drying operations
Soil and geological studies will be
conducted to evaluate foundation resistance
During construction,soil subject to wind
blowing will be watered to minimize dust
PRIMARY:Operational (Both Plants)
‘itigated A major earthquake along the Newport
Inglewood Fault Zone could damage
proposed facilities resulting in the
release of untreated sewage into the
streets.The hazard is greatest at
Plant *2 with liquefaction a potential
concern at Plant 11
Rubber gasketed mechanical joints will be
used to connect pipes to treatment faci
lities to minimize ruptures during
earthquakes.All facilities are and will
be designed to earthquake standards.
eater Resources PRIMARY:Construction (Both Plants)
Construction may require site dewatering
for deep foundations or excavation work
Desanding of water and water disposal
in accordance with EPA and RWQCB NPDES
Permit guidelines
;itigable
-For a description of definitions and terms used in this summary,see the end of this Attachment
PRIMARYz Operational (Both Plants)
An increase in the ability to handle
existing peak and hydraulic flowawill
result from the project,thereby
resulting in a beneficial impact of
preventing overflows of raw waste—
water.No adverse impacts on water
quality are expected
SECONDARY
Mitigable Future water demands are anticipated to
exceed the developable supply resulting
in higher water costs
Provide additional imported water supplies.
Continue to implement wastewater conserva
tion and reclamation projects.
Air Quality and
Microclimate
Mi tigable
PRIMARY:Construction
Dust emissions at Plant 11 are estimated
to be as high as 110 lb/day per acre over
a 21 month period for a two acre maximum
area.Dust should not pose a nuisance
to residential areas of Costa Mesa and
Foundation Valley if mitigation measures
are implemented
During construction,watering should occur
on a daily basis as needed for dust
suppression.Use of well tuned and properly
maintained equipment can reduce gaseous
pollutant emissions.Discontinuing con
struction during second stage smog alerts
will also reduce air pollution problems on
poor air quality days
PRIMARY:Operational (Both Plants)Plants #1 and 12
Positive Impact A net benefit in terms of existing air
quality should occur.Odors,largely
in the form of hydrogen sulfide,are
estimated to be reduced from over 280
pounds per day to less than 3 pounds
per day through construction of covers
and scrubbers on existing facilities.
Implementation of cogeneration facilities
will reduce air pollutant emissions.
Retrofitting of existing internal combust
ion engines with approved air pollution
control equipment (i.e.,selective
dilution)for meeting required reductions
for NO and CO.Addition of ferrous
Water Resources
Positive Impact
Area of Concern/
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required
Area of Concern/
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
An increase in prechlorination capacity
and digester gas clean-up projects will
further reduce odors and SO and NO
emissions.
x x
chloride to digesters will reduce SO
emissions x
Air Quality and
Microclimate
Positive Impact •Estimated emissions from engines
installed in the new booster station
and headworks are expected to be lower
than the emissions from the existing
engines which will be abandoned.No
SO2 and hydrocarbons will decrease a~d
CO may.increase or decrease depending
on the engine ultimately selected for
co—generation facilities.
See previous page
Bloti.c Resources PRIMARY:Operational (Both Plants)Plants #1 and 12
Positive Impact/
Mitigable
Seagulls and crows which feed on food
floating in primary clarifiers will be
displaced once covers are placed on
clarifiers.This will reduce potential
transmission of pathogens.Existing
trees and landscaping which will be
removed will reduce potential wildlife
habitat for some birds.Marine dis
posal of effluent is not expected to
adversely affect biota
1.Means of providing improved wildlife
habitat should be evaluated
2.Industrial and non—industrial source
control programs should continue to be
enforced.
3.Continue to maintain effluent quality
to meet NPDES Permit limitations and
conduct $1.5 million annual marine
monitoring program
4.Research on improved wastewater
disposal practices should continue
Area of Concern/
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
Cultural and
~Ientif Ic Resources
Mitigable
SECONDARY
Continued urbanization threatens to
destroy significant historic and cultural
landmarks
**Continue inventory and mapping programs
to identify cultural resources;support
historic preservation efforts.Support
,paleontological and
scientific research for important sites in
Orange County
Public Service and
Utilities
Mitigable
PRIMARY:Operational (Both Plants)
Energy use will increase substantially
unless cogeneration projects are
constructed.
