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