Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-2441(B) - Upper Newport Bay Sediment & Restoration Project, Unit I, Cooperative Agreement� �EvV�RT o � s e.. C'9[i Fp FNS' TO: FINANCE DIRECTOR Public Works FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: February 7, 1985 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SUBJECT: Contract No. C -2441B OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK (714) 640 -2251 Description of Contract Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Restoration Project Funding Agreement with Port of Long Beach Effective date of Contract Julv 2. 1984 Authorized by Minute Action, approved on June 25, 1984 Contract with The Port of Long Beach Address P.O. Box 570 Beach. CA 90801 -0570 Amount of Contract (See Agreement) Wanda E. Andersen City Clerk WEA:lr attach. City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 1 AGREEMENT 2 3 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into, in duplicate, 4 as of the 2nd day of July 1984, by and between the CITY OF 5 NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, ( "City "); and the CITY 6 OF LONG BEACH, a municipal corporation, acting by and through 7 its Board of Harbor Commissioners ( "Board "). 8 9 This Agreement is made with reference to the following 10 facts and objectives: opOm 11 A. In connection with application to the U. S. mmrn� mo 12 Army, Corps of Engineers ( "Corps ") for permits for certain Y 010 �(p aJm OQ 13 landfill projects within the Harbor District of the City of t o00Cc LE = Z 14 Long Beach, Board entered into a Memorandum of Understanding 0 c 15 ( "MOU ") on March 26, 1984 with the California Department of ZJ� 9 J 16 Fish and Game, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and 17 the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish a procedure 18 for advance compensation for marine habitat losses which 19 will occur as a result of said port development landfills. 20 A copy of said MOU (Harbor Department Document No. HD- 3799) 21 is attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", and by this reference 22 incorporated herein. 23 B. Said MOU obligates Board to perform certain 24 remedial work in the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve 25 ( "UNBER "), located in the City of Newport Beach, California, 26 in order to restore and enhance the shallow water habitat 27 in that area, and further provides that, upon completion of 28 said work, Board shall be credited with certain "habitat 1 Document No. HD- 3851. • • III governmental agencies having jurisdiction for the other restora- 2 tion work. Notwithstanding City's election to combine restoration 3 projects, the City shall not be relieved of its obligation to 4 complete the restoration work described in the Board's Specifica- 5 tions by December 1, 1985. 6 6. If, for any reason, City does not complete the specified restoration work prior to December 1, 1985 or any 8 approved extension of time, City shall return to Board without 9 further demand the unexpended portion of the Board Fund, together 10 with all interest earned on said Fund during the period said 11 Fund was held in trust by City. a10i yrn- =msmo 12 7. City agrees, as between the parties hereto, that _6 V9 a °morn 13 Board shall be entitled to habitat trade -off credits under the 3OWMQ =8�t 14 MOU as a result of the work to be performed hereunder by City, 05 ¢Q3mm 3m m� 15 as if the work contemplated in the MOU were performed under the Umo J 16 jurisdiction and direction of Board. 17 8. City hereby agrees to indemnify and defend the 18 City of Long Beach, Board, and their officers and employees from 19 and against any and all claims, liability, loss or damage arising 20 from, or related to, any work performed in the UNBER area, at 21 any site selected for disposal of dredged material, or otherwise 22 arising out of work contemplated to be performed under the 23 direction and control of City to which the funds deposited by 24 Board are committed. 25 This agreement is executed with all the formalities 26 / 27 / 281 / 4 1.99 :4'781 '. 1 1 2 3 4 51 6 7 * 8, N d mrn� E°�9 mo Y W° C (° M O0] -p a� 'C_2 t�00c ? wo °m °aa a: mom Um9J i 1 0 t 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 required by law by the respective parties hereto on the dates set forth below. Approved as to Form of %. 1984 o ert H. Burnham, City Attorney City of Newport �Beach 1984 Approved as to Form 1984 ROBERT W. PARKIN, City Attorney City of Long Beach 26 By _ `- , -- � t'- 27 Deputy City Attorney 28 RLL:jg:ja 6- 19- 84/N -3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a munic) pal corporation Mayor P iG Tbm CITY CITY OF LONG BEACH, a municipal corporation, by order of its Board of Harbor Commissioners I By;�� Jame, McJ nkin, . Executive D' irector Long Beach Harbdlr Department i BOARD O 6 u a n c m _u L a' C 2 m c m U C L E O �7 U r� W N cn cd h 0 ca W � Q W � z o a � z {y y 6 Q J r-1 T W Z c v � c � 3 t v yy V Ji'i! V X O x� � r H p a Q � o 3 b' Y N _ � R y � c X � C C `c, 2 .