Plants 11 and #2
Implement the most cost effective treatment
facilities which use the least amount of
energy,such as:
SECONDARY
1.Maximizing use of digester gas
2.Optimizing sludge dewatering operations
to minimize polymer and potable water use
3.Implementing cogeneration projects
Mitigable Urban growth will place greater demands
on existing transportation systems and
create a need for additional waste
disposal facilities,schools,police,
fire protection and other governmental
services
**Improve public transportation;encourage
carpooling;reuse and recovery waste
material,etc.
Transportation SECONDARY
Continued overcrowding of Orange
County’s freeway system will occur
unless the region’s transit system under
goes some changes
Convert local streets into high—flow
arterials;encourage vanpools,staggered
work hours,modified work weeks,parking
disincentives,promote telecommunications,
Mitigable
Area of Concern!.
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
Transportation and other menas of reducing dependency
on automobiles for transportation or
increasing efficiency of existing faci
lities.
Noise
Mitigable
PRIMARY:Construction
Noise levels associated with construct
ion at Plant 11 are expected to range
from 75 dB(A)to 105 dB(A)within 50
feet of the equipment being used.‘Pile
driving operations (if employed)will
generate the greatest source,ranging
from 95 dB(A)to 105 dB(A)
Construction activities should not commence
before 7:30 am,nor extend past the hour
of 5:30 p.m.or the hours stipulated by
local ordinances.Low noise level equip
ment and noise barriers should be used.
If feasible,pile drivers should not be
used
Mitigable Noise levels associated with
construction of the outfall booster
station and replacement of pumps in
Headworks C at Plant 12 are expected
to range from 70 dB(A)to 96 dB(A)
within 50 feet of the equipment being
used.These levels should not result
in nuisance noise levels off the site
Construction activities should not commence
before 7:30 a.m.nor extend past the hour
of 5:30 p.m.or the hours stipulated by
local ordinances.Low noise level equip
ment and noise barriers should be used.
If feasible,pile drivers should not be
used
PRIMARY:Operational (Both Plants)
Mitigable Community noise sources of greatest
concern if not controlled are internal
combustion engines,centrifugal blowers
or turbines.
Nearly all the noise associated with
operations can be mitigated by enclosure
of noisy operations;selection of low—noise
equipment;and scheduling of operations to
avoid nighttime operation of vehicles on
local surface streets.Workers can be
protected by participating in safety
training programs and using protective
hearing equipment.All future facilities
and many existing facilities will be
enclosed for odor control purposes.
This will also reduce noise.
Mitigable
rea of Concern/.
mpact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
conomic Factors
ositive Impact
PRIMARY:Construction
District funds are available to
complete the projects without neces
sitating additional revenue-raising
actions.Additional jobs will be
created through the design of the
facilities,construction,and the
administration of contracts
No mitigation measures are required
PRIMARY:Operational:
The present operating budget of $23.6
million will probably increase by $2.4
million.The increase will occur as a
result of improvements made as part of
the environmental mitigation projects
proposed
SECONDARY
Dsitive Impact The economy of Orange County is expected **provide employment opportunities and
to prosper with increased development,affordable housing and require new
development to pay for capital improve
menta needed to accommodate growth
~alth and Safety
Dnsiderations PRIMARY:Operational
Covering and treating air streams will
reduce the concentration of organic
gases volatilized during wastewater
treatment
Covei or enclose existing and new facilities
to minimize odors,aerosols,and volatile
compound emissions;purchase and maintain
best available safety equipment;and con
tinue to conduct safety and training
classes
~upact No mitigation measures are required
itigable
Area of Concern!.
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
Energy/Resource
Commitment
Partially Mitigable
PRIMARY:Operational
Energy:Based on a 24 MGD increase,
it is estimated that for each million
gallons of wastewater per .B.K.treated,
11,000 cubic feet of digester gas,
595 Kilowatt hours of electricity and•
1,000 cubic feet of natural gas will be
utilized.Energy consumption by odor
control systems and chemical and con—
sumable materials are also quite high
Energy:Cogeneration and heat recovery
projects will reduce,energy use;reduce
chlorine sodium hydroxide and activated
carbon use to the lowest possible level;
consider use of digester gas in District
vehicles
Nuisance Factors PRIMARY:Construction
The most significant nuisance conditions
likely to occur are odor and traffic.
