Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem HAGENDA REPORT I DATE: May 29, 2001 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services Steve Badum, City Engineer SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT "NEGATIVE DECLARATION IPOI -017 - SUNSET HARBOUR MARINA ", COUNTY OF ORANGE SUMMARY OF REOUEST: Authorize Mayor to sign Response Letter, with any amendments determined appropriate. Receive and File Staff Report. Instruct Staff to forward to Environmental Quality Control Board for information. BACKGROUND: The City has received a copy of the "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration — IP01 -017 — Sunset Harbour Marina", from the County of Orange. This document evaluates the environmental impacts of proposed improvements to Sunset Harbour Marina including a dry boat storage area, expanded boat launching ramp parking, hand launch facility, public parking and a 3,500 square foot restaurant. Proposed Project: Proposed improvements to Sunset Harbour Marina involve: • Dry Boat Storage Area (Dry Stand): An expanded dry boat storage area, able to accommodate a total of 635 boats with an average length of 35 feet. This is an increase of 394 boats compared to the 241 spaces designated in the existing approved General Development Plan (GDP). The proposed site would encompass 10.71 acres, while 7.3 acres was designated in the existing approved General Development Plan (GDP). For additional information refer to Attachment 3, page 1 of the Notice of Intent. • Expanded Boat Launching Ramp Parking: The boat ramp parking will be expanded from 190 spaces to 291 spaces. The vehicle/trailer spaces will be approximately 40 to Agenda Item H C.Wy Dacume Uu QA\Suna tHar ur Marina. Negp IMI -017.CC Suffftep ft.O .WAS -1 8-01 r Comment Letter re: Negative Declaration IP01 -017 Sunset Harbour Marina, County of Orange City Council Staff Report May 29, 2001 45 feet long. For additional information refer to Attachment 3, page 2 of the Notice of Intent. • Hand Launch Facility: This facility is proposed at the westerly edge of the site just north of the existing boat launch, and is designed for canoes, kayaks, small sailboats and other human powered vessels. For additional information refer to Attachment 3, page 2 of the Notice of Intent. • Public Parking Area: This revised proposal would add 75 additional public parking spaces adjacent to the public park and hand launch area. For additional information refer to Attachment 3, page 2 of the Notice of Intent. • Restaurant: A 3,500 square foot, single story restaurant is proposed at the southwest tip of the project area. For additional information refer to Attachment 3, page 2 of the Notice of Intent. Comment Period on Draft Negative Declaration: The comment period on the Draft Negative Declaration will close on June 7, 2001. Due to the time constraints in commenting on the Draft Negative Declaration by both the City Council or the Environmental Quality Control Board due to meeting schedules, staff has prepared this matter for review and consideration by the City Council, without the matter being reviewed by the Environmental Quality Control Board. This is the first available meeting of the City Council, and the Environmental Quality Control Board will meet again on May 30, 2001, with the next City Council meeting being June 11, 2001, after the close of the comment period. Summary of Proposed Action and Environmental Impacts: Staff has provided as Attachment 2, a complete copy of the "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration — Sunset Harbour Marina ", which provides an overview of the proposed project, a summary of requested project approvals, and proposed mitigation measures. Staff has reviewed the proposed mitigation measures/standard conditions set forth by the County regarding the evaluated environmental impacts. Staff has concerns about the ability of the proposed mitigation measures/standard conditions to adequately reduce potential impacts to the adjoining National Wildlife Refuge and Anaheim Bay to a level as insignificant as possible. Those concerns are set forth in detail in the proposed comment letter for City Council consideration. Please refer to Attachment 1. In June 1999 the City commented on a Negative Declaration for the boat slip replacement project at Sunset Harbour Marina. Sunaa Harbour Manna, Neg Dec UNI- 017.CC SuffRpon 2 09 Comment Letter re: Negative Declaration IP01 -017 Sunset Harbour Marina, County of Orange City Council Staff Report May 29, 2001 FISCAL IMPACT: Minimal, as the County of Orange is the property owner, and the City is not responsible for on -going maintenance activities. However, increased activity at the Marina could impact Police Department activities, resulting in a stretching of police resources throughout the entire community. Potential impacts to sewer and storm water systems could generate increased maintenance costs of these facilities upon the City. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Mayor to sign Response Letter, with any amendments determined appropriate. Receive and File Staff Report. Instruct Staff to forward to Environmental Quality Control Board for information. ee Whit enberg ev um Director of Development Servic s C' ngineer NOTED AND ROVED: (Y� k to . Ba6ski, City Manager Attachments: (2) Attachment I: Response Letter re: "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration - IP01 -017— Sunset Harbour Marina' Attachment 2: "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration — IPOI -017 — Sunaet Harbour Marina ", County of Orange Planning and Development Services Department, May 8, 2001 (complete) Sunset Har ur Marina, Neg Dec IP01 -017.CC Sian Report 3 i Comment Letter re: Negative Declaration IPOI -017 Suuet Harbour Manna, County of Orange City Council Staff Report May 29, 2001 ATTACHMENT 1 RESPONSE LETTER RE: "NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION - IPO1 -017 - SUNSET HARBOUR MARINA" Sunset Harbour Marina, Neg Dec i 1 -017.CC Staff Re on 4 May 29, 2001 Lisa Cibellis Planning and Development Services Department County of Orange P. O. Box 4048 Santa Ana, CA 927024048 Dear Ms. Cibeilis: SUBJECT: City of Seal Beach Comments re: "Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration IPOI -017, Sunset Harbour Marina' The City Council of the City of Seal Beach has reviewed the above referenced Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration (NOI) regarding proposed improvements to Sunset Harbour Marina. The City of Seal Beach would note this facility is located within our corporate boundaries, and would request consultation with our Planning and Engineering Departments prior to the release of any future environmental documents regarding Sunset Harbour Marina. This did not occur with the release of the subject NOI, and therefore we have more extensive comments than would have been required had early consultation and consideration of our comments taken place prior to the release of the document. County staff and representatives of the project proponent have met with City Staff to discuss issues of concern and seek clarification of certain matters, and those meetings have been productive. However, certain issues require formal comments and responses in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. The City of Seal Beach has previously gone on record as supporting upgrading of this major recreation facility within the City limits. The proposed project modifications are seen as a positive action by the leaseholder of this county -owned facility, as long as appropriate mitigation measures are implemented to reduce environmental impacts to a less than significant level. Overarching Comments: Overarching Comment 1: The emphasis on water quality compliance issues by reviewing agencies such as the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Coastal CAMy Dwum tACEQAIMwt Harbour Marie, Neg Da IPoI -017.CC Icuer.docV.W105 -29 -01 City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re: Notice of Intern to Adopt Negative Declaration IP01 -017, Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 Commission cannot be overstated. Given the recent actions of these agencies, the City will require the County of Orange, as property owner, to enter into an indemnification agreement with the City, holding the City and its employees harmless from any enforcement actions instituted for violations of water quality standards at this facility. The potential for water quality violations is significant, given the location of the project and the type of activities that will occur on the property, and the City will not be held responsible for violations that may occur with the future uses of the property by the County and its lessee. Overarching Comment 2: Given the nature and extent of the comments from the City of Seal Beach, it is requested that the document be revised and re- circulated pursuant to Section 15073.