Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSDOC Resolution 1998 - 0019RESOLUTION NO.98-1 9-2 APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR (SARI)CONTROL GATE,CONTRACT NO.2-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO.2 OF ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR REPLACEMENT OF SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR (SARI)CONTROL GATE, CONTRACT NO.2-40,PROVIDING FOR NOTICE THEREOF AND DIRECTING FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION The Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE,DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1 That the project for which this determination is made is the Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI)Control Gate,Contract No.2-40,located in Yorba Linda,California. County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County is the “Lead Agency”as defined by CEQA;and, Section 2 That an Initial Study and Environmental Impact Assessment,which said assessment is included within the Mitigated Negative Declaration,of the environmental effects of said project has been undertaken and completed by the District,and the results thereof have been reviewed by this Board;and, Section 3 Based on the findings of the Initial Study,this Board determines that the proposed project could have an effect on the environment,but there will not be a significant effect because of the mitigation measures described within the Mitigated Negative Declaration which is attached hereto as “Exhibit A”;and, Section 4 That said Mitigated Negative Declaration has been circulated for public review for a period from April 28,1998 to May 3,1998,during which time comments were received from the following agencies and are listed and addressed in Attachment 2 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration: A.California Department of Fish and Game B.County of Orange C.United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 5 That this Board hereby notes all comments received on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor (SARI)Control Gate,Contract No.2-40;and, Section 6 That,for reasons set forth in said Exhibit “A”and in accordance with the mitigation measures incorporated within the Exhibit and by this Resolution,it is hereby found that said project will not have a significant effect on the environment and,therefore, the Board hereby approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the environmental impacts of said project;and, Section 7 That the Secretary be,and is hereby,authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution and the Mitigated Negative Declaration at the District’s office to be available for public inspection and copying;and, Section 8 That the Secretary be,and is hereby,authorized and directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with the Guidelines Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,as amended. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting held June 24,1998. ~~rodon\data1 \wp.dta\admin\BS\Re8oludons\1 998\98-1 9-2.doc ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Name of Project:Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate Structure,Contract No.2-40 Location:Yorba Linda,County of Orange Entity of Person Undertaking Project: A.District County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County B.Other _______________________________________ Staff Determination: The Districts’staff,having undertaken and completed an Initial Study of this project in accordance with Section 15063 of the Amendment to the California Environmental Quality Act,for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project might have significant effect on the environment,has reached the following conclusion: ...~..1.The project will not have a significant long term effect on the environment because of the mitigation measures incorporated; therefore,a Negative Declaration can be prepared. 2.The project could have a significant effect on the environment; therefore,an EIR will be required. Date David A.Ludwin Director of Engineering EXHIBIT “A”TO RESOLUTION NO.98-19-2 H:~wp.dta\engUOBS &CONTRACTS\2-40 SARI~2-4O ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT.doc STATE OF CALIFORNIA) )SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I,PENNY KYLE,Secretary of the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County,California,do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No.98-19-2 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said Board on the 24th day of June,1998,by the following vote,to wit: AYES:Norman Z.Eckenrode,Chair~Steve Anderson;John Collins;Barry Denes; Burnie Dunlap;Jan Flory;John M.Gullixson;Mark Leyes;Pat McGuigan; Mark A.Murphy;Todd Spitzer;Bob Zemel NOES:None ABSENT:None IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of County Sanitation District No.2 of Orange County,California,this 24th day of June,1998. Penny Kyle,~cretarf/ - ~ Board of Dirèotors otøounty $~pitation “ District No 2 of Orange Couc’t)’,California ~ ~-,- -r~_’_~-J -‘f- ~LtD ~In the Office of the Secretary ~County Sanftaji~n District(s) ~No(s)__________________ By I~~~1998 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REPLACEMENT OF SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR CONTROL GATE CONTRACT NO.2-40 June 1998 LEAD AGENCY: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Engineering Department 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 CONTENTS •Project Description •Project Location •Finding of No Significant Impact •Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting •Attachment I —Initial Study •Attachment 2—Comments Received on Initial Study and Responses to Them With the Addition of New Mitigation Measures •Attachment 3—Mitigation Measures to be Included in Project Plans and Specifications PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of relocation and replacement of an existing emergency shut off gate structure on the Santa Ana River Interceptor sewer (SARI)with a new facility located adjacent to the Santa Ana River near the Savi Ranch Business Park,in the City of Anaheim.The replacement is deemed necessary to prevent a massive inflow of sand and debris into the SARI line in the event of catastrophic failure to the existing pipeline.The existing shut off gate constructed in 1981 is a manually operated sluice gate located between La Palma Avenue and the Santa Ana River,downstream of Weir Canyon Road.The existing structure is in a location that would be inaccessible under severe flood conditions as access would be precluded by flooding of the road to the gate.The gate is designed to cut off flow and seal the pipe from inflows of river water and sediment which could overwhelm the downstream treatment facilities in the event of a pipeline break.The relocation of the gate valve is an initial step in the eventual relocation of portions of the SARI to areas outside the Santa Ana River floodplain.The relocation of the interceptor will take at least three years to complete once engineering and environmental studies are completed.As an interim measure to protect the integrity of the central Orange County treatment plants in light of river flow trends,this interim action is needed to help mitigate potential adverse impacts if the SARI pipeline is undercut and potentially washed out during flood flows. PROJECT LOCATION (See attached Figures 1,2 and 3 of the April 1998 Initial Study included as Attachment 1) The new control gate structure is proposed to be relocated to a site which is adjacent to the intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway and Eastpark Drive in the City of Yorba Linda. A Home Depot building and other commercial enterprises adjoin the site.The property is owned by the County of Orange.The CSDOC’s SARI line easement was acquired prior to County’s fee acquisition. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT An Initial Study for the subject project was prepared and circulated for public review on April 28,1998 (See Attachment I for a Copy of Public Notice and Initial Study).Three agencies commented on the Initial Study and Declaration of Intent to File a Negative Declaration (Copies of their comments and responses to them are contained in Attachment 2).Their comments and responses were taken into account in making minor revisions to the proposed mitigation measures(more specific)being adopted as part of this Negative Declaration and included in the Plans and Specifications for the Project.The certification made in the Initial Study that there is no substantial evidence that there will be significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this project is affirmed with the adoption by the Board of Directors of this Mitigated Negative Declaration which includes the mitigation measures contained in Attachment 3 which is a refinement of Section IX of the Initial Study. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires that the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.The project-specific mitigation measures adopted for the Replacement of the Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate (Contract No.2-40)pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act as contained in Attachment 3.These measures have also been incorporated into the project Plans and Specifications and will be monitored by the District’s Project Engineer under the direction of the Director of Engineering.Performance Standards are contained within the Specifications and through the issuance of permits and agreements by various regulatory agencies (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,California Regional Water Quality Control Board,California Department of Fish and Game,County of Orange,etc.).The specific measures will be implemented through the bidding and contracting process and field inspections and compliance reporting is specified in the contract documents. Enforcement of these measures is through surety bonds and a Final Closeout Agreement issued by the Sanitation District’s Board of Directors once the job is completed. H:~*p.dtaH:~p.dta~eng~.JOBS &CONTRACTS~2-4O SARI~E,Mronmentar.Neg Dec~2-4O NEGDECdoc~engUOBS &CONTRACTS~2-4O SARfl2-40 NEGDEC.doc Attachment I ~nitia~Study April,1998 INITIAL STUDY REPLACEMENT OF SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR CONTROL GATE CONTRACT NO.2-40 April 1998 LEAD AGENCY: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Engineering Department 10844 Ells Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92708-7018 CONTACT PERSON:Andrei loan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1 II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION I III.DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3 IV.ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 6 V.DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 11 VI.CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING ZONING,PLANS AND OTHER APPLICABLE LAND USE CONTROLS 15 VII.DETERMINATION 16 VIII.REFERENCES 17 IX.MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE ADOPTED AND INCLUDED IN PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 17 SUPPORTING MATERIALS Figure 1 Regional Location Map Figure 2 Project Location Map Figure 3 Site Plan for Control Gate Structure INITIAL STUDY Entity or Person Undertaking Project: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Administrative Offices:10844 Ells Avenue Fountain Valley,CA 92708 Mailing Address:(P.O.Box 8127) Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 Telephone Number:(714)962-2411 I.