� Z tt O W 04 Zy S V V n � W z W m U " � R C E �ZQ�E y0 Z ua . M m O m 0 m m L H � d V O V y C � y o Q c Z v H = m R a � L t T Ern N u O W Iz m ~ = a O0 O 0 ad � w C ~ O � — r Y C A U 0 3 nL t I = 0 Y Qa � O z2:1 I aK aj y C 7;I ° C ap y I O D L t E 5 Y ti V yNj vi a y Wn = Cp �Q JL ti P n MdV W� V 4J 1 J O!i'[S N r1 ~vim a a' 0 v 0 W • Z ' ' ' 6 � O N U MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN ThE °_OARD OF HARBOR COMMISSION£RS_OF THE CITY OF LONG BEACH, THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, AND THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE TO ESTABLISH A PROCEDURE FOR ADVANCE COMPENSATION OF MARINE HABITAT LOSSES INCURRED BY PORT DEVELOPMENT LANDFILLS WITHIN THE HARBOR DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF LONG BEACH THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) is entered into by the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and through the FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ( "FWS "), AND THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ( "NMES "), the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through the DEPART- MENT OF FISH AND GAME, RESOURCES AGENCY ( "CDFG "), and the CITY OF LONG BEACH, acting by and through the BOARD OF HARBOR COMMISSIONERS ( "Board "). WHEREAS, the Board is mandated to foster the orderly and necessary development of the Port of Long Beach, including the crea- tion of new land in the Harbor District of the City of Long Beach ( "Harbor District ") by landfill; and WHEREAS, FWS and CDFG have as their primary mandate in this ratter the conservation, protection, and enhancement of marine fish and migratory birds and their habitat, including.the planning of biological loss avoidance, the minimization of adverse project impacts upon fish and wildlife resources and their habitat, 1 and assuring full compensation for any unavoidable losses of fish and wildlife and their habitat resulting from project construction and operation; and NMFS has as its primary mandate, the conservation, protection and enhancement of marine fishery resources, including the planning of biological loss avoidance, minimization of adverse project impacts, and assuring full compensation for any unavoidable .losses of fishery resources and their habitat; and WHEREAS, port development landfills are subject to State regulation pursuant to the California Coastal Act and Federal regula- tion pursuant to the River and Harbor Act and Clean Water Act; and WHEREAS, the Board contemplates imminent harbor developments within the Harbor District, consisting of several small landfills, totaling approximately 40 acres; and WHEREAS, the contemplated harbor development landfills are expected to be necessary and water - dependent port improvements, and the minimum landfill to fulfill the purpose; and WHEREAS, the Board has agreed, by approval of Corps of Engineers Permit No. 79 -133, to provide 1.6 acres of marine habitat restoration in order to offset the habitat loss incurred by the com- pleted landfill at Berth 83; and WHEREAS, the landfill at Berth 83 has eliminated, and future contemplated Harbor District landfills will eliminate marine habitat value that FWS, CDFG, and NMFS want to be replaced; and WHEREAS, delay i.n implementing port developments and their mitigation measures serves no public interest and the parties would like to facilitate permit processing for contemplated small landfills which permanently eliminate marine habitat by providing habitat loss cornzensation "for the i-oacts on the marine environment in advance of the habitat losses predicted for the contemplated small landfills; an, WHEREAS, the parties concur that creation of appropriate fish and wildlife habitat values could constitute a bank of habitat credit=_ ( "bank ") which may be charged against the habitat debits or losses incurred by future landfill developments in the harbor Distric' and WHEREAS, the parties concur that the creation of new habitat values within the Harbor District to offset habitat losses within the Harbor District'-could render future, necessary harbor developments more difficult; and WHEREAS, shallow, estuarine coastal enbayment habitat in Southern California with its relatively high value to marine fish and migratory birds has been reduced in area at a faster rate than that of deep water habitat, NMFS, CDFG, and FWS judge that compensa- tion for adverse project impacts upon the marine ecosystem should emphasize the creation of shallow water, coastal embayment habitat (see Exhibit "A "); NOW,-THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED THAT: 1. The Board, at its cost, shall restore tidal influence t a predominately barren, supralittoral area in the "old salt ponds" region of the CDFG Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve ( "UNBER "), located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, California, as shown as Area A on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this referen made a part hereof. The restoration work in Area A shown on Exhibit "B" will create intertidal /subtidal areas of 21.021 acres below the elevation of mean sea level ( +2.8 feet Mean Lower Low Water). In 3 addition, within one year from the date of execution of this mCU by the last party to sign, the Board nav elect, at its cost, �c restore Area 3 consisting of 7.06 acres shown on Exhibit "B" in acc=r_an.ce with the provisions of this MOU. 2. The Board shall be responsible for all aspect=_ c_' the restoration work including acquisition of pernits and contractor selection and supervision. FWS, CDFG and NMFS each agree to cooperate with and assist the Board, procedurally, with the acquisition of per- mits or approvals for the restoration work and for an appropriate dredge spoil disposal site outside the UNBER. 