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Many issues were not adequately described within the subject document, and additional information sources have been provided within our comments that require evaluation and discussion within a re- circulated document. Overarchine Comment 3: The project is proposed on county -owned property adjacent to the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge and the Anaheim Bay/Huntington Harbour estuary system. The National Wildlife Refuge supports several endangered species, and the Anaheim Bay/Huntington Harbour area provides additional habitat use areas for these endangered species and other species of concern. The water quality issues regarding the proposed project are an extremely significant concern to our City, and the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures to address these water quality issues are of paramount importance to our community. This is particularly relevant as the City will review and approve all required construction plans, including drainage and grading plans (See Overarching Comment 5). Overarching Comment 4: The development plans provided within the Initial Study are not adequate in describing of the project components. It is not possible to determine the location of the 3,500 square foot restaurant, the hand launch area or the public park on the plans. There are no conceptual grading plans provided. Clearer project development plans would allow reviewers to focus their comments more specifically to the appropriate issues. Overarching Comment 5: The project is located within the corporate boundaries of the City. All grading and construction permits, including approval of supporting documents such as soil and gcotechnical reports, water quality management plans, storm water pollution and prevention plans, and flood plain compliance plans must also be reviewed and approved by the appropriate City official prior to issuance of construction permits by the City of Seal Beach. Overarching Comment 6: The numbering system utilized for the indicated "mitigation measures" and "standard conditions" is confusing. There is a numerical order consistently followed, but the category alternates between `mitigation measure" and "standard condition" without an explanation of the different characterization of the measure/condition. If the Negative Declaration is utilizing "mitigation measures ", then the document should be titled "Mitigated Negative Declaration'. Suaeer Harbour Marine, ft Da mP01- 017.0C 1,ow, City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re: Notice of Intern to Adapt Negative Declaration IP01 -017, Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 Comments Reeardine Specific Areas of Evaluation: Response Id — Conflict with adiacent, existing or planned land uses? This response does not adequately address the issue of buffers that will separate the parking areas and related improvements from the adjacent sensitive habitats to the west and north within the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. It is impossible to achieve an understanding as to the design features of these buffers, as there are no conceptual plans provided to indicate the height, width, fencing and landscaping proposed within the buffer areas. Have the buffer designs been reviewed by the U.S. Department of Wildlife, as the project manager of the National Wildlife Refuge or by the California Coastal Commission? Response 4b —Seismicity: groundshaking or liquefaction? This response does not address the impacts related to seismic capabilities of the entrance bridge into Sunset Harbour Marina. It seems in the past the County had to complete some retrofit to the bridge due to flood damage to the bridge abutments. Has the County conducted a recent seismic study of the bridge to ensure its ability to support the increased number and weight of vehicles that will be utilizing this expanded recreation facility? Response 5b — Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of Pollution? The Negative Declaration should address compliance with the non- point source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) municipal program of with the City of Seal Beach is a co- pemtittee with the County and provide a formal "Mitigation Measure' to address the following concerns. Reference should be made to compliance with the requirements of Appendix G of the Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Specifically, for each development, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) should be prepared and approved by the City prior to issuance of grading permits or building permits, whichever comes first. The WQMP should follow the guidelines in Appendix G, Section C. Based upon local experience with soil conditions, it is not likely that the silty clay composition of local soils would readily accept runoff from any permeable paving. The proposed gravel surface in the dry storage area may not be effective in filtrating mnoff. The County should further evaluate use of a non - permeable surface for the dry boat dock areas or provide additional mitigation measures to ensure that any spills of fuels, solvents, etc., would not penetrate into the permeable surface areas. Again, all grading plans, hydrology, and drainage reports should be approved by the City. In terms of broader mitigation measures for project impacts, the Negative Declaration analysis should consider and include as appropriate mitigation measures the following: ❑ Preparation of a construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) under State NPDES requirements; Suneet Hm mr Marina, Neg Da M­017= teaer City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re: Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration /POI -017, Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 ❑ incorporation of those construction notes recommended in the Countywide DAMP New Development Appendix; • incorporation of Federal EPA/NOAA guidance measures for coastal non -point source pollution; • incorporation of other measures from the State Municipal Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual; ❑ incorporation of other measures from the State Urban Runoff Technical Advisory Committee Report and Recommendations; • incorporation of appropriate measures from "Marinas and Recreational Boating Management Measures ", located within "California Management Measures for Polluted Runoff " (CAMMPR), Volume B, prepared by the State Water Resources Control Board and the California Coastal Commission, dated January 2000 (a copy is provided as Attachment A to this letter), and • development of a long -term post-construction water quality management plan, describing commitments to installation and maintenance of structural facilities and conduct of non - structural BMPs consistent with the DAMP New Development Appendix. In addition, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued a draft version of "Order No. 01 -20, NPDES No. CAS618030 — Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of Orange, Orange County Flood Control District and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County Within the Santa Ana Region Areawide Urban Storm Runoff'. Table 2, "Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Listed Waterbodies" indicates that Anaheim Bay and Huntington Harbour are "medium" priority sites and are affected by metals, pathogens and pesticides. This document establishes a number of proposed new requirements for the treatment and disposal of runoff, and this Order should be reviewed by the County in the preparation of all future construction and monitoring documents related to this project. ReMonse 6a — Violate any water aualiN standards or waste discharge requirements? The City of Seal Beach requests those measures set forth immediately above also be incorporated into formal "Mitigation Measures ", for this area of concern, specifying the actions to be taken. The issue of water quality in the immediate surroundings of this facility cannot be overlooked or minimized. Impacts upon endangered species that utilize the National Wildlife Refuge and other sensitive areas of Anaheim Bay and Huntington Harbour need to be completely and thoroughly anticipated and addressed in the mitigation measures and standard conditions impose project development. The concept plan indicates that runoff from the project would be conveyed into the National Wildlife Refuge. This should be carefully reviewed by the County in consultation with the National Wildlife Refuge and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project should be redesigned to eliminate any surface flows from the project area into water adjacent to the National Wildlife Refuge. Any drainage to the National Wildlife Refuge could be problematic due to the recent actions by regulatory agencies to prohibit any discharges into wildlife zones. This would be similar to the situation at the Marine Refuge at Crystal Cove. Suvet Hazbour Mario.. Neg Dm tP0] -01].CC Utur City of Seat Beach Comment Letter re. Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration IP01 -017, Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 There also a concern that the subsoil in the boat storage area may allow for the transfer of pollutants into the open water areas if surface infiltration reaches a perched water table that may have a tidal influence. Recent City development policies call for the development of new parking lots to include oil/water separator technology. Stormceptor /CDS or similar designs are required. The City permits "Fossil Filter" technology for retrofit situations or isolated drains. Additionally, the City has required all new developments to meet the first flush retention rule (fast 3/4" rainfall, 5 -min. tune of concentration). These design factors should be considered in the preparation of final construction documents for the proposed project The City of Seal Beach would request the installation of a boat pump head near the boat ramp facility and the provision of an on -call attendant to assist boat operators in the operation of the boat pump facility. Effective use of such a facility would greatly diminish the potential adverse water quality impacts of boat pumping operations conducted improperly. and/or forecasts? and Insufficient Parking capacity