Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 1990 - 0086RESOLUTION NO.90-86 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARDS OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS NOS.6,7 AND 14 OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING FINAL SUPPLEMENT NO.1 TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR PROPOSED FORMATION OF COUNTY DISTRICT NO.14 AND PROPOSED REORGANIZATION NO.79 INVOLVING REORGANIZATION OF DISTRICTS NOS.7 AND 13 RE BAKER-GISLER INTERCEPTOR, CONTRACTS NOS.14-1-lA AND 14-1-1B,AND BAKER FORCE MAINS,CONTRACT NO.14-1-2 AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNNECTION THEREWITH, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ***************** WHEREAS,on July 24,1985 the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California,received and approved a Proposed Formation of County Sanitation District No.14 and Proposed Reorganization No. 79 Involving Reorganization of Districts Nos.7 and 13 Environmental Impact Report (EIR)by adoption of Resolution No.85-130;and WHEREAS,the EIR approved by said Resolution No.85-130 included the Baker-Gisler Interceptor and Baker Force Mains as projects covered by the EIR but offered alternatives and not specifics regarding pipe size and final alignment;and WHEREAS,in December 1986,the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6,7 and 14 of Orange County,California,authorized the preparation of a Project Report on the Master-Planned Joint Sewage Conveyance Facilities to Serve Future Flows of Districts Nos.6,7 and 14;and WHEREAS,as a result of the Project Report,a specific alignment for the ~aker-Gis1er Interceptor was recommended;and WHEREAS,the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6, —1— 7 and 14 of Orange County,California (DISTRICTS),have previously coñimissioned Ultrasystems,Inc.to prepare a Supplement No.1 to Environmental Impact Report for Proposed Formation of County Sanitation District No.14 and Proposed Reorganization No.79 Involving Reorganization of Districts Nos.7 and 13 re Baker-Gisler Interceptor,Contracts Nos.14-1-lA and 14-1-1B,and Baker Force Mains,Contract No.14-1-2 to identify and analyze the impacts of construction of these sewage conveyance facilities and changes identified since the original Environmental Impact Report of 1985,(the “PROJECT”);and WHEREAS,DISTRICTS is the lead agency for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for projects contained within said Supplement,as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,as amended (hereinafter “CEQA”)and the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA as modified and adopted by the DISTRICTS (hereinafter “CEQA Guidelines”);and WHEREAS,in order to facilitate an objective assessment of the additional individual and collective environmental impacts associated with the changes since the July 1985 approval of the EIR,DISTRICTS have caused to be prepared a Draft Supplement No.1 to Environmental Impact Report for Proposed Formation of County Sanitation District No.14 and Proposed Reorganization No.79 Involving Reorganization of Districts Nos.7 and 13 (hereinafter referred to as “DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR)to address the significant,adverse environmental impacts,mitigation measures and Project alternatives associated with the Project;and WHEREAS,the DISTRICTS have consulted with other public agencies and the general public and given them the opportunity to comment on said DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR as required by the provisions of CEQA and CEQA Guidelines;and -2- WHEREAS,on March 14,1990,a duly-noticed public hearing was held by the Boards of Directors of the DISTRICTS to provide a further opportunity for the general public to coment on and respond to the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR;and WHEREAS,the DISTRICTS have evaluated the comments received from public agencies and persons who reviewed the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR;and WHEREAS,said comments and recommendations received on the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR,either verbatim or in summary,a list of persons,organizations and public agencies commenting on the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR,and the responses of the DISTRICTS to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process have been included in and made a part of said DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR to form the Final Supplement No.1 to Proposed Formation of County Sanitation District No.14 and Proposed Reorganization No.79 Involving Reorganization of Districts Nos.7 and 13 (hereinafter referred to as “FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR”)for said Project as required by Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines;and WHEREAS,said FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR has been presented to the Boards of Directors of DISTRICTS for review,consideration and approval prior to the final approval of,and commitment to,undertaking the Baker-Gisler Interceptor, Contract No.14-1-lA,and Baker Force Mains,Contract No.14-1-2. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6,7 and 14 of Orange County,California,as follows: 1.That the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6, 7 and 14 of Orange County,California,do hereby certify that the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,and that the DISTRICTS have reviewed and considered the information contained in said FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR prior to approval of,or commitment to, —3— the Project.Said FINAL SUPPLMENT EIR is composed of the following elements: A.A Draft Supplement Environmental Impact Report,“Draft Supplement No.1 to the Final Environmental Impact Report on Proposed Formation of County Sanitation District No.14 and Proposed Reorganization No. 79 Involving Reorganization of Districts Nos.7 and 13 re Baker-Gisler Interceptor,Contracts Nos.14-1-1A and 14-1-1B,and Baker Force Mains,Contract No.14-1-2”,and all apendices thereto; B.Comments and responses to said DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR. 2.That the Boards of Directors of DISTRICTS 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 SUPPLEMENT EIR as specifically itemized below: A.Earth Impacts Pipeline construction will result in grading, excavation and compaction of soil and temporary disruption to street and parking and recreation facilities along the pipeline route.Excavation and construction activities may result in some erosion and siltation into adjacent streams and storm drains. Findi~ngs Work will be conducted in accordance with applicable city,County,state and Districts’requirements.The ground or streets will be restored to preconstruction or better condition.Erosion will be controlled by provision in the contract documents. B.Hydrology Impacts The priject route crosses the Santa Ana-Delhi -4- Channel,Airport Storm Channel,Greenville-Banning Channel, Santa Ana River,which are under the jurisdiction of the County of Orange and/or the the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. Findings The impact of the proposed project on the flood control channels is limited to the construction period.Upon construction completion the channels will return to their normal operating capacities and means.All work will be in accordance with applicable permit provisions including allowances for the proposed improvements to the Santa Ana River. C.Biota Impacts The majority of the proposed sewer line route will be located in public roadway.There is one section of the proposed pipeline that will be located along the northern boundary of the Mesa Verde Country Club;this portion will affect approximately 30 trees and/or larger shrubs. Findings Trees and shrubs will be replaced or replanted on a 1:1 basis unless other arrangements are made with the property owner when the easement is acquired. 0.Noise Impacts Project implementation will generate short-term noise levels from alignment construction activities and long-term noise levels from future sewer maintenance repair activities. Findings Work hours and equipment mufflers will meet applicable noise ordinances E.Land Use —5— Impacts Project excavation and construction activities will cause minor disruptions to residential,small businesses and airport facilities that are proximal to the pipeline route. The pipeline will require an easement from the Mesa Verde Country Club Golf Course and in an existing parking lot for an office building located at 1520 Nutmeg Place. Findings Access will be maintained by at least one ingress/egress point at all times for each property.The portion of the pipeline proposed through the John Wayne Parking lot,under the freeway and in Airport Loop and Airway Avenue will cause minor disruption to small commercial and industrial uses through the partial closure of Airway Avenue.Emergency access will be maintained during construction. F.Transportation and Circulation Impacts Traffic congestion,particularly during the peak hours,can be expected on that stretch of roadway being impacted by construction activities.The major intersections, i.e.,Baker/Harbor,Baker/Fairview,Baker/Bristol,and Baker/Red Hill,are particularly susceptible to traffic congestion.Construction activities in the parking lot between Deodar Avenue and Cinnamon Avenue may temporarily disrupt businesses located on that site.Construction activities along Airway Avenue may temporarily limit vehicle access to the MillionAir Fixed-Base Operations,Crash/Fire Rescue Station No.33 and th~Martin Aviation Hangar.Parking in the North Parking Lot ~John Wayne Airport may also temporarily disrupt -6- airport patrons.Construction activities associated with the proposed project may temporarily impact pubic bus services to residents and businesses in the area.Bus stops may be blocked and bus routes displaced temporarily during construction. Construction activities will occur in school zones on Gisler Avenue at Gibraltar Avenue and on Baker Street at Babb Street. These construction activities could interfere with the normal flow of children to and from school and potentially create hazardous situations.Construction of the project will require an encroachment permit to tunnel under the San Diego Freeway between Airport Loop Road and the airport parking lot. Findings All construction will require traffic detour plans approved by applicable local agendies.Tunnels willbe used under major intersections to minimize congestion.Adequate signage will alert motorists of the construction.These requirements will be included within the contract documents. G.Recreation ImDacts Implementation of the proposed project will require a permanent easement area of approximately 1/2-acre through the Mesa Verde Country Club Golf Course. Findings Construction within the golf course will be limited to temporary and permanent easement areas.A temporary fence will separate the construction area from the active golf course. H.Utilities Impacts Excavation activities may potentially disrupt electrical,natural gas,water,sewer and telephone lines —7— located along the pipeline route. Findings All utilities will be maintained to all properties. Temporary connections will be made when necessary. I.Health and Safety Impacts Portions of the proposed pipeline alignment are located near schools which may create hazardous situations for children at crosswalks and along school routes.The open trench,parked machinery and stockpiled dirt may appear to be an attractive play area to children able to reach the construction site.During limited periods when tie-ins with existing facilities occur or when operations nuisances commence odor and noise may occur. Findings Trenches will be fenced or plated on all off hours. Work will be scheduled,to the extent possible,to vacation periods near schools. J.Aesthetics Impacts Short-term visual impacts from machinery,trenching, and dirt pilings will occur along each segment of the proposed alignment during construction. Findings The construction contract will require that the construction areas be kept neat and clean and dust be kept to the minimum. K.Economi Factors Impacts Districts funds are available to complete the projects.Additional revenue-raising actions may be required in the future.Additional jobs will be created through the -8- design,construction and the administration of the contracts. Higher sewer use and connection fees are anticipated. Findings All new construction is paid for by the collection of fees from developers. L.Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project Impacts Improvement and expansion of the sewer conveyance system is designed to accommodate projected growth based on land use plans of the various areas within the service area. Findings Implementation of the proposed project will not in and of itself promote additional growth to the service areas. 3.That the Boards of Directors of DISTRICTS further find that changes,alterations or conditions have been incorporated into the projects contemplated in the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR which will substantially mitigate or avoid the signficant effects identified in the DRAFT SUPPLEMENT EIR.Certain of the significant effects cannot be fully mitigated.The short-term impacts, including land use changes,traffic control,construction noise,visual impacts from construction,may continue to be significant after all feasibly known and identified mitigation measures are implemented.The 1985 EIR discussed these impacts;they are treated again within the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR.The DISTRICTS Director of Engineering will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of the mitigation measures. 4.That certain changes or alterations,(e.g.mitigation measures)are required in or incorporated into the Project through the permitting responsibility and jurisdiction of a public agency other than County Sanitation Districts.These changes,identified in the 1985 EIR,are not changed by the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR. -9- 5.That the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6, 7 and 14 of Orange County,California have balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Project.The Boards do hereby further find,determine and state, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15093 of the State Guidelines,that the occurrence of those certain significant environmental effects identified in the EIR (1985)and set forth in paragraphs above have been found acceptable and will be permitted without further mitigation due to the following overriding considerations. A.The Project is necessary to accommodate wastewater flows from ongoing and future development approved by the local land use authorities.The DISTRICTS is a single-purpose agency with the responsibility to collect,treat and dispose of wastewater generated within the DISTRICTS’service area. Construction of the Project identified in the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR is necessary to provide sewerage conveyance facilities to serve development approved by the cities and County after separate environmental review by the approving entity as identified in local land use plans. B.The Boards of Directors find that implementation of the Project alternatives identified in the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR are infeasible as follows: 1)No-Project Alternative.The DISTRICTS’sole function is to provide sewerage faciltiies to adequately collect,treat and dispose of wastewater.If the no-project alternative is implemented and no new facilities are built to accommodate city and County approved land uses,the sewer system will become unreliable with potenti~d raw sewage backup in the streets and other urban areas and discharge untreated wastewater to the ocean.The -10- No-project addressed in this FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR would result in construction of the sewer as originally designated in the EIR of a size and alignment which would result in reduced capacity to convey ever-increasing flows as well as serious impacts on traffic on more heavily-traveled arterials than originally noted in 1985. 2)Provision for Lesser/Greater Capacity.Installation of smaller pipes than identified would not meet planned land use development and redevelopment of the cities and County,thus limiting growth or necessitating construction of additional pipelines at a higher cost in the near future.Installation of pipelines larger than identified in the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR is not warranted at this time.The DISTRICTS’responsibility is to serve anticipated growth,as determined by the local municipalities,not to act as the vehicle by which growth is induced or restricted. 3)Alternative Pipeline Route.Various underground and aboveground alternatives were considered before the aboveground alternative across the golf course was chosen.In order to place the sewer line underground across the golf course or under Gisler Avenue,it would have been necessary to either construct a longer siphon,which would caused maintenance problems,maintenance,or to construct a pump station which would have resulted in reduced reliability and increased costs. The basis for establishing the profile of the Baker-Gisler Interceptor is the hydraulic control which sets the downstream elevation of the pipeline.This point is the elevation of the headworks in the treatment plant in Fountain Valley.From this —11— point,the pipeline profile is extended upstream at a minimum pipe size and slope combination to carry the design flow.A siphon will be required beneath the Santa Ana River and the Greenville-Banning Flood Control Channel regardless of,the alignment selected because of their elevations.If a siphon is kept to less than 600 feet in length and designed properly,the Districts can maintain the siphon with relatively high reliability.The solids that may collect can be removed routinely,minimizing the probability of a blockage.A siphon can only be maintained at this locatin for less than 