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION In accordance with the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)of 1970 and the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County’s (Districts)CEQA Guidelines most recently amended and approved in 1997,this document combined with any attachments, constitutes the Initial Study for the project listed below.This Initial Study provides the basis for the determination that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment if the proposed measures to mitigate potential measures are implemented. Based on this initial study,a Mitigated Negative Declaration is being issued.This document and the Mitigated Negative Declaration are being circulated for comments from other agencies and interested individuals for a period of 30 days. II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION A.Tifie:REPLACEMENT OF SANTA ANA RIVER INTERCEPTOR (SARI)CONTROL GATE (Contract 2-40) B.Location (See attached Figures 1,2 and 3) The control gate structure is proposed to be relocated at a site which is adjacent to the intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway and Eastpark Drive in the City of Yorba Linda.A Home Depot building and other commercial enterprises adjoin the site.The property is owned by the County of Orange as a part of the Featherly Regional Park (underdeveloped area).The Districts’SARI line easement was acquired prior to County’s fee acquisition.The City of Yorba Linda gave a permanent easement to the Sanitation Districts to construct the control gate structure. The control gate relocation project is being undertaken to allow emergency shutoffs in the event of upstream pipeline or manhole failure which otherwise would allow silt and debris to disrupt central treatment plant operation. C.Description The proposed project consists of relocation and replacement of an existing emergency shut off gate structure on the Santa Ana River Interceptor sewer (SARI)located adjacent to the Santa Ana River near the intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway in the City of Yorba Linda.The replacement is deemed necessary to prevent a massive inflow of sand and debris into the SARI line in the event of catastrophic failure of the existing pipeline.The existing shut off gate constructed in 1981 is a manually operated sluice gate located between La Palma Avenue and the Santa Ana River,downstream of Weir Canyon Road.The existing control gate is located Page 1 of 18 in an area that would be inaccessible under severe flood conditions as access would be precluded by flooding of the road leading to the gate.The gate is designed to cut off flow and seal the pipe from inflows of river water and sediment which could overwhelm the downstream treatment facilities in the event of a pipeline break.The relocation of the gate valve is an initial step in the eyentual relocation of portions of the SARI to areas outside the Santa Ana River floodplain.The larger relocation of the interceptor will take at least three years to complete once engineering and environmental studies are completed.As an interim measure to protect the integrity of the downstream treatment plants in light of recent rainfall and river flow trends, this interim action is needed to help mitigate potential adverse impacts if the SARI pipeline is undercut and potentially washed out during flood flows. The relocation project was not part of the long term Master Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR),the Sanitation Districts prepared in 1989 and has only recently been proposed because of a 1996 study by the engineering firm of Holmes and Narver prepared under contract to the Districts showed that the Santa Ana riverbed has dropped about six to eight feet since the time the SARI line was constructed in 1975.The entrapment of sediment behind Prado Dam prevents downstream deposition to mitigate the scouring effects of flood flows.Significant future erosion is predicted as a result of future flows being released from Prado Dam which is being raised by a major flood control project by the Corps of Engineers. The construction would include a reinforced concrete vault overlying the existing 42-inch diameter pipeline.The vault would house a metering system,communications equipment,a motorized sluice gate,and electrical power.Above ground will be a fenced access area and control panel. The most potentially significant impacts associated with the project are those associated with the construction of the below-ground vault,exposure of persons to pipeline effects during dewatering operations,and the potential for generation of the odors.All of these potential impacts have been addressed and adequate mitigation measures incorporated into project design and construction specifications such that any impacts will be reduced to insignificant levels.The facility will be the same capacity as the old gate structure,but will have all new components and be more reliable due to improved technology and reliable access to the station.It will be designed to meet greater performance standards (improved maintenance, reliability,and electronic controls). The specific recommended project components are the result of a design being completed by Holmes &Narver for the Districts.The project was not anticipated in the Districts’1989 Master Plan and has only recently been planned as a result of the streambed scour studies and the Prado Dam operations analysis. The proposed project will be an underground station with exterior dimensions of about fifteen feet by twelve feet and a depth of thirty-one feet below the existing grade.The excavation required for construction is anticipated to be approximately thirty by twenty feet and thirty-three feet deep.The facility will have an enclosed control panel which will house all electrical equipment.The site will be separated from the park by a screening fence. The cost of the proposed gate structure and support facilities is estimated to be approximately $250,000-$350,0000. Page 2 of 18 D.Purpose The gate wifl be operated monthly only for reliability checkouts.Its primary purpose is to be ready for closure,by top management direction,only during the passage of a major (50-1 00 year event),and then only in the event that metering signals upstream failure and intrusion of damaging flood waters,silt and debris. Ill.DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is located in the City of Yorba Linda near the intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway and Eastpark Drive.The project will be constructed alongside the Santa Ana River within an open space,wildlife comdor.The surrounding land uses are mainly commercial and open space.There is a Home Depot Store immediately adjacent to the proposed project site. Within the park property there is a rock-reverted flood control levee and a gravel access road. The adjacent alluvial wash is sparsely vegetated.The channel of the Santa Ana River flows westerly approximately 500 feet north of the site. Geology/Soils Soils and geological conditions at the site were the subject of an April 1998 Geotechnical Investigation by Diaz-Yourman Associates (DYA).DYA indicates that the property is fenced along the southerly side,has a gravel surface flood coat roadway for access and is sparsely vegetated. Borings taken at the site indicate alluvial sand,gravel and cobbles well below the Districts’ pipeline (the limits of the borings). Hydrology/Water Quality The groundwater underlying the property and in the general area of the project is of good quality and replenished by the perennial flow of the Santa Ana River.The DYA report found groundwater present at a depth of 18 feet during site drilling and indicated that local levels have been significantly affected by the water level in the adjacent Santa Ana River. Vegetation/Wildlife The proposed site area overlies the SARI pipeline.The easement at the proposed vault is sparsely vegetated with mulefat and other indigent species.The site has no significant vegetation or wildlife.This is in contrast to the nparian areas adjoining the river where close to three hundred species of plants have been recorded (March 1992)along its reach.However, about 300 feet northerly of the proposed vault the vegetation becomes increasingly dense approaching the thalweg.Within the perennial stream exist large Sycamore tree typical of southern California npanan areas are found.Cottonwoods and an oak woodland also characterized this stretch of the river between Horseshoe Bend and Featherly Regional Park. The most abundant native plant species are sunflowers,grasses and various broad-leaved plants. Page 3 of 18 A review of the Plants and Animals of the Santa Ana River in Orange County (Marsh,1992) indicates the presence eleven species of fish,three salamanders and four frogs and toads along this stretch of the river.These species are associated with the river and not the drier upland areas of the floodplain.- The least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bel!iipusillus)is a Federal (listed in May 1986)and State listed (June 1980)endangered species that inhabits nparian habitats in the area around Prado Dam. The birds nest in dense streamside thickets of willow or wild rose.It is a migrant which arrives from the south in March or April,departing in August or September to wintering grounds in the southern part of Baja California.The birds feed on insects. The bird prefers mature npanan habitat characterized by a dense understory of young willows (Sa!ix.sp),mulefat (Bacchans salicifoiia),California rose (Rosa califomica)and others shrubby species.These areas frequently occur in association with cottonwoods (Populus spp.)and California sycamore (Platanus racemosa)which contribute to providing a varied understory with stratified vegetation which is preferred habitat for the birds.Wide woodlands adjacent to rivers are the most suitable places to find the birds (RECON,1990).In the Santa Ana River area below Prado Dam,three least Bell’s vireo temtones were detected in a 1996 survey to examine the impacts associated with modifications to the District’s Santa Ana River Interceptor trunk sewer.Access to and maintenance of the sewer has been restricted due to the sensitivity of the area and presence of the least Bell’s vireo.The proposed project does not have the type of habitat where the birds are likely to be found. Another noteworthy species which is Federally listed as endangered is the Arroyo Toad (Bufo micmscaphus califomicus).This toad is also on the California State list as a species of special concern.The habitat preferences of this species,cobbles near water are not present at the project site. Archaeology/History The site has undergone significant modification over the years so no surface artifacts or evidence of prehistoric use remain. Existing and Proposed Land Use All work will take place on an easement obtained by the Districts from private owners and county~owned maintenance access roads will provide access to the site. There is no wildlife or vegetation in the areas where the project will be constructed.Most of the site is open ground.Because of wildlife potential,the backfilled excavation will be planted with indigent species. Adjacent to the project site are existing commercial buildings. Relevant Land Use Planning!Aesthetics The proposed structure Will be constructed as an underground facility which would be unobtrusive after completion. Page 4 of 18 Demographic and Growth Dynamics The project is in conformance with the projections of capacity and growth identified in the approved 1989 Master Plan prepared by the Sanitation Districts.Land use over the easement is consistent with the Yorba Linda General Plan and the County’s Santa Ana River Habitat Management Plan. Transportation/Circulation No pubic transportation facilities will be offered.Access will be via locked gates from Eastpark Drive to the east and Crystal Drive to the west (approximately 1-1/2 miles total). Noise The major contributors to the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site are vehicles traveling through the area.The 91 Freeway lies approximately 2000 feet easterly.However, during construction there will be intermittent periods of normalconstruction equipment noise. There will be no noise associated with post-construction operations. Climate/Air Quality The climate of this area is profoundly influenced by the Pacific Ocean and its semi-permanent pressure systems that result in warm,dry summers and coot,wet winters. The project area has mean temperatures ranging from about 55 degrees Fahrenheit in January to 70 degrees F in August.However,during the summer the maximum temperatures reach as high as 100 degrees.Rainfall varies from year to year;however,the annual average is about 12 inches occurring primarily from November through April. Air quality standards are often exceeded in the area and it is a designated nonattainment area for several pollutants.Air quality is an important concern in the South Coast Air Basin.Sewer collection systems contribute to emission levels by the use of energy for pumping treatment and through the potential release of odorous compounds.The proposed project is not expected to change any of the wastewater characteristics or increase the potential for odors. Energy Conservation Electrical energy for the area is supplied by Southern California Edison.Purchased energy is required to operate the pumps and power the pump station support facilities.Energy is used to produce and transport the materials heeded and to construct and operate the proposed wastewater facilities.The manufacturing of concrete,steel,pipes,and other construction materials require energy.Diesel fuel,gasoline,and oil are consumed in transporting the construction materials from the production location to the construction site.Energy is consumed when actual construction occurs at the proposed site. Page 5 of 18 IV.ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (Explanation of all “yes”and “maybe”answers are required on attached sheets.) YES MAYBE (NO 1.Earth.Will the proposal result in: a.Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geological substructures?1 b.Disruptions,displacements,compaction or uncovering of the soil?~“ c.Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ~,, d.The destruction,covering or modification of any unique geological or physical features? ..~,, e.Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? ~, f.Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay,inlet or lake? ~,, g.Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes,landslides, mudslides,ground failure,or similar hazards? / 2.Air.Will the proposal result in: a.Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? ~,, b.The creation of objectionable odors?/ c.Alteration of air movement,moisture,or temperature or any change in climate,either locally or regionally? / Page 6 of 18 3.Water.Will the proposal result in: a.Changes in currents,or the course of direction of water movements,in either marine or fresh waters? / b.Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ,, c.Alteration to the course or flow of flood waters?/ d.Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? ~,, e.Discharge into surface waters,or in any alteration of surface water quality,including but not limited to temperature,_dissolved_oxygen,_or turbidity? / f.Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ,,, g.Change in the quantity of groundwater,either through direct additions or withdrawals,or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? 1 h.Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? ‘I, i.Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? ~,, 4.Plant Life.Will the proposal result in: a.Change in diversity of species,or number of any species of plants (including trees,shrubs,grass, crops,and aquatic plants)? / b.Reduction of the numbers of any unique,rare or endangered species of plants? ,~, c.Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? / d.Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?/ Page 7 of 18 5.Animal Life.Will the proposal result in: a.Change in the diversity of species or numbers of any species of animals (birds,land animals including reptiles,fish and shellfish,benthic organisms or insects)? b.Reduction of the numbers of any unique,rare or endangered s pecies of animals? c.Introduction of new species area,or result in a barrier to of animals into an the migration or movement of animals? d.Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6.Noise.WtI~the proposal result in: a.Increases in existing noise levels? b.Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7.Light and Glare.Will the proposal produce light or glare? . 8.Land Use.Will the proposal result in: a.A substantial alteration of the present or planned land uses of an area? 9.Natural Resources.Will the proposal result in: a.Increase in the rate or use~of any natural resources? ,, 10.Risk of Upset.Will the proposal involve: a.A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including,but not limited to,oil, pesticides,chemicals or radiation)in the event of an accident or upset conditions? ~, b.Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11.Population.Will the proposal alter the location, distribution,density,or growth rate of the human population of an area? I j~ ‘ Page 8 of 18 12.Housing.Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? ~,, 13.Transportation/Circulation.Will the proposal result in: a.Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? I b.Effects on existing parking facilities,or demand for new parking? . c.Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? ,,, d.Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ~,, e.Alterations to waterbome,rail or air traffic?/ f.Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ~, 14.Public Services.Will the proposal have an effect upon,or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a.Fire protection?1 b.Police protection?/ c.Schools?‘,‘ d.Parks or other recreational facilities?/ e.Maintenance of public facilities,including roads?/ f.Other governmental services?I 15.Energy.Will the proposal result in: a.Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?/ b.Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy,or require the development of new sources of energy? . I Page 9 of 18 16.Utilities.Will the proposal result in a need for new systems,or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a.Power or natural gas?“ b.Communications systems?I c.Water?“ d.Sewer or septic tanks?I e.Storm water drainage?“ f.Solid waste and disposal?I 17.Human Health.Will the proposal result in: a.Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? I b.Exposure of people to potential health hazards?I 18.Esthetics.Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public,or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? ~,, 19.Recreation.Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? / 20.Cultural Resources. a.Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? / b.Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric building, structure,or object? / c.Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? I d.Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ~,, Page 10 of 18 21.Mandatory Findings of Significance. a.Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of California history or prehistory? / . b.Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?(A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief,definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) . ~,, c.Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small;but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) . ,,, d.Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? / V.DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) 1.Earth Construction would involve the excavation of soils to a depth of about 33 feet below the ground surface entailing an estimated 500 cubic yards of material.Complete sheetpiling will be required to support the construction due to groundwater conditions and adjacent buildings. The construction area will be approximately thirty by twenty feet and thirty-three feet deep. Excavated soil will be stockpiled northeast of the proposed construction area,adjacent to the access road,without obstructing the road. Therefore,there would be minor changes in geological substructures within the site boundary in a very confined area.Some excavated material may be used as backfill. Page 11 of 18 A soils investigation has been conducted to support the design of the proposed new gate valve.The soils investigation included recommendations with respect to soil corrosion potential and liquefaction potential during an earthquake.Overall the Diaz Yourman & Associates Report of April 10,1998 concludes that the site will be subject to earthshaking during a major earthquake but seismic design n accordance the 1997 Uniform Building Code procedures based on Seismic Zone 4 and Soil Type S0 are appropriate.They conclude,that the site is “suitable for the proposed development”,and go on to recommend a mat foundation and a design to resist buoyant uplift from groundwater. Local topography would be temporarily altered due to stockpiling of soils.Disturbed areas would be subjected to increased wind erosion.Since construction will occur between August 1st and October 30th,it is not anticipated that potential water erosion during the primary construction period is likely. About 30 cubic yards of additional soil fill will be required to fill the sloping area around the structure.An additional 11 cubic yards of riprap 12”to 18”size)will be required to line the sloping area around the level pad.Finally,about 15 cubic yards of gravel to be spread over the level pad area.The side slopes of the pad will be lined with riprap.Any other riprapped areas associated with the access road will also be repaired if disturbed. After backfilling,any excess material will be exported to a legal disposal site. 2.Air Heavy construction equipment such as trucks,tractors,backhoes,and other equipment powered by internal combustion engines would be used.Also,construction employees and delivery vehicles would be coming to and from the site for a period of 2 to 3 months (August 1st to September 30th or October 30th of 1998).These would emit a few pounds per day of various air pollutants. Based on such estimates,theconstruction will not result in substantial deterioration in ambient air quality.The types of equipment to be used on site will include Vibrating type Sheet Pile Driver and Sheet Pile Extractor (less noisy),Crane with Clam Bucket,Concrete Pump Truck (Only at the time of concrete delivery),Front end Loader/Dozer and Electric Dewatering Pump. The small area and depth of excavation will minimize dust.Also,the nature of the soils (clay and sand)will preclude significant dust emissions.Dusting should it occur,will be controlled by spraying water on the stockpiled soils. 3.Water During construction of the gate valve structure there will be a need to dewater the site.A sump pump within tightly sheeted excavation may be used for dewatenng the site.It is estimated that dewatering use will generate about 100,000 gallons of water at the beginning of excavation.As the pumping continues,groundwater inflow is expected to reduce to about 10,000 gallons per day to be pumped intermittently depending upon the infiltration of groundwater into the construction pit. Pagel2ofl8 The current plan is to discharge the dewatered water directly into the Santa Ana River.A sediment trap will be installed to prevent any sediment from the dewatered water entenng the river.A rock outlet protection will be installed at the outlet pipe end to prevent any riverbed erosion. All dewatered groundwater will have to be handled and disposed of in accordance with appropriate regulations and required permits. A silt fence will be constructed around the construction area to present sediment transport to the river in the event of an unexpected storm or from wind erosion. Once constructed,the proposed facilities are not expected to have an effect on surface or groundwater in the project area. 4.Plant Life Neither construction nor operation of the proposed facilities are expected to have an effect on plant life in the project area.The area to be disturbed by cortstruct~on is not well vegetated and mainly sparse mulefat.Adjacent to the site is a gravel access road adjacent to an industrial park/commercial development.The area to be disturbed by construction will be about 40 feet by 50 feet including the area to be sheetpiled.Any disturbed native vegetation will be replaced. 5.Animal Life Plants and animals species are not found in abundance at the site.The adjacent npanan areas of the river have an abundance of vegetation and wildlife species.These should not be impacted by the proposed project. Representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service have seen the site with one of the project consulting engineers (Carl Nelson,P.E.) who indicated that the habitat is not of the type preferred by the Arroyo Toad (cobbled streambed)where it breeds in the period from March to July in shallow pools of slow moving streams.The voice is the major identifying factor to locate the species. 6.Noise Heavy noise is not expected at the construction site.We are specifying vibrating type sheet pile driver and extractor,which produce very less noise.Also electric dewatering pump will be used instead of oil generator pump. 7.Light and Glare Neither construction nor operation would produce light and glare in the project area. Page 13 of 18 8.Land Use Neither con~t~ruction nor operation is expected to adversely impact land use in the project area. The area is not subject to public access and a fence and gate will be installed around the area to preclude access to the control gate structure except by authorized maintenance personnel. The gate structure will be in a sealed below-ground structure to preclude odor releases from the sewer. 9.Natural Resources Construction of the proposed gate valve facility will require increased use of construction materials such as steel,concrete and other materials.This increased use is not expected to be significant. 10.Risk of Upset Release of hazardous materials to environment is not anticipated.There will be no storage of fuels on-site and on-site fueling of equipment is not anticipated for the brief periods of time it will be in use during excavation and backfilling. 11.Population Neither construction nor operation would have an effect on population in the project area. 12.Housing Neither construction nor operation would have an effect on housing in the project area. 13.Transportation/Circulation There will be an increase in local traffic from construction work and deliveries of materials and possible hauling of construction debris from the site.A construction Staging Area (about 1 00-ft.x 200-ft.area)will be located northeast of construction site,just north of access road. Due to small size of the project,heavy equipment will not remain on the site for a period of time.They will remain at the site only for a few days,as required for completing that particular element of construction. There is an existing access road south of the proposed structure.Entrance is located on Crystal Drive under the Weir Canyon Road Bridge.- Construction workers will park northeast of the construction site,adjacent to the access road. As this is not a public road,there will be no disturbance to traffic.There will be few construction workers on site with an estimated 5 pickup trucks at any one time to be parked adjacent to the access road. 14.Public Services Neither construction nor operation would have an effect on public services in the project area. Page 14 of 18 15.Energy Neither construction nor operation of the new gate structure would use substantial amounts of fuel or energy or increase the demands upon existing sources of energy. 