on -site or off -site? These responses evaluate impacts in relation to previously certified Environmental Impact Report (FIR) 478. Major portions of the project evaluated in EIR 478 have not been constructed. Future project impacts should also be evaluated within the context of the existing improvements at the project site. If this is not done, it is not possible for the residents along Edinger Avenue to fully understand the impacts of the proposed project. In addition, the document should indicate the source of the "Trip Generation Rates" and "Parking Rates" set forth in Table 7- 1 and Table 7 -2, respectively. Are they from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (TIE) or some other organization? If the generation/parldng rates are not from ITE, there should be an explanation as to the reason why IM information was not utilized. Response 10d - Wetland Habitat (e.g. , marsh riparian and vernal Pool)? This response indicates approximately 0.7 acres of wetland habitat exists in a 60 -foot wide corridor along the northerly and westerly property boundaries. There is no mapped delineation of these wetland areas in relation to the project components or the buffer areas. Why is it not possible to incorporate these wetland areas into the project design, including the buffer areas, and eliminate this impact? Response 10f — Adopted or proposed conservation Plans and policies (e.g., Natural Community Conservation Plan or Resource Mapdeernent Plan)? A federal Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the adopted "Endangered Species Management and Protection Plan for the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge ", and there is no mention or evaluation of this project's impacts upon that adopted Plan. In addition, the response indicates that "extensive resource planning has been prepared for Sunset Harbor ". It is unclear as to if these studies relate to the project area or to the wider area of Sunset Harbor. Please clarify this information. Without an evaluation in the federal EIS document and the "Endangered Species Management and Protection Plan for the Sunlit Harbour Marina, Ne per 111)1 -0I7.CC t r City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re. Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration [POI-01 7. Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge ", and other extensive resource material contained in the federal EIS, it is impossible to determine if there are significant, unavoidable impacts. Therefore, the Negative Declaration should be re- evaluated and re- circulated, if appropriate, upon the conclusion of the additional evaluation necessary to fully evaluate potential impacts to endangered species. Response 15f — Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The evaluation does not evaluate provisions of the adopted `Emergency Operation Plans of the City of Seal Beach ", adopted June 1996. Again, without evaluation of this document, the conclusion is unsupported. Response 17c and 17d — Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities and sewer or septic tanks? The City's two sewer pump stations are severely deteriorated and at the end of their useful design life according to the recently completed City Sewer Master Plan (see Attachment B). If additional capacity is needed it is doubtful that the existing system can handle the additional flow. The replacement and possibly the re- routing of the fine to the City of Huntington Beach sewer system to eliminate the underwater channel crossing should be considered. Again, without evaluation of this document, the conclusion is unsupported. Please be aware the City of Seal Beach does not have a Local Coastal Plan, and this project will require Coastal Commission approval prior to issuance of building permits by the City of Seal Beach for the proposed project. Thank you for your consideration of the comments of the City of Seal Beach. Please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services at (562) 431 -2527, extension 313, if you have any questions regarding this matter. He can provide additional clarification of the concerns of the City and provide direction regarding the processing of development plans through the City building permit review process and the Coastal Commission approval process. Sincerely, C William J. ane, yor City of Seal Beach Attachments: (2) Sunw Hv our Marine, Neg Dec M1 17.CC Lever City of Sea! Beach Comment Letter re: Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration IP01 -017, Sunset Harbour Manna May 29, 2001 Attachment A: "Marinas and Recreational Boating Management Measures ", located within "California Management Measures for Polluted Rutuoff " (CAMMPR), Volume H, prepared by the State Water Resources Control Board and the California Coastal Commission, dated January 2000 