Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System ProgramAGENDA ITEM 14 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Comments on Notice of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report on IRWD's Proposed San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program Recommendation Direct the City Manager to transmit a comment letter to IRWD. Discussion As provided in the Resolution establishing the Environmental Quality Affairs Committee, EQAC has reviewed the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the subject Environmental Impact Report (EIR). At their meeting of March 13, EQAC approved the comments reflected in the attached memorandum to the Mayor. Because this is a project by an agency other than the City of Newport Beach, the Resolution provides that EQAC's comments may be distributed only after they are approved by the City Council. We have reviewed the comments prepared by EQAC, and generally agree with their substance. We are concerned, however, that the tone of the comments may be too critical, and could create a perception that Newport Beach is not supportive of the Natural Treatment System (NTS). In fact, at the suggestion of the Water Quality Citizens Advisory Committee, the Mayor has expressed the City's support of this project and requested favorable consideration of it by the State Water Resources Control Board. Therefore, staff has prepared a comment letter for the City Manager's signature, which raises the same issues as EQAC and conveys them as suggestions for a strong EIR. Sent By: Hawkins Law Offices; M To: Erom: E M 949 650 1181; Mar -19 -02 10:38AM; Page 2 O R A N D U M Mayor Tod Ridgeway and Members of the City Council City of Newport Beach Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee City of Newport Beach Subject: IRWD's Notice of Preparation (the "NOP') of a Program Environmental Impact Report (the "EIR') regarding the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program (the "Project") Date: March 19, 2002 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the NOP for the captioned Project. We understand that the City has already recommended the Project to various agencies. Nothing in these comments detracts from that support; these comments simply address the NOP and our comments on the scope of the EIR. In addition, upon our request, the IRWD staff helpfully provided us with a copy of the Initial Study ( "IS "). For the purposes to insuring an adequate EIR, we provide comments on the IS. We offer the following comments in the hopes of improving the EIR and the Project. L Project Location: The EIR must recognize and appreciate the Project's proximity to and potential impacts on the City of Newport Beach. In addition, notwithstanding the broad watershed designation, we are unclear how or why a special district such as IRWD can commence a study which covers an area which overlaps other special district jurisdictions. The EIR should address and explain this jurisdictional issue. In addition, we are unclear about the San Diego Watershed boundaries. If the Project seeks to benefit, among other features, the Upper Newport Bay, the EIR should include runoff from the John Wayne Airport area and Santa Ana/Delhi Channel. 2 MAR -19 -2002 11:22 949 650 1181 96% P.02 Sent By: Hawkins Law Offices; 949 650 1181; Mar -19 -02 10:38AM; Page 3 Mayor Tod Ridgeway Members of the City Council City of Newport Beach Page 2 March 19, 2002 I Project Description: The NOP attempts to provide a general description of the Project. The EIR must provide more detail. For instance, as to the source of the water which gives rise to the Project, the NOP discusses "low -flow and initial storm runoff ..." The NOP fails to state the source of the low -flow runoff. In addition, our review of the Initial Study ( "IS ") has not uncovered any discussion about the source of the water which is the source of the Project. In addition to the source of the water, neither the NOP nor the IS address the quality of the source water. Further, neither document discusses the quantity of the water. The EIR must discuss the source of the water, the quantity of such water and importantly, the quality of that water. The NOP's Program Description also should more thoroughly describe and discuss the Project goals. Such goals are indispensable to ascertaining impacts, devising mitigation and determining which, if any, impacts wan-ant a statement of overriding considerations. The EIR must identify and discuss the Project goals and how these goals affect impacts and mitigation. This failing regarding Project goals also underlines the determination and criteria for the site selection for the individual treatment sites. The EIR must address the criteria for site selection and a discussion of how that criteria is applied for each site selected. The NOP notes that IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate document to conduct the environmental analysis for the thirty-seven (37) sites. However, the NOP continues that it will also conduct a "project level" analysis for eleven (11) sites. The EIR must discuss the rationale for such a distinction and truly provide a differential analysis for the project level analysis. I Summary of Probable Environmental Effects: The NOP notes that the Project could "result in a significant impact to agricultural operations." The EIR must discuss, in the program and project level analyses, the impacts of the Project on agricultural resources. I Hydrology and Water Quality Resources: The NOP recognizes the beneficial impacts of the Project on surface water resources. However, the NOP fails to address the Project's impacts on groundwater and a J MRR -19 -2002 11:22 949 650 1181 96% P.03 Sent By: Hawkins Law Offices; 949 650 1181; Mar -19 -02 10:39AM; Mayor Tod Ridgeway Membera of the City Comet City of Newport Beach Page 3 March 19, 2002 groundwater quality. Given the recent closure of the City's wells, the EIR must discuss groundwater impacts and impacts on groundwater quality. 5 Public Safety Resources: Page 4/5 The NOP discusses safety concerns in connection with open water bodies and vector control. However, Figure 3 of the NOP displays several sites in and around the El Toro facility. We understand that this facility may have soils and groundwater contamination. As such, the Project may have an impact on public safety including soils and groundwater contamination. 