3. All restoration work performed by the BoarH pursuant to this MOU will be accomplished at sites w.ithin UNBER designated by the CDFG. 4. The Board agrees that its work will be scheduled and con ducted so as not to incur significant habitat loss or degradation elsewhere within the UNBER and so as not to adversely impact any State or Federal endangered species which utilizes the UNBER, including the California Least•Tern, the Light- footed Clapper Rail, Relding's Savannah Sparrow, or Salt Marsh Bird's Beak. 5. All parties agree that each acre of deep water substrate (located at depths of minus 20.0 feet MLLW or deeper) within the Barbo District lying either beneath the footprint of a landfill or beneath a piling - supported wharf and more than 35 lineal feet back from the wharf face shall be considered to have a habitat value rated at 1.0 habitat units. 6. All parties agree that each acre in the UNBER, after being regularly influenced by tidal waters of the Pacific Ocean by N • • the restoration projects described in paragraph 1 and Exhibit "B" and after certification and approval described in paragraph 10 shall be considered to have a habitat value of 1.5 habitat units. Additional habitat value credits totaling 10.59 will accrue upon completion of similar restoration work within Area B of the UNBER. 7. The Board may charge marine habitat losses resulting from port development landfills against the banked habitat unit credits established at the UNBER in a manner consistent with the relative habitat values stipulated in paragraphs 5 and 6. S. All parties agree that the UNBER restoration work will fulfill the existing special condition of Corps of Engineers Permit No. 79 -133, and will consume 1.6 habitat value credits from the bank. Thus, the initial balance available for offsetting future harbor development losses will be 29.93 habitat value credits, unless the Board elects within the period provided in paragraph 1 to restore Area B, in which case, after restoration thereof, the number of habitat value credits remaining shall be 40.52. 9. All parties agree that credits remaining in the bank created by this MOU shall be used to offset losses to the marine habitats resulting from port development landfill projects within the Harbor District that are shown to be necessary, the minimum possible, and water dependent and port related. Such agreement shall be indicated by all parties in an official and public manner, during completion of the environmental review process required under the California Environmental Quality Act or the National Environmental Policy Act, and /or of the regulatory process required under the Cali- fornia Coastal Act, the River and Harbor Act or the Clean Water Act. 5 10. Habitat value credits may not be charged and the con- templated landfills may not be placed until the UNBER restoration work has been inspected and.certified complete by the Chief Harbor Engineer of the Harbor Department of the City of Long Beach and the CDFG, and approved by the CDFG, NMFS and FWS. The Board shall have no responsibility for maintenance or monitoring of the UNBER restored area following this inspection, certification, and approval. 11. The contemplated Board landfill projects likely to consume the habitat value credits include: a. THUMS Consolidation at Pier J (15 acres); b. Pier A Terminal Expansion (24 acres); Other Board landfill projects may be added or deleted with the written consent of all parties. 12. All landfill projects outside the Harbor District boundaries in effect on January 1, 1984 are excluded from consideratior under this MOU. 13. The Board, with the written consent of all parties may allow the consumption of habitat value credits by others proposing a landfill in the Harbor District with the prior approval of the Board when the authorized person or entity is an applicant for a Corps of Engineer's permit. 