600 feet if the sewer line is kept at an elevation above the existing ground level.This means that if the alignment is across the golf course,a portion of the pipeline will have to be above the existing ground level at the golf course.Similarly,if the alignment is to be down Gisler Avenue,a portion of the pipeline will have to be above the existing level of Gisler in order to maintain a siphon that is less than 600 feet. Three alternative alignments were addressed in the Project Report:(1)an alignment following Washington Avenue and California Street;(2)an alignment following Washington Avenue, Illinois Street and Indiana Avenue;and (3)an alignment continuing in Gisler Avenue and through the Mesa Verde Country Club golf course as recommended. Th~first alignment would be very shallow,create a tremendous burden on the surrounding residential community during construction.and would be very expensive due to have encumbrance of existing utilities along the route.Many service connections to -12- several of the utilities would require relocation and most likely additional utility mains would be required within the street due to the shallow depth of this large trunk sewer pipe.The environmental effects would be extreme traffic congestion and disruption of access to residences during construction. The second alignment similarly results in a very shallow depth, requires a siphon beneath the Greenville-Banning Channel that is too long for the Districts’to maintain and would be very disruptive to the surrounding residential community.The environmental effects would be similar to the first alignment in disruption of residences during construction. The third alternative,that through the golf course,involves the least disruption to residences during construction,and would result in partically no permanent environmental change.There are additional costs involved in purchasing the necessary construction and permanent easements.After the project is completed under this alternative,the only change would be a sloped area on the rough of one fairway of the golf course as opposed to the present flat area on the rough.Environmentally,this is the least disruptive of all of the alternatives considered. A variation of the third alternative in which the pipeline would be placed along Gisler Avenue presents several unsatisfactory results.Gisler Avenue just west of Washington Avenue falls below the elevation of the interceptor pipe.This requires the siphon beneath the Greenville-Banning Channel to be extended to a total length of approximately 1,600 feet.The Districts are currently.. -13- unable to clean this length of siphon with current technology. Further,to be compatible with the current planning for the proposed bridge over the Santa Ana River at Gisler Avenue,the pipeline must be below the existing Gisler Avenue elevation at Vermont Avenue.This means that the Districts would have a very unservicable siphon if the gravity line is to be used and the pipe is to be placed in or along Gisler Avenue. Another alternative to an all-gravity system would be to construct a pump station at some point west of the Gisler Avneue and Washington Avenue intersection.A pump station,however,has many disadvantages to al all gravity flow system.It’s life cycle costs are significantly greater than those of the all-gravity system,requires continual operation and maintenance attention, would significantly affect the reliability of the overall system in that there are many additional possibilities for malfunctions, requires a significant structure which would be much more damaging to the aesthetics of the neighborhood than the landscaped and covered box across the rough of the golf course presently being considered. After considering all of these alternatives,the route proposed in the FINAL SUPPLEMENT EIR is the least damaging environmentally. The proposed route will enter the golf course near Vermont Avenue. A portion of the rough area of one fairway will be regraded and landscaped.The interceptor design can continue as a gravity flow system throughout this area with a siphon that is capable of being maintained by the Districts,resulting in increased reliability.A -14- box conduit was selected to lessen the vertical height of the facility and to provide for a line that will appear to be completely underground after the regrading and relocation of the existing trees on the easement area.During construction,this alignment will provide the least disruption to neighbors and the golf course.After construction,it will provide the least disruption of the beauty of the golf course and the neighborhood. C.For the reasons set forth above,it is not economically feasible to further mitigate or avoid the environmental effects hereinabove identified. 6.That the Board Secretary is authorized and directed to file the Notice of Determination and any other documents in accordance with the requirements of CEQI\and the Districts’CEQA Guidelines. PASSED AND ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 11,1990. -15- STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I,RITA J.BROWN,Secretary of the Boards of Directors of County Sanitation Districts Nos.6,7 and 14 of Orange County,California,do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.90—86 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said Boards on the 11th day of July,1990,by the following vote,to wit: DISTRICT 6 AYES:Ruthelyn Plumer,Chairman,Don R.Roth,James A.Wahner NOES:None ABSENT:None DISTRICT 7 AYES:Richard B.Edgar,Chairman pro tern,John C.Cox,Jr.,Dan Griset,Don R.Roth,Sally Anne Sheridan,James A.Wahner NOES:None ABSENT:Don E.Smith DISTRICT 14 AYES:Peer A.Swan,Chairman,Leslie A.Pontious,Don R.Roth, Sally Anne Sheridan NOES:None ABSENT:Don E.Smith IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of County Sanitation District No.6 on behalf of itself and Districts Nos.7 and 14 of Orange County,California,this 11th day of July,1990. ~ ~ Boards of Director~i~,eôunty ~‘ Sanitation Distric~ts:~Nos~.-6,~7 an~14 of Orange County,~a14forni~~ ‘_.l •.~‘