16.Utilities Neither construction nor operation of the gate structure will result in the need for new utility systems or require substantial alterations to any utility system. 17.Human Health Neither construction nor operation of the new gate structure is expected to have an effect on human health in the project area. 18.Esthetics The construction of the gate valve will only result in minor alteration of the existing landscape. There will be an above-ground control panel and cyclone fencing around the site.The fence will be an 8-foot high chain link fence with three strands of barbed wire on top for security.A twelve-foot wide double swing gate will be provided for site access.It will also be topped with barbed wire. 19.Recreation Neither construction nor operation would have an effect on recreational opportunities in the project area which is precluded from public access and fenced: 20.Cultural Resources Neither construction nor operation would have an effect on cultural resources in the project area.No cultural resources have been found during prior construction activities at the site. VI.CONSISTENCY WITH EXISTING ZONING,PLANS AND OTHER APPLICABLE LAND USE CONTROLS The project is compatible with existing zoning and the Districts Wastewater Master Plan.It is also compatible with the City of Yorba Linda and County of Orange General Plans. Page 15 of 18 VII.DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: Check one of the boxes below for the appropriate Determination I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. . . I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures descried on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the X environment,and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Page 16 of 18 VIII.REFERENCES Diaz Yourman &Associates.1998.Geotechnical Investigation -Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer Control Gate Structure.Project 112-10.Prepared for Holmes &Narver Consulting Engineers.April (DRAFT). Marsh,Gordon A.1992.Plants and Animals of the Santa Ana River in Orange County. Prepared for Orange County Environmental Management Agency. P&D Environmental Services,1996.Letter Report -Results of 1996 Survey for the Least Bell’s Vireo in the Santa Ana River Associated with the Districts’SARI Project.Prepared by Doug Willick,Staff Biologist,August 13,1996. IX.MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE ADOPTED AND INCLUDED IN PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1.Earth Complete sheetpiling will be required to support the construction due to groundwater conditions and adjacent buildings. The construction area will be clearly marked and staked and heavy equipment use outside this area will be prohibited. Excavated soil will be stockpiled northeast of the proposed construction area,adjacent to the access road,without obstructing the road. The side slopes of the pad will be lined with riprap.Any other nprapped areas associated with the access road will also be repaired if disturbed. 2.Air Dusting should it occur,will be controlled by spraying water on the stockpiled soils. 3.Water A sump pump within tightly sheeted excavation may be used for dewatering the site. The current plan is to discharge the dewatered water directly into the Santa Ana River.A sediment trap will be installed to prevent any sediment from the dewatered water entering the river.A rock outlet protection will be installed at the outlet pipe end to prevent any riverbed erosion. All dewatered groundwater will have to be handled and disposed of in accordance with appropriate regulations and required permits. A silt fence will be constructed around the construction area to present sediment transport to the river in the event of an unexpected storm or from wind erosion. Page 17 of 18 Any disturbed native vegetation will be replaced. 4.Noise Vibrating type sheet pile driver and extractor,which produce very less noise,will be specified for use.Also electric dewatering pump will be used instead of oil generator pump. 5.Land Use The area is not subject to public access and a fence and gate will be installed around the area to preclude access to the control gate structure except by authorized maintenance personnel. The gate structure will be in a sealed below-ground structure to preclude odor releases from the sewer. 6.Risk of Upset There will be no storage of fuels on-site. 7.TransportationlCirculation A construction Staging Area (about 100-ft.x 200-ft.area)will be located northeast of construction site,just north of access road. Heavy equipment will not remain on the site except for only a short period of time (a few days) as required for completing any particular element of construction. Construction workers will park northeast of the construction site,adjacent to the access road. Page 18 of 18 Al :jee H:\wp.dta~engUOBS &cONTRAcTs\2-40\Environmental\Neg Dec\IN!TIAL.DOC PROJECT LOCATION I HIS LEGEND DISTB~CT NO.2 BOUNDARY —--—j BOUNDARY OF Ct1~ES I FIGURE 1-REGIONAL LOCATION MAP ~s~&~~ ~~~~M~~á r\_c ,‘/‘~~-,--t -~ ‘~ --~&.- ‘~~t:.~~~-~-~k ~ ~ 1~M’~~—..~~,.p ~N~A.-~3 ~~~‘\ ~ ..~~Y ii e •‘~~%‘‘~~ c~iN ~‘I - - -2~’~e I’ II _ ~I __~\\.~—.~~ ~~~~ FIGURE 2 -.PROJECT LOCATION APPROX.SCALE:1”=1550’± 8~HIGH CHAIN -LINK FENCE I 8”OUTRIGGER WITH OF BARBED WIRE I C—2Q1I~—9Ol N8834’32”E — CENTERLINE OF 4t DIA RC SEWER 30’0.C.S.D.SEWER EASEMEN MATCH EXISTING ELEVATION -~ CONTROL PANEL FS 350.80 FIGURE 3 -SITE PLAN, I ‘ N Attachment 2 Comments Received on Initial Study and Responses with the Addition of New Mitigation Measures June 22,1998 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED Commenter Nature of Comments Response to Comment California Department of Fish and Game,South Coast Region comments dated May 29,1998 Provided standard CEQA response on recommended information on biological resources to include in CEQA document. Contact with the Department’s field representative and field surveys had already occurred and a Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement (No.50- 187-98)was issued on June 1, 1998.This agreement contains measures to protect fish and wildlife resources which will be incorporated into the project Plans and Specifications and Construction Contract requirements. County of Orange U Planning and Development Services ~ The County raised a number of questions regarding the project boundaries,rights-of- way and permitting requirements. More details of the boundaries of various jurisdictions have been included on Plans. Permitting and information regarding dewatenng, vegetation removal and re planting and appropriate field staking have been included in Plans and Specifications. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service . The Service as an advisor to the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers provided comments the need for mitigation to protect jurisdictional waters/wetlands and restoration measures for disturbed habitat.Also concerns about noise and its impacts on the least Bell’s vireo.Impacts to the Santa Ana sucker,a Federal candidate from dewatering and a discharge to the Santa Ana River were raised.The fencing around the final structure was deemed to have the potential debris trap during storm flows, All of the concerns raised have been addressed and specific measures taken to avoid or eliminate significant impacts. No wetlands will be impacted, vegetation removed will be restored,noise impacts will be minimized through specification of low-noise generating pile drivers,and the water from dewatering will be discharged to the sewer system.Project construction has been scheduled to occur after the least Bell’s vireo breeding season.The structure will be outside the floodplain of the river and will not have the potential to serve as a debris trap. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE COUNTY OF ORANGE Response to Planning and Development Services Letter of May 27,1998.A copy of the letter and the comments are attached. Comments: Flood 1.Comment noted that supports constructing the project as proposed. 2.Ownership of the project is by the County of Orange.The boundaries of the jurisdictions of the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD)and the Orange County Parks Department are noted on the final plans.The rights-of-way for the various jurisdictions have been noted on the final plans.The control gate will be constructed on land owned by the OCFCD over which CSDOC acquired an easement prior to OCFCD ownership. 3.The City of Yorba Linda easement granted to the Sanitation District preceded the grant to the OCFCD and should have been eradicated when the levee was dedicated to OCFCD and has no influence on the present use of the easement previously acquired by Sanitation District. 4.Comment noted that the Santa Ana River Trail will be unaffected by the proposed project since it is on the opposite side of the river from the project. 5.It is noted that the County agrees that the project site is outside the 100-year flood plain boundary. It is noted (and applications have been filed)for an Orange County Public Property Permit which are supported with construction drawings containing all needed information. Water Quality 7.Comment noted.The Sanitation Districts has its own NPDES blanket dewatering permit.Depending upon water quality conditions,volumes of water for disposal and the field conditions,dewatering may occur either by a discharge to a recharge basin or by discharge to the sewer collection system.A direct discharge to the Santa Ana River will not occur (Also see response to Comment No.3 of the May 29,1998 Letter from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service regarding dewatering impacts on the Santa Ana sucker,a local fish which is a Federal candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act). Recreation and ODen SDace 8.The soils stockpile area,staging area and revegetation sites have been discussed with the appropriate County agencies and have been designated on the site plans and in the Plans and Specifications through he permitting process now underway. 9.The field construction site staking and/or fencing will be done as part of the permitting process. 10.The plant and irrigation plans and specifications for revegetation of the site are being prepared and will be submitted as part of the County of Orange Public Property Permit process and contained within the Plans and Specifications that go out to bid. 11.The erosion control plan is being prepared and will be submitted as part of the County of Orange Public Property Permit process and contained within the Plans and Specifications that go out to bid. 12.The site access plan is being prepared and will be submitted as part of the County of Orange Public Property Permit process and contained within the Plans and Specifications that go out to bid. 13.A detailed site map is being updated to include the delineation of property ownership and easements as part of the County of Orange Public Property Permit process and contained within the Plans and Specifications that go out to bid. 14.An easement for power and telephone services is being obtained by the Edison Co.and Pacific Bell and will be an integral element of the issuance of the County of Orange Public Property Permit which has been applied for as described in the responses to comments 8-1. County of Orange Planning &Development Services Department MAY 271998 Mr.David A.Ludwin,P.E. Director of Engineering County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue P.0.Box 8127 Fountain Valley,CA 9278-8 127 NCL 98-33 THOMAS B.MATHEWS DIRECTOR 300 N.FLOWER ST. THIRD FLOOR SANTA ANA.CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS: P.O.BOX 4048 SANTA ANA.CA 92702-4048 TELEPHONE: (714)834-4643 RECEIVED FAX 4 834-2771 ENGINEERJ1~G DEPAR~NT MAY 2 91998 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY SUBJECT:ND for the Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate The above referenced item is a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND)for the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC).The proposed project consists of the relocation and replacement of an existing emergency shut off gate structure on the Santa Ma River Interceptor sewer (SARI)located adjacent to the Santa Ma River near the intersection of Savi Ranch Parkway and Eastpark Drive in the City of Yorba Linda.The property is owned by the County of Orange as a part of the Featherly Regional Park. The County of Orange has reviewed the ND and offers the following comments: Flood Coiiv~es~t We are supportive of the proposal to construct the control gate on the SARI line.We concur that it is wise to seal the pipe during high flows in the Santa Ma River.Sealing the pipe during high flows in the river may result in release of untreated sewage in the 42-inch diameter pipeline;however,the alternative is large amounts of sediment flowing into the pipeline if the pipe were to wash away.Sediment from pipe failure between Weir Canyon Road and Green River Golf Course could overwhelm the down stream treatment plant in Fountain Valley with sand resulting in a much greater potential sewage spill than what could occur from the 42-inch pipe alone. 