Attachment B: Selected portions of City of Seal Beach Sewer System Master Plan, dated February 1999 Distribution: Seal Beach City Council Seal Beach Planning Commission Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board City Manager City Manager, City of Huntington Beach City Engineer Director of Development Services Sunset Harbour Marina, Neg Dec MI-017.CC Lever 7 City of Seal Beach Comment letter re: Notice oflment to Adopt Negative Declaration IPOI -017, Sunset Harbour Marina May 29, 2001 ATTACHMENT A "MARINAS AND RECREATIONAL BOATING MANAGEMENT MEASURES ", LOCATED WITHIN "CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR POLLUTED RUNOFF" (CAMMPR), VOLUME H, PREPARED BY THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, DATED JANUARY 2000 SunsO Ha our Maim, Neg Dec IPOI -017.CC Uuer The SWRCB, CCC, and other State agencies have identified 17 MMs to address marina and recreational boating sources of nonpoint pollution. Because marinas are located at the water's. edge, pollutants generated from marinas and boats are less likely to be buffered or filtered by natural processes. When boating and related activities (e.g., marinas and boat mairtenance areas) are poorly planned or managed, they may threaten the health of aquatic systems and pose other environmental hazards. The USEPA (1993) identifies several sources of pollution associated with marinas and boating activities: • Poorly flushed waterways; • Pollutants discharged from boats (recreational boats, commercial boats, and "live - aboards "); • Pollutants carried in storrnwater runoff; • Physical alteration of wetlands and of shellfish/ other benthic communities during construction of marinas, ramps, and related facilities; • Pollutants generated from boat maintenance activities on land and in the water. - California's management measures me intended to be applied to control impacts to water quality and habitat from marina sitin and co ns c - tru ti d din 4.1 Assessment, Siting and Design A. Water Quality Assessment B. Marina Flushing C. Habitat Assessment D. Shoreline Stabilization E. Storm Water Runoff F. Fueling Station Design G. Sewage Facilities H. Waste Management Facilities 4.2 Operation and Maintenance A. Solid Waste Control B. Fish Waste Control C. Liquid Material Control D. Petroleum Control E. Boat Cleaning and Maintenance F. Maintenance of Sewage Facilities G. Boat Operation 4.3 Education/Outreach A. Public Education g on (new an expan g marinas), and marina and boat operation and maintenance. The measures are designed to reduce NPS pollution by requiring the best possible siting for marinas and maintenance areas, providing for the best available design and construction practices and appropriate operation and maintenance practices, and encouraging the development and use of effective pollution control and education efforts. The management measures cover the following operations and facilities ( USEPA, 1993): • Any facility that contains 10 or more slips, piers where 10 or more boats may tie up, or airy facility when a boat for hire is docked; • Any residential or planned community marina with 10 or more slips; • Any mooring field where 10 or more boats are moored; • Public or commercial boat ramps; • Boat maintenance or repair yards that we adjacent to the water, and any Federal, State, or local facility that involves recreational boat maintenance or repair on or adjacent to the water. Marinas and Recreational Boating 84 The assessment, siting, and design MMs for marinas and recreational boating is summarized as follows: 4.1.A. Water Quality Assessment — Consider impacts to water quality in siting and designing new and expanding marinas. 4.1.B. Marina Flushing — Site and design marinas to provide for maximum flushing and circulation of surface waters, which can reduce the potential for water stagnation, maintain biological productivity, and reduce the potential for toxic accumulation in bottom sediment. 4.1.C. Habitat Assessment — Site and design marinas to protect against adverse impacts on fish and shellfish, aquatic vegetation, and important local -, State -, or federal- designated habitat areas. 4A.D. Shoreline Stabilization— Stabilize shorelines where shoreline erosion is a pollution problem. 4.1.E. Storm Water Runoff — Implement runoff control strategies to remove at least 80% of suspended solids from storm water runoff coming from boat maintenance areas (some boat yards may conform to this provision through NPDES permits). 4.1.F. Fueling Station Design — Locate and design fueling . stations to contain accidental fuel spills in a limited area; provide fuel containment equipment and spill contingency plans to ensure quick spill response. 4.1.G. Sewage Facilities — Install pumpout, pump station, and restmom facilities at new and expanding marinas where needed to prevent sewage discharges directly to State waters. 