14. No contemplated landfill, considered under this MOU, shall exceed in area the then remaining balance of habitat value credit 15. This MOU shall remain valid until the balance of habitat value credits has been consumed or until rescinded by written consent all parties. Nothing contained in this MOU shall be deemed or constru= as an agreement by any of the parties that the habitat values set fort in paragraphs 5 and 6 shall be applicable to any port landfill project other than those expressly described or referred to in paragraph 11. THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING SHALL BE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT FROM THE DATE WHICH ALL PARTICIPANTS HAVE SIGNIFIED AGREEMENT BY SIGNATURE OF THE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE. CITY OF LONG BEACH, acting by and through i Board of Harbor Commis- sioners I I 1 Jane$' fit'. wciunx fl n, Executive Direc ox THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INFERIOR Date �1 / APPP,R.,OVED, AS TO FOR. R b W. P- ,f.r:' Ciry Attorney BY SENIOR n' ',TY CITY ATTORNEY M o rca 14, ) q ail_ _ Josep R. lu , Assis ant Regional Da e Direct a on I THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME OF THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA . Donald Carper, Director Date THE NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE . C. Full$rton, Regional Director 1 hemby ro.ttfy ;hat u!I cr llb -. br me apllan r fcrth In St -:a A 4 ... :,e:.n 1=9 he e ECP: J a iw. anplf.o . ;Ih -crt N rmrw Nan 3-5-84 ...a.. by the C -16 C4J sr 7 '3-07 -124 - - -- Date . Deportm.ut of Ckneral Services APPROVED MAR 3 0 1984 MIBIT A • FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES OF THE PORT OF LONG BEACH AND UPPER NEWPORT BAY AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP The Long Beach Harbor District occupies part of the 6000 -acre marine coastal embayment known as San Pedro Bay, which is semi - enclosed by 9 miles of breakwater. Within Long Beach Harbor, a major commercial port, the water depths are mostly greater than twenty feet deep, most shoreline is protected with rock or bulkhead, and land uses are urban /industrial in nature. The main groups of public fish and wildlife resources of significance relying on San Pedro Bay, are marine fishes and water - associated migratory birds. Fish populations are diverse and abundant, with 130 species reported and 70 considered common in occurrence. Seven species rank high in abundance and are: white croaker, queenfish, white seaperch, northern anchovy, tonguefish, speckled sanddab, and shiner perch. A ranking by biomass would usually include: jacksmelt, white croaker, bat ray, brown smoothhound, corbina, California halibut, and white seabass. The area also supports a nursery function for a variety of coastal marine fishes. The migratory bird community of San Pedro Bay is also large and diverse, including about 150 species. The most abundant birds are water - associated and include several gull species, brown pelican, surf scoter, cormorant species, grebe species, tern species, scaups, sanderling, and willet. About 840,000 annual bird- use -days have been estimated. The 741 -acre Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve (UNBER), managed by the California Department of Fish and Game for the benefit of fish and wildlife resources, occupies about half of the Newport Bay estuary. Within the UNBER are-cord grass and pickleweed dominated salt marsh, intertidal.mudflats, and shallow subtidal estuarine channels. About 78 species of fish have been reported and seven are numerically dominant: topsmelt, killifish, mosquitof ish, deep body and slough anchovy, arrow goby, and shiner perch. A biomass ranking would usually include striped mullet, topsmelt, yellow -fin croaker, deep body anchovy, diamond turbot, striped bass, black perch, and shiner perch. The area also supports a nursery function for a variety of coastal marine fishes. The migratory bird community of Upper Newport Bay is also large and diverse, including about 159 species. The most abundant birds are shorebirds such as sandpipers, willet, dowitchers, marbled godwit, avocet, egrets and herons, and waterfowl such as pintail, mallard, ruddy duck, wigeon, green - winged teal, northern shoveler, as well as gull, cormorant and tern species. About 4 million annual bird - use -days have been estimated. Five State and /or Federal endangered species make significant use of the bay, as well, and they are: The light- footed clapper rail, California least tern, California brown pelican, Belding's savannah sparrow• and salt marsh bird's be: Southern California's highly productive, relatively shallow, marine or estuarine, semi - enclosed, coastal embayments have been modified and greatly diminished in extent during the last century. In particular, about 90 percent of the area of river and creek mouth lagoons and their wetlands in Los Angeles and Orange Counties have been filled and developed. San Pedro Bay and Newport Bay are each considered to provide high habitat value for their respective fish and wildlife resources and to be scarce in extent in the region. (Both correspond to the Fish and Wildlife Service Mitigation Policy Resource Category 2, with a Mitigation Goal of no net loss of in -kind habitat value. In -kind can be described as: the substitute habitat is equal in value to fish and wildlife resources which are physically and biologically the same as or closely approximate to those impacted.) The distance between Long Beach Harbor and the UMBER is about 25 miles and they share many common bird and fish species, although the population sizes and total species lists are somewhat different. In establishing the relative habitat value of the harbor waters slated for filling versus the estuarine area to be restored, the