2.Page 1 states, ConM~è “The property is owned by the County of Orange a part of the Featherly Regional Park (underdeveloped area).” It is difficult to plot the exact location of the proposed control gate structure based on the description and map provided with the NOP;however,it appears that the location of the control gate structure will be within Parcel 2202 which is owned in fee by the Orange County Flood Control District.Parcel 2202 is 105-feet wide and approximately one mile long and encompasses the maintenance road along the south levee of the Santa Ana River • upstream of Weir Canyon Road.There is an easement for open space and recreation to •the County of Orange over 65-feet of the 105-feet wide parcel.The 65 width of easement is adjacent to County of Orange property or Featherly Regional park and appears to be included as part of the Park.It appears the control gate will be built on the 40-feet wide NO.strip owned by OCFCD outside the open space and recreation easement.We have enclosed an OCDCD right or way map displaying OCFCD ownership in the area.Please have the Sanitation District review the attached right of way map,identify the precise location of the control structure and if required modify the mitigated Negative Declaration to reflect ownership of the property as OCFCD and not County of Orange for Featherly Regional Park. 3.The letter dated April 28,1998 transmitting the NOP states that the City of Yorba Linda ~gave a permanent easement to the Sanitation Districts to construct the control gate structure.Our right-of-way maps indicate that the City of Yorba Linda owns an No.3 easement over 105-feet width of Parcel 2202 where the control gate will be constructed; however,the City of Yorba Linda has no authority to issue an easement over land owned •in fee by the Flood Control District.Please see Flood Control District right-of-way map. 4.Page 15,Item 19,please add that the Santa Ana River Trails,including both the paved C~t bike trail and the riding and hiking trail are located on the opposite side of the Santa Ana t’io.4 River from the location of the proposed control gate. 5.The location of the proposed control gate appears to be outside of the 100-year flood Cv.~*t-t plain boundary (see attached Corps GDM map of he flood plain boundary). No.~ 6.An Orange County Public Property Permit will be required for the construction of the ~control gate and vault structure on OCFCD or County of Orange (Featherly Park)right No.~of-way including access to the site.Please submit construction drawings with the permit application. Water Quality 7.In response to your request for input on the subject project,Environmental Resources has ~reviewed this document.Reference is made on Page 13 of the ND to groundwater having to “be handled and disposed of in accordance with appropriate regulations and required No .?permits.”The County conducts construction dewatering pursuant to NPDES Permit 93- 49-020.Although this project would be located on County property,CSDOC should contact the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board to obtain its own NPDES dewatering permit coverage. Recreation and Open Space 8.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit for the construction of the control gate and vault structure,the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County ~(CSDOC)will need to secure approval from the Manager,Public Facilities &Resources •Q Department/Harbors,Beaches &Parks (PFRD/HBP Program Management & Coordination in consultation with the Manager,Public Facilities and Resources Department/Program Development Division,regarding the location of soils stockpile, staging area,and revegetation sites. 9.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC will clearly ~identify the project construction area in the field with staking and/or fencing subject to p.J0 ~the approval of the County Monitor. 10.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC will need to submit planting and irrigation plans and specifications for revegetation sites to the ~lo Manager,PFRD/HBP Program Management &Coordination in consultation with the Manager,PFRD/Program Development Division for review and approval.CSDOC will also need to submit information on the quantity and type of vegetation that was removed. 11.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC will be required Cti~~r~1 to submit an erosion control plan to the Manager,PFRDfProgram Development Division P40.U for review and approval. 12.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC will be required to submit a site access plan to the Manager.PFRD/Program Development Division in ,~~consultation with the Manager,PFRD/HBP/Program Management &Coordination for review and approval. 13.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC will need to submit construction drawings which include an accurate delineation of property p4,~ownership and easements(s)data subject to the review and approval of the Manager, PFRD/Program Development Division in consultation with the Manager,PFRD/HBP Program Management &Coordination. 14.Prior to issuance of an Orange County Public Property Permit,CSDOC must obtain an easement from the County of Orange to construct the control gate structure. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the ND.If you have any questions,please contact me or feel free to call Charlotte Harryman directly.Charlotte can be reached at (714)834-2522. ,‘ge~~ager ‘~1 Environmental Project Planning Services Division Attachment:OCFCD right of way map GF:sfLudwin (2) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE U.S.FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Response to U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Letter of May 29,1998. Comments: 1.The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWL)request that a mitigation plan be prepared that specifies how all permanent and temporary impacts to jurisdiction wetlands/waters will be mitigated,including details regarding proposed restoration measures and restoration performance criteria.There will be little or no impact to jurisdictional wetlands or waters.A Clean Water Act Section 404 application for the project has been filed with the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,which has permitting authority.The USFWL serves as an advisor to the Corps of Engineers and their comments and concerns will be addressed as part of the 404 permitting process. 2.Concerns about noise impacting the least Bell’s vireo,a federally endangered bird species that inhabits the riparian habitat in the Santa Ana River below Prado Dam prompted the USFWL to suggest restricting project construction to the non-breeding season September 16 to March 14.It was anticipated (and required to meet the concerns of flood control agencies)that the work be completed by November 15. To accomplish this requires that work be initiated by August 15.The California Department of Fish and Game 1601 Agreement indicates that work shall be completed between August 1 and November 30,except for revegetation.Earlier survey work of the area done for part of a larger sewer project in the Santa Ana Canyon has indicated the presence of two least Bell’s vireos in the section of the river surveyed from the project site to Prado Dam.The nearest location of an unpaired male least Bell’s vireo was some 800 feet north east of the project site on the other side of the Santa Ana River.The biologist who conducted these earlier field surveys indicated that he felt this bird had a territory that extended approximately 200 feet upstream and downstream of the sewer line crossing of the Santa Ana River and included both sides of the River.He indicated that they believe the birds leave the area by late July (Doug Willick,Staff Biologist,P &0 Environmental Services,Letter Report dated August 13,1996 to Dawes of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County regarding “Results of 1996 Survey of the Least Bell’s Vireo in the Santa Ana River Associated with CSDOC’s SARIS Project”).The Fish and Wildlife Service has indicated that they would like to see construct restricted to the non-breeding season extending from September 16- March 14.This differs from and conflicts with the requirements of the Streambed Alternations Agreement (Notification Number 5-187-98)issued by the California Department of Fish and Game (which specifies work shall be completed between August 1 and November 30th except for the revegetation which shall be done between October 1 and February 28th).The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service is an advisor the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers for the Corp’s issuance of a 404 permit. This permit is soon to be issued and CSDOC and its selected contractor must abide the by the terms of this permit also.Efforts are underway to resolve the scheduling conflicts that arise from the conflicting windows for construction.CSDOC anticipates a construction start date of August 15th and a maximum 135-day construction period,which includes the revegetation of the site.The specifications (Section 52,page 52-3 item 6(b)(viii)require “Low noise type sheet pile driver and extractors shall be used on the site”to mitigate concerns about noise adversely impacting the birds.Construction will also occur at a time when the California Department of Fish and Game believes there will be minimal possibility of impacts. Noise levels will be less than 80 dba at 50 feet. 3.Site dewatering will not result in a discharge to surface waters.The contractor will be required to discharge to the sewer system or to a recharge area in a manner consistent with the Districts’s specifications.In addition,a silt fence will be constructed around disturbed areas in compliance with specifications.An erosion control plan will be required.Finally,stockpiles of soil will have to be covered with plastic sheeting to prevent erosion.No storage of fuels will be allowed on the construction site.All of these measures should prevent sedimentation of the Santa Ana River,which might adversely affect the Santa Ana River sucker. 4.The County of Orange has indicated that the proposed structure and fencing will not lie within the floodplain of the I 00-year flood,thus the potential that the fencing may perform as a debris dam is problematic and not an issue of concern. United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenue,West Carlsbad,CA 92008 MAY 2 9 1998 David A.Ludwin,P.E.,Director of Engineering County Sanitation Districts of Orange County,California P.O.Box 8127 Fountain Valley,California 92728-8127 Re:Notice of Preparation of Mitigated Negative Declaration for Replacement of Santa Ma River Interceptor Control Gate in the City of Yorba Linda,California. Dear Mr.Ludwin: The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)has reviewed the above referenced Notice of Preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)dated April 28,1998,regarding the replacement of a control gate for the Santa Aria River Interceptor.The Service offers the following comments and recommendations regarding project associated biological impacts based on our review of the Initial Study,and our knowledge of sensitive and declining habitat types and species in Orange County. The proposed project consists of relocation and replacement of an existing emergency shut off gate structure on the Santa Ma River Interceptor sewer located adjacent to the Santa Aria River near the intersection of SAVI Ranch Parkway and Eastpark Drive in the City of Yorba Linda. Construction would include a reinforced concrete vault overlying an existing 42-inch diameter pipeline.The vault will have exterior dimensions of about 15 feet by 12 feet,and a depth of3l- feet below the existing grade.To accommodate this structure,approximately 500 cubic yards of soil will be excavated to create a space approximately 30 feet by 20 feet,with a depth of 33 feet. Above ground will be a fenced access area and control panel that will house electrical equipment. The area disturbed by construction is estimated to be 40 feet by 50 feet. The Service is concerned for the protection of fish and wildlife and their habitats.In this regard, we provide comments on public notices issued for a Federal permit or license affecting the Nation’s waters pursuant to the Clean Water Act.The Service also administers the Endangered Species Act of 1973,as amended (Act).Section 7 of the Act requires Federal agencies to consult with the Service should it be determined that their discretionary acts may affect a listed threatened or endangered species.Section 9 of the Act prohibits the “take”(e.g.,harm,harassment,pursuit, injury,kill)of federally listed wildlife species.“Harm”(i.e.,“take”)is further defined to include habitat modification or degradation where it kills or injures wildlife by impairin INEERING DEPARTMENT JUN o 1998 COUNTY SAN ITATLON DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY Mr.David Ludwin 2 behavioral patterns including breeding,feeding or sheltering.