4.1.11. Waste Management Facilities— Install facilities at new and expanding marinas where needed for the proper recycling or disposal of solid wastes (e.g., oil filters, lead acid batteries, used absorbent pads, spent zinc anodes, and fish waste as applicable) and liquid materials (e.g., fuel, oil, solvents, antifreeze, and paints). The operation and maintenance MMs for marinas and recreational boating are summarized as follows: 4.2.A. Solid Waste Control— Properly dispose of solid wastes produced by the operation, cleaning, maintenance, and repair of boats to limit entry of these wastes to surface waters. 4.2.B. Fish Waste Control— Promote sound fish waste management, where fish waste is a NPS problem, through a combination of fish cleaning restrictions, education, and proper disposal. 4.2.C. Liquid Material Control— Provide and maintain the appropriate storage, transfer, containment, and disposal facilities for liquid materials commonly used in boat maintenance, and encourage recycling of these materials. 4.2.D. Petroleum Control — Reduce the amount of fuel and oil that leaks from fuel tanks and tank air vents during the refueling and operation of boats. 4.2rE. Boat Cleaning and Maintenance — Minimize the use of potentially harmful hull cleaners and bottom paints, and prohibit discharges of these substances to State waters. 4.2.F. Maintenance of Sewage Facilities — Maintain ptunpout facilities in operational condition, and encourage their use so as to prevent and control untreated sewage discharges to surface waters. 4.2.G. Boat Operation— Prevent turbidity and physical destruction of shallow -water habitat resulting from boat wakes and propwash. The education/outreach MM for marinas and recreational boating is summarized as follows: 43A Public Education — Institute public education, outreach, and training programs to prevent and control improper disposal of pollutants into State waters. Marinas and Recreational Boatine 85 0 S a z 0 F 6 c. Z 0. C G vaC 0 O CO Y 'S x u3�.xv°iy a'v�,3 <dmuc��:ciY C fi & c u —° = H u U.0 c u ax _ u F 93avu_�o_ 6 O dci ci cixiav L s Z a ° ow � F 'wd 0 m 0 e a @ V C m c rZ�cE n— v`w'..03 O.O OY._ 6 ✓' T Y q C C V� W `o W T C 9 $ E e ' o _ € `o R E• Q q =d ^ 9 C C S � ? Q cC m c e3d P 0 m C S v u � w 6�0 a W o m U o U N Uv U v a writ V U v e C m c t- u - m °E -� 0 m 0 e a @ V C m c rZ�cE n— v`w'..03 O.O OY._ 6 ✓' T Y q C C V� W o a W T C 9 $ E e W U `o in S ? Q cC U.] 1 0 m C S v u 6�0 a W o m U o U N Uv U v a writ V U v e 0 m 0 e ))! |!!] | }!J \\ w;a ;! [! ;B ))f!! « =lE=! ±I G <, / 65 S !_ 2� -; ; � §f• ON � ch | \! §3! WO A ]\ u \\} \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ _ ;;l: §8� =:« Q C p C w aE ^ C m C e m.� �mvsip E��m E'c?u°o.�J mp CY .z o =p_p � m` q' .E y g 94 G �' o d> a • y y $ u o° a s a s a y ZZ.p.. 6 � 5 c E 5 " y c U y — 9 o � u 0 E m dL 6L j U 0' 33�z3= a' 3 U 3 c Y m y o ° - - w� 38 w . U. U � y L q Y• Q G U ud wC G Q C p C w P m O z 9 c E V `c ° '° "u m e u° {S�k�� v E u u i. n E s' -_ c w 'c° E m'• "'• ''• c o c co n3 ° ° ?° c v 7 c Ci m° m m p .E E c" �_ _9u— 3cc zmUm =L u Sea �r3dU nmz U' ❑ v$ s i:� � d°.. O N 6 6 t° 3 D u U .m .m .5 „ u u iY � e a� 1- u Z6.oaCau'6U 3 A= _ _vY E ur a` � o a min u o O• V O iii. Ac a g e Z 8 W c_ o¢- 0 e N C s° Y 7 L b O "a sz� oa 2a. e `o u 0 U - °Y e c < - C xUU 9 q na }Z! N a a P m O z 9 c c c wT o c a n > C" c `o m mW D L a E O p n� L A 2 m .E c m p 9 O y j 9 V C a C 6 O y 6 a O p m V9 ^ � m S E z m L 3 u � L e9 pd we o m m e u � G 6 C va E .E n m E m c e ci d 4 G v e` a L Y Y `n a r m 0 a Y b T ao m° 0 C m c n t a _ c a E 3 a o � m w u o c u r m E V u c i• m 3 3 ur E W .. uu a z.EE� zE'ci -cnB ' 0 0 M" A ooC o �•c _c O ° OUa 9 C F v 6o3�o:Ny; °�� 23 c�gKio o C7U Vi �.a o%3 vin . Ff V 0 N V 7 U ¢ 3 - 3SUe m U 3 3 � Q u c e ci d 4 G v e` a L Y Y `n a r m 0 a Y b T ao m° 0 C m c n t a a °. L o z D CC6 C L O E V U 9 y O 0 � Y x +C• C W 1 U O m i Y U u O i u Z ° =' = 8 E a` C P O N Q ?U 4 G q a c m `O C 9 i 3 U r V 0 L X00 S.Q V OuO. L•0 O y S .6 - 'i ✓ t y - U � w G V _ C U 9 f/1 9 N N O V m udi >i � d U uC v y- uypi N q C G > Vf Y W Vl �n s 0 p 0> C p 6 G N m q 9 N y 6 U ❑ m � CJU 0 B and e U w O h o y � m c O o T C Q O C u a W U � ° c e `o C7 — Y u co i U Oi U O U [s. h L U y U w O c m `O C 9 i ) ! ;!I 4.!! _ ■Q!)( }<2,� ! =._,l, ;.lp! - - /{ {!![ //§ If||9) ^!!0.10 \ \// \� \ `: | §[§ §()Ea ) C — y F yV ° •G�g06 beTm Y_�^CymT4W yC� .°.. uN�WU yz Nr�1 °]a •GLQm n UV...pO:.i wLWB�ym�C�6n C0'EN V U U Q 'zU'z m'Y' y ° 2A = eU u Ct Z H o0a nU` o�T w u u V %avi yqC ` c ; �_ p' 6 �� .Q m Y Y m U W �' W C E 3 n° G. 0 Q U t_ C N m _ a c 0 a` 6 4 a 3 y N C a U N b Q N 4 c N 4 9 •V W m C _ E m= a IN p � O Q 9 G m — a y u L � � � C p Lm`o- u o a m U 9 U L � 6 7 G m m O=0 9 m Y C L y' 6 v q T m L o a m E Q C QN W u 6 y C O N � m 3 °w �= m O C F H 0 9.v V p y O m G m E o 9 G m V � 6L_ Y W C „ m - „o 3 3 m O O y S = 9 U Q 9 0 9 m e u R G 6 a O p'C Z o n e � H 0 Q 5 E a 5 m n y Y a E 9 3 9 N G xa °o o° 0 �/1 N O 'a' w L O j N nt N !Pi N 4 Q N a Q 9 0 9 \ E.2 ` -0u ! }} )81, CY / / } \2 } :- :- - ) /©% / »$r! _\ \ _ -!!)0u / CY CY --() «E - ® . _ /U.2 !!!