5. is g. Protect Description: See our comments above on the NOP. >1 Setting and Surrounding Land Uses: Although the NOP discusses surrounding land uses and topographic features in the San Diego Creek Watershed, the NOP fails to discuss the surface water and groundwater basins within the watershed. In addition, the NOP fails to discuss any other water sources within the watershed. For instance, IRWD's Sand Canyon Reservoir may discharge waste water into the watershed. The EIR must identify both the surface and groundwater features as well as any other water sources including waste water sources which affect or contribute to the watershed. S. References: IRWD has drafted several other environmental documents for projects within the District's boundaries which are similar to the NOR The EIR should contain references to the environmental documents for those similar projects. L Aesthetic Resources: The Checklist notes that the Project may degrade existing visual quality. The Explanation states in a conclusory fashion that the Project would result in replacing "existing agricultural features" (actual farms ?) with improved visual resources. The Explanation fails to discuss the aesthetic metric which supports this conclusion. The EIR must provide this and other explanations regarding aesthetic resources. L+ MRR -19 -2002 11 :22 949 650 1181 96: P.04 Sent By: Hawkins Law Offices; 949 850 1181; Mayor Tod Ridgeway Members of the City Council City of Newport Beach Page 4 March 19, 2002 flIREErr= L See our comments above. Mar -19.02 10:39AM; Page 5/5 The Checklist indicates that the Project will have extensive potentially significant impacts on biological resources. The Explanation notes that the Project may disturb existing wetlands and have additional impacts on other biological resources. The Explanation states that these impacts, including direct, indirect and cumulative impacts, will be evaluated for the site selection. However, as indicated above, the EIR must identify, discuss and evaluate the criteria for such site selection. iy. Geologic and Soils Resources: The discussion of geologic /soils impacts states that the Project will not create significant impacts to such resources including no significant impacts to marshes and open water areas. However, the discussion of biological resources indicates that the Project may have impacts to existing wetlands. We believe that marshes are wetlands. Hence, if the Project will affect wetlands, it will affect marshes. The EIR must reconcile the apparent conflict between these two contradictory conclusions. Y, Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Hydrology and Water Quality See our comments above on the NOP. yL Mandatory Findings of SW1#cance: The Checklist notes that the Project may result in mitigatable impacts, and the explanation discusses individual air quality impacts. However, the explanation fails to discuss the cumulative impacts of the individual projects on air quality. The EIR must discuss such cumulative impacts. MAR -19 -2002 1123 949 650 1181 95 P.05 March 27, 2002 Mr. Norris Brandt, P. E. NTS Program Manager Irvine Ranch Water District P. O. Box 57000 Irvine, CA 92219 -7000 VIA FACSIMILE Dear Mr. Brandt: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) regarding the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural Treatment System Program, and for agreeing to Assistant City Manager Sharon Wood's request to transmit Newport Beach's comments after the 30 -day review period. The City of Newport Beach has an Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC), which has reviewed and made comments on the subject NOP and Initial Study. The City Council reviewed EQAC's comments on March 26, 2002, and authorized me to transmit this letter as the City's comments. Project Location The EIR should recognize the project's proximity to and potential impacts on the City of Newport Beach. In addition, the NOP was not clear as to the boundaries of the San Diego Watershed and why runoff from the John Wayne Airport area and Santa Ana/Delhi Channel are not included. It would be helpful for the EIR to explain these issues more fully. 2. Project Description The EIR should provide more detail than is available in the NOR For instance, our review of the NOP and Initial Study did not uncover any discussion about the source of the water for the project. Discussion of the quantity and quality of the water also should be included. C1) The EIR should include a more thorough description of the project goals. Such goals are indispensable to ascertaining impacts, devising mitigation and determining which, if any, impacts warrant a statement of overriding considerations. The lack of specificity regarding project goals also affects the determination and criteria for the site selection for the individual treatment sites. The EIR should address the criteria for site selection and discuss how these criteria are applied to each site selected. The NOP notes that IRWD has determined that a Program EIR is the appropriate document to conduct the environmental analysis for the 37 sites. However, the NOP continues that it will also conduct a "project level" analysis for 11 sites. The EIR should discuss the rationale for such a distinction and provide a differential analysis for the project level analysis. 3. Setting and Surrounding Land Uses Although the NOP discusses surrounding land uses and topographic features in the San Diego Creek Watershed, it does not discuss water sources, including surface water and groundwater basins, within the watershed. For instance, IRWD's Sand Canyon Reservoir may discharge wastewater into the watershed. To the extent that these sources impact or will be impacted by the project, they should be discussed in the EIR. 4. Summary of Probable Environmental Effects Aesthetic Resources The Initial Study checklist notes that the project may degrade existing visual quality. The explanation states that the project would result in replacing "existing agricultural features" (farms ?) with improved visual resources. The aesthetic metric that supports this conclusion is not provided, and greater explanation is needed in the EIR. Biological Resources The checklist indicates that the project will have extensive potentially significant impacts on biological resources. The explanation notes that the project may disturb existing wetlands and have additional impacts on other biological resources, and these impacts (direct, indirect and cumulative) will be evaluated for site selection. As indicated above, the EIR should identify, discuss and evaluate the criteria for such site selection. Geological and Soils Resources The discussion of geologic and soils impacts states that the project will not create significant impacts to such resources, including no significant impacts to marshes and open water areas. However, the discussion of biological resources indicates that the project may have impacts to existing wetlands. Since marshes are wetlands, there appears to be a conflict between these two conclusions, which should be reconciled in the EIR. r Public Safety Resources Figure 3 of the NOP displays several sites in and around the former WAS El Toro. Based on the City's understanding that this facility may have soils and groundwater contamination, the EIR should discuss whether the project will have an impact on public safety, including soils and groundwater contamination. 5. Mandatory Findings of Significance The Initial Study checklist notes that the project may result in mitigable impacts, and the explanation discusses individual air quality impacts. However, the explanation does not discuss the cumulative impacts on air quality. This discussion should be included in the EIR. 6. References If IRWD has drafted other environmental documents for projects that are similar to the subject project, the EIR should contain references to them. The City of Newport Beach has indicated our support for the NTS project, and that position has not changed. I hope that these comments help IRWD to prepare a complete EIR that will support approval of the project. Sincerely, Homer L. Bludau City Manager Cc: City Council Environmental Quality Affairs Committee 3 2