“Take”can only be permitted pursuant to the pertainant language and provisions in section 7 (Federal consultations)and section 10(a)of the Act. The Service requests the following specific information and recommendations be incorporated in the MND to assist you in planning forthe preservation of sensitive wildlife species and habitat within the proposed project area,and as a means to assist you in complying with pertinent Federal statutes. 1.Section 404 of the Clean Water Act prohibits the unauthorized discharge of dredged or fill C~CYIW~M4 material into jurisdictional waters of the United States,including wetlands.Section 404 also ~provides that the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)may issue permits for discharges of * dredged or fill material into jurisdictional waters and wetlands.Potential areas of Corps jurisdiction should be evaluated and wetlands should be delineated using the methodology set forth in the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).A mitigation plan should be prepared that specifies how all permanent and temporary impacts to jurisdictional wetlands/waters will be mitigated,including details regarding proposed restoration measures and restoration performance criteria. 2.The Initial Study notes that the least Bell’s vireo (Vireo belilipusillus),a federally ~endangered species,occupies riparian habitat within the Santa Ana River,downstream from the Prado Dam.Riparian vegetation with the potential to support the vireo exists within 300 feet of the project site.According to the analysis of noise effects,intermittent periods of normal construction equipment noise will occur.This includes noise generated by a vibrating-type sheet pile driver,sheet pile extractor,crane with clam bucket,concrete pump truck,front end loader/dozer and electric dewatering pump.Construction equipment of this type typically generates noise levels in excess of 80 dba at 50 feet.Such noise levels may disrupt the normal feeding,breeding and sheltering behavior of nesting birds at close range.To avoid harassment of the least Bell’s vireo,project construction should be restricted to the non-breeding season for this species (September 16 to March 14) 3.The Santa Ana sucker (Calosfomus sanlaanae;“sucker”),a Federal candidate species,is found within the Santa Ana River downstream of Featherly Park adjacent to the proposed project. ‘Mt’~mk A 90-day finding has been published by the Service for the Santa Ma sucker that concludes that NO substantial information exists to support a decision that listing of the Santa Ma sucker may be 3.warranted. Dewatering of the project site directly into the Santa Ma River has the potential to increase sedimentation of the river and adversely affect the sucker by burying gravels needed for breeding, feeding,and sheltering.Increased turbidity,and/or alterations in pH associated with cement operations and construction activities also could result in take of the sucker in the form of harm. The Service recommends that prior to initiation of construction,the project proponent submit to the Service for our concurrence of a dewatering plan that minimizes potential impacts to the sucker.Avoidance of adverse effects on the sucker should obviate the need to consult with the Service regarding project impacts should this species become listed in the future. ‘Mr.David Ludwin 3 4.The project description notes that a fenced structure will be placed at ground level directly ~ above the vault,within the dry portion of the Santa Ma river flood plain.Such a structure could act as a debris trap during storm flows,or should the Santa Ma River change course.The MN]) should discuss the potential for this to affect the integrity of the proposed structure,and result in further construction needs within the flood plain. The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above referenced.Any questions or comments regarding this project should be directed to William Miller at (760)431-9440. Sincerely, Jim A.Bartel Assistant Field Supervisor 1 -6-98-TA-21 2 cc:Bill Tippets (CDFG,Long Beach) Eric Stein (ACOE,LA) Gary Medieros (NROC) RESPONSE TO CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (Letter from Ronald D.Rempel,Regional Manager dated May 29,1998 1.The project area was previously surveyed for the presence of sensitive wildlife with surveys done in 1995 and 1996 for the presence of the endangered Least Bell’s Vireo.The area lies in a flood control corridor and is sparsely vegetated.A field representative of the Department of Fish and Game has consulted with the project designers and permitting consultant and verified that the site does not contain environmentally significant habitat or sensitive species.The habitat is not suitable to the Arroyo toad.No surface water discharge is proposed that might impact the Santa Ana sucker a fish of special interest and a candidate species for listing as an endangered species.The Department of Fish and Game issues a Streambed Alteration Agreement (No 5-18-98)on June 1,1998 which contains a specific set of requirements to assure the protection of habitat and wildlife resources in the project area.This is a binding agreement,which is incorporated into the adopted mitigation measures for the project. 2.The project will consist largely of an underground structure with electrical controls on a fenced pad surrounded by fencing.There are no conflicts with adjoining land uses,which consist of flood control right of way and a fenced commercial/industrial complex.No potential land use conflicts exist and the project will have no cumulative impacts on wildlife or their habitat.Revegetation of the site will be done to restore those portions of the site which will be disturbed during construction.The entire site where construction will occur will be staked and designated boundaries for construction equipment will be visible to construction workers as required by the Department’s Streambed Alteration Agreement 5-18-98 issued on June 1,1998. 3.Alternatives to the project were analyzed and the subject of a larger project to evaluate replacement or stabilization of the entire Santa Ana River Interceptor Sewer Project along the upper reaches of the Santa Ana River below Prado Dam. Concerns over the stability of those portions of the pipeline that cross or lie beneath the river have been studied (Holmes and Narver,1996)1.The proposed project represents an important interim project designed to protect the integrity of the sewer system andtreatment facilities downstream in the event of a major storm event which might wash out the interceptor sewer crossing the Santa Ana River.Future plans to replace or stabilize the interceptor will be the subject of engineering plans and will undergo environmental review pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 4.No impacts to endangered species will occur and no California Endangered Species Act (CESA)permits or extra ordinary mitigation will be required other than noise reduction for the sheet pile drivers to reduce the potential to impact birds. 5.No watercourses or wetlands will be impacted and the Department has issued a Streambed Alteration Agreement (No.5-187-98)to address their concerns and establish mitigation requirements for the project in the form of a permit.Measures are being undertaken to prevent erosion of soils. H:\wp.dta\engUOBS &CONTRACTS~2-4O SARI\2-40 ATTACH2.doc State of California -The Resources Agency PETE WILSON,Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME .http://www.dfg.ca.gov South Coast Region 330 Golden Shore,Suite 50 Long Beach,California 90802 (562)590-5113 RECEIVED May 29 1998 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT JUN 0 31998 Mr.David A.Ludwin,P.E. Director of Engineering COUNTY SANITATION County Sanitation Districts of Orange County DISTRICTS OF P.O.Box 8127 ORANGE COUNTY Fountain Valley,California 92728-8127 Dear Mr.Ludwin: Notice of Preparation of Mitigated Negative Declaration for Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate Contract No.2-40,Orange County The Department of Fish and Game (Department)appreciates this opportunity to comment on the above-referenced project,relative to impacts to biological resources.To enable Department staff to adequately review and comment on the proposed project,we recommend the following information be included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration: 1.A complete assessment of the flora and fauna within and adjacent to the project area, with particular emphasis upon identifying endangered,threatened,and locally unique species and sensitive habitats. a.A thorough assessment of rare plants and rare natural communities,following the Department’s May 1984 Guidelines for Assessing Impacts to Rare Plants and Rare Natural Communities (Attachment 1). b.A complete assessment of sensitive fish,wildlife,reptile,and amphibian species.Seasonal variations in use of the project area should also be addressed.Focused species-specific surveys,conducted at the appropriate time of year and time of day when the sensitive species are active or otherwise identifiable,are required.Acceptable species-specific survey procedures should be developed in consultation with the Department and the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. c.Rare,threatened,and endangered species to be addressed should include all those which meet the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)definition (see CEQA Guidelines,§15380). d.The Department’s California Natural Diversity Data Base in Sacramento should be contacted at (916)327-5960 to obtain current information on any previously ~44/’~e6 £“14~i4’~s~1~7O. Mr.David Ludwin May 29,1998 Page Two reported sensitive species and habitat,including Significant Natural Areas identified under Chapter 12 of the Fish and Game Code. 2.A thorough discussion of direct,indirect,and cumulative impacts expected to adversely affect biological resources,with specific measures to offset such impacts. a.CEQA Guidelines,§15125(a),direct that knowledge of the regional setting is N critical to an assessment of environmental impacts and that special emphasis should be placed on resources that are rare or unique to the region. b.Project impacts should be analyzed relative to their effects on off-site habitats. Specifically,this should include nearby public lands,open space,adjacent natural habitats,and nparián ecosystems.Impacts to and maintenance of wildlife corridor/movement areas,including access to undisturbed habitat in adjacent areas,should be fully evaluated and provided. c.The zoning of areas for development projects or other uses that are nearby or adjacent to natural areas may inadvertently contribute to wildlife-human interactions.A discussion of possible conflicts and mitigation measures to reduce these conflicts should be included in the environmental document. d.A cumulative effects analysis should be developed as described under CEQA Guidelines,§15130.General and specific plans,as well as past,present,and anticipated future projects,should be analyzed relative to their impacts on similar plant communities and wildlife habitats. e.The document should include an analysis of the effect that the project may have on completion and implementation of regional and/or subregional conservation programs.Under §28OO-~2840 of the Fish and Game Code,the Department, through the Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP)program,is coordinating with local jurisdictions,landowners,and the Federal Government to preserve local and regional biological diversity.Coastal sage scrub is the first natural community to be planned for under the NCCP program.The Department recommends that the lead agency ensure that the development of this and other proposed projects do not preclude long-term preserve planning options and that projects conform with other requirements of the NCCP program.Jurisdictions participating in the NCCP program should assess specific projects for consistency with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines. Additionally,the jurisdictions should quantify and qualify:1)the amount of coastal sage scrub within their boundaries;2)the acreage of coastal sage scrub habitat removed by individual projects;and 3)any acreage set aside for mitigation.This information should be kept in an updated ledger system.These issues must be addressed in an Environmental Impact Report per CEQA Guidelines,§15065 and §15380. Mr.David Ludwin May29,1998 Page Three 3.A range of alternatives should be analyzed to ensure~that alternatives to the proposed project are fully considered and evaluated.A range of alternatives which avoid or otherwise minimize impacts to sensitive biological resources should be included. ~Specific alternative locations should also be evaluated in areas with lower resource sensitivity where appropriate. a.Mitigation measures for project impacts to sensitive plants,animals,and habitats should emphasize evaluation and selection of alternatives which avoid or otherwise minimize project impacts.Off-site compensation for unavoidable impacts through acquisition and protection of high-quality habitat elsewhere should be addressed. b.The Department considers Rare Natural Communities as threatened habitats having both regional and local significance.Thus,these communities should be fully avoided and otherwise protected from project-related impacts (Attachment 2). c.The Department generally does not support the use of relocation,salvage, and/or transplantation as mitigation for impacts to rare,threatened,or endangered species.Department studies have shown that these efforts are experimental in nature and largely unsuccessful. 