public fish and wildlife agency biologists (FWS,CDFG,NMFS) used all available information. Such information included: bird (primarily waterfowl, rather than shorebirds) and fish (primarily - demersal, but also surface associated) sampling data for both areas, shared species, .common biological functions, productivity, fish nursery function, ecosystem physiography and areal extent. The data, references, and analysis for the comparison had been summarized and presented in two lengthy planning aid reports (dated June 1981 and Sept. 1983) prepared by FWS for the Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, as part of the CE Los Angeles -Long Beach Harbor Long -Range Planning Project. This MOU actually stems from a need of the Port to address, on a more immediate and much smaller scale, the same biological matters of the CE planning project which predicts about 2600 acres of new landfills over the next several decades within Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors. The Newport Bay restoration site, a largely barren floodplain area above the reach of the tides, presently provides minimal habitat value. (An existing least tern and avocet nesting area would be improved, but is not considered as part of the mitigation tradeoff. Further, a recent history of sediment loading is being remedied by a task force of State and local agencies charged with that responsibility.) The fish and wildlife agencies assisted the Port with the planning of the UNBER project, including the configuration of the site, manner and timing of construction, so that adverse impacts to the UMBER ecosystem and, particularly, the endangered species it supports, would be avoided. The fishery and waterfowl habitat improvement at the restoration site would be virtually 100 percent. Similarly, the loss of habitat value within the "footprint" of a port landfill would be_ s • 109 percent: The relative habitat value of the habitat to be "lost" compared to the habitat to be "gained" was formulated -as described above by professional public agency biologists. This synthesis had been developed over several years of involvement with other long -range or Port Master Plan efforts..(The Habitat Evaluation Procedure promulgated by the Fish and Wildlife Service was not literally employed due to the absence of species models for appropriate marine and estuarine species, unavailablity of non -FWS HEP trained personnel, and the lack of time or funds to garner either of the former. An analogous evaluation process was employed.) It is worth noting that the habitat "tradeoff" formalized in this MOU actually represents the fourth specific attempt by all parties, over several years, to define and implement a suitable habitat loss compensation measure for the completed landfill at Long Beach Harbor Berth 83 and /or a mitigation bank for future port developments. (As already mentioned, concurrent port planning efforts with larger scopes or longer planning horizons are in progress.) The first attempt involved an effort by the Port to design within -port projects which balanced cut and fill such that the net area of marine habitats remained unchanged. Such a balancing of Port land /water area has been practicable for only a few, relatively small projects.. Also, onsite or within -port loss compensation measures are further complicated. Through predictions of cargo throughput needs, the Port indicates that land will likely be the factor limiting the Port's functions and that new landfills are necessary to increase the land area available for them.. Establishment of a mitigation area within a developing Port greatly increases the likelihood that the compensation area may later be threatened with destruction by future port landfills and /or could impede or prevent necessary port development projects. The second attempt focused on the restoration of tidal influence to a 16 -acre parcel of diked, historic coastal wetland in the City of Huntington Beach, Orange County. The necessary change of ownership, purchase, or easement which would allow the mitigation work could not be accomplished, though. Thirdly, an artificial reef construction project in San Pedro Bay was designed. However, uncertainty regarding the net biological "improvement" offered by the artificial reef project caused it to be considered impracticable, at that time. Then, CDFG, NMFS, and FWS reanalyzed coastal wetland "restoration" as a port mitigation measure, considering such factors as nearness of the restorable site to the site of the loss, technical feasibility of tidal restoration, willingness of the land owner, and ecosystem and fish and wildlife resource similarity. It was concluded that the Newport Bay site was most feasible, at that time. EXHIBIT B '%s� .' .'.'.'.'.'.'.�.::'i 1if � `� • `'::'..:::: .': �: is .... ..::'::':': }'. . . AREA' TO 3E XCAVATED A -` SIN DIEiG DREEK .w / PROPOSED OESIGN h SCALE: P -100` EBB F 000 1T'RAP1�lr l ..... .' .�.':•::':': •r :.:•:• }:�ii i `:iii.:' X. nor .