Odors will be greatest when tie—ins
with existing facilities occur or when
start up of operations commence
See mitigation measures under.individual
subject headings
PRIMARY:Operational
See operational impacts under individual
subject
See operational mitigation measures under
individual subject headings
Area of Concern/
V
Impact Status Impacts Mitigation Measures
Energy/Resource
Commitment PRIMARY:Operational
Partially Mitigable Energy:Based on a 24 MGD increase,
it is estimated that for each million
gallons of wastewater treated,
11,000 cubic feet of digester gas,
595 Kilowatt hours of electricity and
1,000 cubic feet of natural gas will be
utilized.Energy consumption by odor
control systems and chemical and con
sumable materials are also quite high
Energy:Cogeneration and heat recovery
projects will reduce energy use;reduce
chlorine sodium hydroxide and activated
carbon use to the lowest possible level;
consider use of digester gas in District
vehicles V
Nuisance Factors PRIMARY:Construction
The most significant nuisance conditions
likely to occur are odor and traffic.
Odors will be greatest.when tie-ins
with existing facilities occur or when
start up of operations commence
PRIMARY:Operational
See operational impacts under individual
subject
See mitigation measures under individual
subject headings
See operational mitigation.measures under
individual subject headings
Definitions:
Primary Impacts Those impacts which are directly associated with construction and operation of the
proposed projects.
Construction Impacts Relatively short-term impacts which will occur during the construction of the
facilities or improvements.They can range from excavation—associated changes in the soil profile to
traffic increases associated with construction worker commuting and deliveries of building materials and
equipment.
Operational Impacts Impacts associated with operation of the completed facilities.These can be either
increases or decreases in existing usage patterns for energy,chemicals,air pollutant emissions,
expenditures for operation and maintenance or supplies.Operational improvements can reduce these impacts,
while the addition of new facilities may change existing conditions either positively (i.e.,reduced odors
or energy use),or negatively (more employees required,hence increased commuting).
Secondary Impacts Indirect impacts associated with project implementation or accommodation of new urban
development.These impacts are numerous in nature and relate to all the activities,needs and demands
associated with continued development or redevelopment of portions of the Districts’service area.These
impacts are not generated or controlled in any way by the District,but are associated indirectly by their
provision of increased treatment capacity to service planned and approved urban growth of member agencies.
Mitigation Measures Measures taken to reduce,minimize or eliminate environmental impacts or the effects
of a project.Mitigation can include the following:
1)Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
2)Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
3)Rectifying the impact by repairing,rehabilitating,or restoring the impacted environment.
4)Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the
life of the action.
5)Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
*The Districts will cooperate with agencies responsible for implementing these measures.See Table 2 for a
partial listing of agencies.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
SS.
COUNT?OF ORANGE )
I,RITA J.BROWN,Secretary of the Boards of Directors of County
Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,5,6,7,11 and 13 of Orange County,
California,do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.85—119 was
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said Boards on the 10th day of
July,1985,by the following vote,to wit:
AYES:Ruth Bailey,Michael Beverage,Richard Buck,Sam Cooper,Norman
Culver,Richard B.Edgar,Don R.Griffin,Dan Griset,Robert
Hanson,Evelyn Hart,Ron Hoesterey,Carol Kawanami,William
Mahoney,Philip Maurer,Molly McClanahan,James Neal,Carrey
Nelson,Richard Olson,Richard Partin,Bob Perry,Ruthelyn
Plummer,Richard Polis,Joyce Risner,Don Roth,David Sills,Jean
Siriani,Don Smith,Charles Sylvia,John Thomas,James Wahner,
Gene Wisner
NOES:None
ABSENT:Roger Stanton
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of County Sanitation District No.1 on behalf o~itself and Districts
Nos.2,3,5,6,7,11 and 13 of Orange County,California,this 10th day of
July,1985.
Rita J.Brown,Secretary
Boards of Directors,County
Sanitation Districts Nos.1,2,3,
5,6,7 11 and 13 of Orange County,
California