4.A California Endangered Species Act (CESA)Permit must be obtained,if the project has the potential to result in “take”of species of plants or animals listed under CESA, either during construction or over the life of the project.CESA Permit s are issued to •~conserve,protect,enhance,and restore State-listed threatened or endangered species and their habitats.Early consultation is encouraged,as significant modification to a project and mitigation measures may be required in order to obtain a CESA Permit. a.Biological mitigation proposals should be of sufficient detail and resolution to satisfy the requirements for a CESA Permit. b.A Department-approved Mitigation Agreement and Mitigation Plan are required for plants listed as rare under the Native Plant Protection Act. 5.The Department opposes the elimination of watercourses and/or their channelization or conversion to subsurface drains.All wetlands and watercourses,whether intermittent or perennial,must be retained and provided with substantial setbacks which preserve the riparian and aquatic values and maintain their value to on-site and off-site wildlife populations. a.The Department has direct authority under Fish and Game Code §1600 et.seq. in regard to any proposed activity which would divert,obstruct,or affect the Mr.David Ludwin May 29,1998 Page Four natural flow or change the bed,channel,or bank of any river,stream,or lake. Early consultation is recommended,since modification of the proposed project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. b.A discussion of potential adverse impacts from any increased runoff, sedimentation,soil erosion,and/or urban pollutants on streams and watercourses on or near the project site,with mitigation measures proposed to alleviate such impacts must be included. The Department holds regularly scheduled pre-project planning/early consultation meetings.To make an appointment,please call our regional office at (562)590-5137. Thank you for this opportunity to comment.Questions regarding this letter and further coordination on these issues should be directed to Mr.Scott Harris,Wildlife Biologist,at (562) 590-5100,or Ms.Tern Dickerson,Environmental Specialist,at 714-363-7538. Si rel, Regional Manager Attachments cc:See attached list Mr.David Ludwin May29,1998 Page Five cc:Mr.Scott Hams Department of Fish and Game Long Beach,California Mr.Ray Ally Department of Fish and Game Long Beach,California Mr.Jim Dice Department of Fish and Game San Diego,California Ms.Tern Dickerson Department of Fish and Game Laguna Niguel,California Mr.William Tippets Department of Fish and Game San Diego,California U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad,California U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles,California State Cleannghouse Sacramento,California AT~ACHMENT1 State of California THE RESOURCES AGENCY Department of Fish and Game May 4,1984 GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS ON RARE AND ENDANGERED PLANTS AND PLANT COMMUNITIES The following recommendations are intended to help those who prepare and review environmental documents determine when a botanical survey is needed,~Jj~should be considered qualified to conduct such surveys,h.g~field surveys should be conducted and ~information should be contained in the survey report. 1.Botanical surveys that are conducted to determine the environmental effects of a proposed development should be directed to all rare and endangered plants and plant communities.Rare and endangered plants are not necessarily limited to those species which have been “listed”by state and federal agencies but should include any species that, based on all available data,can be shown to be rare and/or endangered under the following definitions. A species,subspecies or variety of plant is “endangered”when the prospects of its survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy form one or more causes,including loss of habitat,change in habitat,over-exploitation, predation,competition or disease.A plant is “rare”when,although not presently threatened with extinction,the species,subspecies or variety is found in such small numbers throughout its range that it may be endangered if its environment worsens. Rare plant communities are those communities that are of highly limited distribution.These communities may or may not contain rare or endangered species.The most current version of the California Natural Diversity Data Base’s Outhne of Terrestrial Communities in California may be used as a guide to the names of communities. It is appropriate to conduct a botanical field survey to determine if,or the extent that,rare plants will be affected by a proposed project when: a.Based on an initial biological assessment,it appears that the project may damage potential rare plant habitat; b.Rare plants have historically been identified on the project site,but adequate information of impact assessment is lacking;or c.No initial biological assessment has been conducted and it is unknown whether or not rare plants or their habitat exist on the site.- - 3.Botanical consultants should be selected on the basis of possession of the following qualifications (in order of importance): a.Experience as a botanical field investigator with experience in field sampling design and field methods; b.Taxonomic experience and a knowledge of plant ecology; c.Familiarity with the plants of the area,including rare species;and d.Familiarity with the appropriate state and federal statutes related to rare plants and plant collecting. 4.Field surveys should be conducted in a manner that will locate any rare or endangered species that may be present.Specifically,rare or endangered plant surveys should be: a.Conducted at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both “evident”and identifiable. Field surveys should be scheduled (1)to coincide with known flowering periods,and/or (2)during periods of ATTACHMENT 2 SENSITIVITY OF TOP PRIORITY RARE NATURAL COMMUNITIES IN SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA ensitMty rankings are determined by the Department of Fish and Game,California Natural Diversity Data Base and based on either umber of known occurrences (locations)and/or amount of habitat remaining (acreage).The three rankings used for these top priority rare natural communities are as follows: Si.-Less than 6 known locations and/or on less than 2,000 acres of habitat remaining. S2.-Occurs in 6-20 known locations and/or 2,000-10,000 acres of habitat remaining. S3.-Occurs In 21-1 00 known locations and/or 10,000-50,000 acres of habitat remaining. The number to the right of the decimal point after the ranking refers to the degree of threat posed to the natural community regardless of the ranking.For example: Bank S1.j.=very threatened S2.2 threatened S3.~=no current threats known Sensithiltv Ranklnas (February 1992) Community Name S1.1 Mojave Riparian Forest Sonoran Cottonwood Willow Riparian Mesquite Bosque Elephant Tree Woodland Crucifixion Thorn Woodland Alithom Woodland Aiizonan Woodland Southern California Walnut Forest Mainland Cherry Forest Southern Bishop Pine Forest Torrey Pine Forest Desert Mountain White Fir Forest S1.2 Southern Foredunes Mono Pumice Flat Southern Interior Basalt Fl.Vernal Pool S2.1 Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Riversidian Upland Coastal Sage Scrub Riversidian Desert Sage Scrub Sagebrush Steppe Desert Sink Scrub Mafic Southern Moced Chaparral San Diego Mesa Hardpan Vernal P. San Diego Mesa Claypan Vernal P. Alkali Meadow Southern Coastal Salt Marsh Coastal Brackish Marsh Transmontane Alkali Marsh S2.2 Active Coastal Dunes Active Desert Dunes Stab.and Part Stab.Desert Dunes Stab.and Part Stab.Desert Sandfield Mojave Mixed Steppe Transmontane Freshwater Marsh Coulter Pine Forest S.California Feitfield Southern Dune Scrub Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub Maritime Succulent Scrub Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Southern Maritime Chaparral Valley Needlegrass Grassland Great Basin Grassland Mojave Desert Grassland Pebble Plains Southern Sedge Bog Cismontane ,AJkaliMarsh Coastal and Valley Freshwater Marsh S.Arroyo Willow Riparian Forest Southern Willow Scrub Modoc-G.Bas.Cottonwood Willow Rip. Modoc-Great Basin Ripanan Scrub Mojave Desert Wash Scrub Engelmann Oak Woodland Open Engelmann Oak Woodland Closed Engelmann Oak Woodland Island Ironwood Forest Island Cherry Forest S.Interior Cypress Forest Bigcone Spruce-Canyon Oak Forest White Mountains Fellfield S2.3 Bristlecone Pine Forest Umber Pine Forest NDDB rare communities R-5 Feb.1992 Page 1 Top Priority Rare Natural Communities From Region Five Code Number Location Few Records Name S1.1 Rank 21330 CIs Southern Dune Scrub 31200 CIs Southern Coastal Scrub 32400 Cis Maritime Succulent Scrub 32720 Cis • Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub 37030 CIs V Southern Maritime Chaparral 42110 Cis Valley Needlegrass Grassland 43000 Des Y Great Basin Grassland 43777 Des Y Mojave Desert Grassland 47000 Cis Pebble Plains 51177 CIe •V Southern Sedge Bog 52310 Cis Cismontane Alkali Marsh 61700 Des Mojave Riparian Forest 61810 Des Sonoran Cottonwood Willow Riparian 61820 Des Mesquite Bosque 75100 Des V Elephant Tree Woodland 75200 Des V Crucifixion Thom Woodland 75300 •Des Y AJithom Woodland 75400 Des V Aiizonan Woodland 81600 Cis Southern California Walnut Forest 81820 ‘Cis V Mainland Cheny Forest 83122 Cis V Southern Bishop Pine Forest 83140 Cis Torrey Pine Forest 85330 Des Y Desert Mountain White Fir Forest $1.2 Ranic . 21230 Cis Southern Foredunes 35410 Des Mono Pumice Flat 44310 Cis Southern interior Basalt FL Vernal Pool S2.1 Ranic 32300 Cis V Venturan Coastal Sage Scrub 32500 Cis Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub 32710 Cis Y Riversidian Upland Coastal Sage Scr. 32730 Cis V Riversidiart Desert Sage Scrub 35300 Des V Sagebrush Steppe 35120 Des Y Desert Sink Scrub 37122 Cis V Mafic Southern Mixed Chaparral 44321 Cis San Diego Mesa Hardpan Vernal P. 44322 Cis San Diego Mesa Claypan Vernal P. 45310 Des Alkali Meadow 52120 Cis Southern Coastal Salt Marsh 52320 Cis Coastal Brackish Marsh 52410 Des .Transmontarie Alkali Marsh Coded as either cis (for cismontane)or des (for desert) •STATE OF CALIFORNIA -THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON,Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Region 5 P.O.Box6657 guna Niguel,California 92607-6657 9)363-7538 David Ludwin Director of Engineering County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Ave. Fountain Valley,CA 92728-8127 June 1,1998 Dear Mr.Ludwin: Enclosed are two copies of Streambed Alteration Agreement 5-187-98.If you agree with the conditions/measures set forth in the agreement,please sign both copies and return both to our office for signature,at the above address.Written notice of your intent to commence project activities needs to be provided to the Department at least five days in advance of commencing project activities. The California Fish and Game Code requires that you notify the Department in writing within 14 days of receipt of this Proposal as to its acceptability.If you do not respond within this time period you will lose your right to request binding arbitration.For minor changes we suggest you contact the person responsible for writing your agreement prior to sending the written response. If you have any questions regarding the proposed conditions please contact me at (949)363-7538. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Tern Dickerson Environmental Specialist III Environmental Services,Region 5 RECEIVED ENG~ER~JG JUN 0 31998 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 330 Golden Shore,Suite 50 Long Beach,California 90802 Notification No.5-187-98 Page .,.LofI. AGREEMENT REGARDING PROPOSED STREAM OR LAKE ALTERATION THIS AGREEMENT,entered into betv~een the Stateof California,Department of Fish and Game,hereinafter called the Department,and ~XK~iXXXd ~~County Sanitation Districts of Orange County:10844 Ellis Ave.:Fountain Valley.CA 92728-8 127:O~~X1~(~~%-~3X~Xd$tate of California hereinafter called the Operator,is as follows: WHEREAS,pursuant to Section 1601 of California Fish and Game Code,the Operator,on the 11th day of May .1.22k,notified the Department that they intend to divert or obstruct the natural flow of,or change the bed, channel,or bank of,or use material from the streambed(s)of,the following water(s):aanta Ana River Orange County,California,Section Township..