�' :�.x�'� �' >�• ' � L� fl _.. .1..:::. '•i •�r s . J. j .u1[1 y. .... ................. . ..:. ............... . . AlAck• . ORANGE COUNTY �' r rassTAIN YALLET MSL • 0.00' WINCra1 UpM S1jGlflO f� lE1roNT SAT can MESA LATITUDE 33'- 38• -55• N 1a"wr lucs PROJECT LOCATION MARINE ENVIRONMENT MITIGATION rEfl•OIIT aft IN UPPER NEWPORT BAY FOR FACIi>:IC OCEAN �; « PORT OF LONG BEACH EXPANSION COUNTY OF ORANGE s�= STATE OF CALIFORNIA d APPLICATION BY PORT OF LONG BEACH VICINITY MAP N` SHEET 1 OF '2. DATE- JAN., 1984 0 1 2 D 4 S b SCALE 11 MILES MARINE ENVIRONMENT MITIGATION IN UPPER NE'APORT BAY FOR PORT OF LONG BEACH EXPANSION COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPLICATION BY PORT OF LONG BEACH SHEET 2 OF 2 DATE: JAN., 1384 E 11 - AA`A1 6 BY THE CITY COUNCIL June 25, 1984 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY OCUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.-F-3(d) JUG! 2 51984 TO: CITY COUNCIL APPROVED FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL AND RESTORATION PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH PORT OF LONG BEACH RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute a cooperative agreement to provide $600,000 of the Port of Long Beach funds for construction of the Unit I Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Restoration Project. DISCUSSION: On May 29, 1984, the City Council authorized the City Manager to sign a Letter of Understanding with the Port of Long Beach, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service and the California Department of Fish and Game to combine construction of the Port of Long Beach mitigation project in the Upper Newport Bay with the planned Unit I Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Restoration Project. See attached report to the City Council from the Public Works Department. The subject agreement provides for the payment of $600,000 to the City from the Port of Long Beach. Principal terms of the agreement are as follows: 1. Parties to Agreement a. Port of Long Beach b. City of Newport Beach 2. Port of Long Beach agrees to deposit $600,000 with the City of Newport Beach for construction of the mitigation project. 3. City of Newport Beach agrees to complete the Port of Long Beach mitigation project as part of the Unit I Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control and Restoration Project by December 31, 1985. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director JW:jd Att. -4, 0 i May 29, 1984 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. F -18 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: UPPER NEWPORT BAY SEDIMENT CONTROL FACILITIES PORT OF LONG BEACH MITIGATION FUNDS RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to sign a letter of understanding with the Port of Long Beach providing for the use of $600,000 of Port funds for a portion of Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities. DISCUSSION: On April 9, 1984, the City Council authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities Imple- mentation Agreement. The Agreement has been approved by the County of Orange for the City of Irvine, The Irvine Company and approval by the State Department of Fish and Game is anticipated this month. The Department of Fish and Game's budget request of 1.7 million dollars for Unit I of the In -Bay Project has been approved by the assembly and Senate Subcommittees. So it is likely that these funds will be included in the Final State Budget. The Department of Fish and Game's portion of the Project Cost also included mitigation funds from the Port of Los Angeles ($362,000) and a Mitigation Project to restore 21 acres of wetlands in the Upper Bay by the Port of Long Beach. The Port of Long Beach work is estimated to cost $600,000. At a meeting on May 22, 1984, the concept of combining the Port of Long Beach Project with the larger In -Bay Project was examined, and it was determined that combining the two projects would benefit overall restoration of the Upper Bay in two ways: 1) by increasing the economy of scale of excavation work, thereby allowing more sediment to be removed from the Bay, and 2) by allowing the prospective contractor greater number of options with which to carry out the project and achieve cost savings. The City, if it accepts the role as lead agency for implementation of the In -Bay Facilities, has been requested to sign a letter of understanding which would provide the following: 1) Signatories to Letter of Understanding a) Port of Long Beach b) U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service c) National Marine Fisheries Service d) California Department of Fish and Game e) City of Newport Beach APPROVED 6% C1iY COCi�CIL DAT `2`P -.0 `/ • 0 May 29, 1984 Subject: Upper Newport Bay Sediment Control Facilities - Port of Long Beach Mitigation Funds Page Two 2) Port of Long Beach - deposit $600,000 with the City of Newport Beach for construction of Mitigation Project. 3) City of Newport Beach- agrees to complete the entire 21.021 Port of Long.Beach wetland restoration project to the satisfaction of the Department Fish & Game National Marine Fisheries Service,& U. S. Federal Wildlife Service by December 1, 1985. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director JW:do 3