~$...Range JYL. WHEREAS,the Department has determined that such operations may substantially adversel affectkIiose existing fish and wildlife resources within the Santa Ana River specifically identified as follows:birds:least Bell’s vireo. other songbirds:riparian vegetation which provides habitat for those species:willows.cattails:and all other aquatic and wildlife resources.including that riparian vegetation which provides habitat for such species in the area THEREFORE,the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife resources during the Operator’s work.The Operator hereby agrees to accept the following measures/conditions as part of the proposed work. If the Operator’s work changes from that stated in the notification specified above,this Agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game.Failure to comply with the ~rovisions of this Agreement and with other pertinent code sections,including but not limited to Fish and Game Code Sections 5650,5652,5937,and 5948,may result in prosecution. Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or property,nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal,state,or local laws or ordinances.A consummated Agreement does not constitute Department of Fish and Game endorsement of the proposed operation, or assure the Department’s concurrence with permits required from other agencies. This Agreement becomes effective the date of Department’s signature and terminates November 30.1999 for project construction only.This Agreement shall remain in effect for that time necessary to satisfy the terms/conditions of this Agreement (1)“a ~ Page.2..of .3. STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER:5-187-98 I.The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and resolved by this Agreement.The signing of this Agreement does not imply that the Operator is precluded from doing other activities at the site.However, activities not specifically agreed to and resolved by this Agreement shall be subject to separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq. 2.The Operator proposes to alter the streambed to relocate and replace the Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate Structure,impacting V2-acre of stream.The project is located approximately 2 miles east of Weir Canyon Road bridge,near the City of Yorba Linda. 3.The agreed work includes activities associated with No.2 above.The project area is located in the Santa Ana River in Orange County.Specific work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans and documents submitted by the Operator,and shall be implemented as proposed unless directed differently by this agreement 4.The Op~itor shall not impact more than Y~-acre of stream,mostly unvegetated.Nearly all of the impacts are temporary,except for approximately 150 ft2.Disturbance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the limits approved by the Department.The disturbed portions of any stream channel shall be restore4.,~estoratiou shall include the revegetation of stripped or exposed areas with vegetation native to the areâ~All mitigation/revegetation shall be installed within..2~..days of project impact,and all planting shaIJ~€done between October 1 and February 28. 5.The Operator shall only work between August 1 and November 30,except for the revegetation. 6.No equipment shall be operated in ponded or flowing areas.All work shall be done when the stream is dry. 7.No direct or indirect impacts shall occur to any threatened or endangered species,including least Bell’s vireo.If any threatened or endangered species could be impacted by the work proposed,the Operator shall obtain the required state and federal threatened and endangered species permits. 8.Installation of culverts or other structures shall be such that water flow is not impaired. 9.Preparation shall be made so that runoff from steep,erodible surfaces will be diverted into stable areas with little erosion potential.Frequent water checks shall be placed on dirt roads,cat tracks,or other work trails to control erosion. 10.Water containing mud,silt or other pollutants from project activities shall not be allowed to enter a flowing stream or placed in locations that may .be subjected to high storm flows. 11.Structures and associated materials not designed to withstand high seasonal flows shall be removed to areas above the high water mark before such flows occur. 12.The perimeter of the work site shall be adequately flagged to prevent damage to adjacent riparian habitat. 13.Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of the stream to the greatest extent possible. 14.The Operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws.All contractors,subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of the operator to ensure compliance. 15.If a stream’s low flow channel,bed or banks have been altered,these shall be returned as nearly as possible to their original configuration and width,without creating future erosion problems. 16.Access to the work site shall be via existing roads and access ramps. 17.Spoil sites shall not be located within a stream/lake,where spoil shall be washed back into a stream/lake,or where it ~~over aquatic or riparian vegetation.\ (2)P~~’and documents specified -Contract No.2-40,Replacement of Santa Ana River Interceptor Control Gate Structure;which is incorporated herein by this reference. (3)“to a level that is substantially similar to presently existing conditions.” Page..Lof~. STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION NUMBER;5-187-98 18.Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof,asphalt,paint or other coating material,oil or other petroleum products,or any other substances which could be hazardous to aquatic life,resulting from project related activities, shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the state.These materials,placed within or where they may enter a stream/lake,by Operator or any party working under contract,or with the permission of the Operator,shall be removed immediately. 19.No debris,soil,silt,sand,bark,slash,sawdust,rubbish,cement or concrete or washings thereof,oil or. petroleum products or other organic or earthen material from any construction,or associated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to enter into or placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into,waters of the State. When operations are completed,any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area.No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the high water mark of any stream or lake. 20.No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow. 21.The Operator shall provide a copy of this Agreement to all contractors,subcontractors,and the Operator’s project supervisors.Copies of the Agreement shall be readily available at work sites at all times during periods of active work and must be presented to any Department personnel,or personnel from another agency upon demand. 22.The Department reserves the right to enter the project site at any time to ensure compliance with term s/conditions of this Agreement. 23.It is understood the Department has entered into this Streambed Alteration Agreement for purposes of establishing protective features for fish and wildlife.The decision to proceed with the project is the sole - responsibility of the Operator,and is not required by this agreement.It is further agreed all liability and/or incurred cost related to or arising out of the Operator’s project and the fish and wildlife protective conditions of this agreement,remain the sole responsibility of the Operator.The Operator agrees to hold harmless the State of California and the Department of Fish and Game against any related claim made by any party or parties for ersonal injury or any other damages. 24.The Department reserves the right to suspend or cancel this Agreement for other reasons,including but not limited to the following: a.The Department determines that the information provided by the Operator in support of the Notification/Agreement is incomplete or inaccurate; b.The Department obtains new information that was not known to it in preparing the terms and conditions of the Agreement; c.The project or project activities as described in the Notification/Agreement have changed; d.The conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change or the Dep ent determines that project activities will result in a substantial adverse effect on the environment. 25.Contact Person:Director of Enciineerina (714)593—300. .Before any suspension or cancellation ot the Agreement,lhe Department will notify the Operator tn writing of the circumstances which the Department believes warrant suspension or cancellation.The Operator will have seven (7) working days from the date of receipt of this notification to respond in writing to the circumstances described in the Department’s notification.During the seven (7)day response period,the Operator shall immediately cease any project activities which the Department specified in its notification.The Operator shall not continue the specified activities until that time when the Department notifies the Operator in writing that adequate methods and/or measures have been identified and agreed upon to mitigate or eliminate the significant adverse effect. CONCURRENCE (Operator’s name)California Dept.of Fish and Game (~ (stgnature)(date)(signature)(date) General Manager Environmental Specialist Ill ~title)(title) Attachment 3 MITIGATION MEASURES TO BE ADOPTED AND INCLUDED IN PROJECT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 1.Complete sheetpiling will be required to support the construction due to groundwater conditions and adjacent buildings. 2.The construction area will be clearly marked and staked and heavy equipment use outside this area will be prohibited. 3.Excavated soil will be stockpiled within the construction staging area. 4.The side slopes of the pad will be lined with riprap.Any other riprapped areas associated with the access road will also be repaired if disturbed. 5.Dusting should it occur,will be controlled by requiring stockpiles to be covered with plastic sheeting. 6.An electric sump pump within tightly sheeted excavation may be used for dewatering the site. 7.The water removed by dewatering will be discharged though a temporary discharge line to the sewer system though a manhole located in the Auto Plaza parking lot westerly of the construction site or to the 42”RCP sewer line.A sediment trap will be installed to prevent any sediment from the dewatered water from entering the sewer line.All dewatered groundwater will have to be handled and disposed of in accordance with appropriate regulations and as required by the NPDES permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board,Santa Ana RegioA:. 8.A silt fence will be constructed around the construction area to present sediment transport to the river in the event of an unexpected storm or from wind erosion. 9.Any disturbed native vegetation will be replaced.Contractor shall videotape the site,including staging and storage areas,prior to commencing work.All existing vegetation,except for common grass,shall be inventoried and shown and labeled on a scaled drawing.After completing the work,the Contractor shall restore the disturbed vegetation to a level substantially similar to the existing condition prior to performing any construction-related activity.All revegetation shall be performed between October 1 and February 28.Contractor shall videotape the site and immediately surrounding area after completing the revegetation.All record videotapes shall show the date and time of day when videotaping took place.The original videotapes shall be submitted to CSDOC within three days after they are recorded. 10.Vibrating type sheet pile driver and extractor,which produce very less noise,will be specified for use.Also electric dewatering pump will be used instead of oil generator pump. 11.The area is not subject to public access and a fence and gate will be installed around the area to preclude access to the control gate structure except by authorized maintenance personnel.The gate structure will be in a sealed below- ground structure to preclude odor releases from the sewer. 12.There will be no storage of fuels on-site. 13.A construction Staging Area (about 100 ft.x 200-ft.area)will be located northwest of construction site,which will be staked and clearly marked. 14.Heavy equipment will not remain on the site for only a short period of time (a few days)as required for completing any particular element of construction. 15.Construction workers will park northwest of the construction site in the construction staging area. 16.The Specifications clearly indicate that the contractor shall comply with all the requirements of permits obtained by the Districts.The permitting agencies are, without being limited to: i)U.S.Army Corps of Engineers -Section 404 permit. ii)Regional Water Quality Control Board -For Dewatering and NPDES Permit. iii)California Department of Fish and Game -Section 1601 Certification and Agreement for Streambed Alteration. iv)County of Orange,PF&RD -Encroachment permit. H:~wp.dta’~ng\JOBS &CONTRACTS~2-4O SARI\2-40 AUACH3.doc