}! )« ) {} \ m c `c C 0 G m x `c ° 3 a y O � u 3 m Y c E c 0 L L O q 6 u C o a_ N c `c = c - - F T L C T 9 0 9 a T Y d �• n E 6 x 9 y � � .�_•� V WdgOeE VAO��w x�d y?L xYV1n osZp c.E —'m o x..p33J'°^'Eu m:9 uE ZUm ' W hvx ox °c .. '•a °Y'y o a a = v G O O O xC y o C o d E w c A o n c u5U� U m 72 CppC 3y� a E °' U `° w a m E U• m� o v E °° •V c u L n y a x C Z i C'� 4� �> x •°iJ �. Jed A Q � O G €� C � � C€ c�� V.V.1N Vi a..] N W ��al�•U V O = O T g v O � Y Y ad aP z 90 u° S 3 a a ., p. c N a a ,. 3 ,. U° W u $ N$ a U �+ °' U u U U 52 qrO O VJ O 6 0 0 x � 9 0 9 a Q c °c 0 V C 9 T u a E V pp C V W C V 6 V E 8 � y O G 6 G C y W� � u N °�La u 6 =oN UoyuS °aou �E nyEcy'3m A 9�o v W _ wV pj W V L A V N Y 6 W r C O 9 q 0. E m6 m A? =6 A'O =EL EpVCE C�g.T. GO u6 - u,CN�F.E Z; TL T V L U W 3`p 'E Ov�C Fy Y 9 00 N A9 9 O (A NT y H fn N � 66 Eo C y u m � a s 9 o � i U Q c °c 0 V C 9 0 T 04 F p0 L O U O � O U UE 0 _ ° Q c C E c c 3 w r`n U - 9 �a o s e= e e w C A O 6 3323 m zY " i 3 o 0 0 = U c r o U Yoc°u O - -- �r U c U aOiO' h e _ U a _ Y: ° C as h o v 0 ! / \\ \� \\ \ \ } \ \, &7 . - , ® E.® } ;:!!fi §(` )tom!! |22 f {S!e!® ' ;file!$ _ G�;r! „§ m;; !}z - -A - - >- l�;; :I±)!` ƒ))}� )k�) \()` . : - | !f - 2 \ ).rlj ! � \\k \2 \\/ ;± ... . . RE . §7 \( U ! a 2 5 m V 3 S t v 9 m m �y v _ u - u > t v - _ _ 2 V C O u ` v c c o _ L L _ m No 0 9 i V O W G E° e_ Z T u q O N Y Y O p 6 E rq C 9 O C y� E m y H m °om 3 O 6 C N LW 9 E .° a" a _ " n m > Q Co: V.U.1N yL.] wN yV `rS-U avW V O 3 U w o u i o ti. Q U CY cy U mU V' c U tiro uU ffi w � u U d <= a om F m No 0 9 i w 7 T V V V O V TU O O m V V L Y N U G W O C W U C U m G H L U .E ^_ L U E Z U 9COG 'uV y @LV EmC u.� 0�1^CQ nrGa�00VypW qG6 °> U `'vn oLO Lm�mY T_,e 'c E �vu33 U u W E U W n °u W n L m w _ L' s y�� V v CAL 'u Ea m$ tL U m V)'i V1 dN U�`'C'm6 m w O C V u E2 O 'y € c0 R2 ,u6 y0 Q C U^ O a U v S v_ �C y a 4 > 4 C 6 U� O u yo U U O U q U C e 0.01 G O U L: 9 0 n m 0 0 u 9 c i y- o O 9 0 Y 3 E q •= V Y �' 6° O m y m g y L _�> _S C U U m udi y C Y E Y L m d >` W = E m 'C a 1 o u o. w g u° U C C c N° ._° u u E u= u e —° B° c —° . u3 v� v y y n . O E y�> � '> q na w w 9 m Y 9 G 3 m N Q' m C ° W m a u E n Y m O r V n o v u Y a ° U = fn G y U v �p K_ P y VUj u C U C eC. H J A D rn m 0 0 u 9 c i E'2 ! j2 -g / 2,l !/ § 9 { |)\ { }6) ) {!* uff$ ;2 / \{)! aE6i )}!! /,i\i!`!!t! ., - !_ (\ j\ � \( \\ \\ f2 9 }(()).E!\ CT :$\ CY \ }\ \\ ` u } :\ io: ) {!* uff$ ;2 / \{)! !! {f f2 9 }(()).E!\ \i } io: ) \{ \\ @® \\ � §� a o G^]'pgwL'C pOMww06�CQN Cn_ a"m VmOI..VOG• °TNe+I LC all m 4. U a q q_ V O NI Vi 9 O Ur" Z=UV �= O U F [ V N N 0 LV C O 9 9 �• W y S W C @ ^Q & y L B> O L Y R W H U m O O' Y W ,-U '-U a�uG .. O —G um „'o G LO ��m 90� �'O w'O� V�L�NU =UYOpL C.E M.mLO pWuB 'O `o >> g�nEvi�ov8u9�2�cG a3L''c 6.ESx4 G =`r�aZ „¢ �'WNJC� 9 i ' m ° C. v O O_ C Q C C m W d 6 y v�3vv �Zi m l- b N � P 0 o�d y D o e U _ o U Vi G L O m m° 0 K m G 2 m° 0 N n p m V C •e.• 6 O U t O T rn Q T U O L' W ?'� E- 2 U E - °e V.1° o._ cZUy d,E%d. &�s.a =msso u m`_ g °_ u. V Y v Y g .E uu ao_�py3E cy�._E`m -'E �._ -oy c.w oo„uju `o c m u 'v 'm o Z a u o y u yaa q= 'Z;c u .E3c E °UO °u _E E� ° Na y�2- v�4 Ev `�8. o m w °w3 m� w` z 3 W Y T a g y E NO VO Q•C j p VyNE d^ 9�— W u E' - q O Y v 7E C >` N N L p L >^ Ci O 'O C A a > >W 46 U F U O F O u o O u U N n O- n u U y =u 3 Y+ W va ° q8 u S m.Etv'e C p u ' c W W nu CY v attar s iwQ 3PuP U W9m m' UU o.y'u U UUC - U.. E u m 3 Q m° 0 N k)) {r!)§; )}\(§)f!\ &!w ] \2 . }\ CY - - 2! ��§ - "__&e;;! S \ �} - i7 \7j\ : k)) {r!)§; )}\(§)f!\ &!w ] \2 . }\ CY - - 2! ��§ k0 {!2. . , _ ) \ {!! ; � 1,�. - - {E -a - & £),!!5. _ = gi ƒ ).!.« - _ . - -� E#±!!$ ƒ! })} /!!!!(; -:_: - 2 /. -� ;! -: ;! } }):©' -! /! i \ _ E -)[!\ m 9 0 °c u E •O 69 O `., E 0. 4 E m °Nymo.v 24 c 3E�a °oq aEj E.a '° -n 9 y y am. F m n 3 ° O N 6 d Y R Y �EmU> wa dm 0onc 6 y y E u m C UaNVi P.J w viV f-U a�W •. p Q O 8 b v y G P U U U a„ U U g ti u N a �' b V m' C U ° 6 O m 9 0 °c u U `o t O A> A N �2 E� mzmY 3 — c Y C E N 6 r V C v T c E a C C V O O CY. GO u V u Y Y y � Y U -9C avJ�wmu m9 m C O c 2 a O F CY'L mL Ya —UO�,C m09 ui z m L m 0 O L Y °'j y t y 9 °' 6 O L y m C q '� N❑ h U Z. 6 C i >i .0 m W Y d N O V L O j0 ❑ N 0 9 N C V � Cm C > N ] N 6 N p O w O � m v G u C y � i T i O ❑ P L N ° V _ y Y Y � Y O dg e V o � w C u O a . � U � N 'i .. G u 0� 00 'Jam O 6= -m�0 y YmY L 9 q0 O v9 eat= TO au3�� tO.Y 9Eu �g�mFoF ;muCY �vs ts °_ c m` a�`0- 6L9LjL i0 V1��CmCu0. E .] 6 m — _ .3 3 m E — m in o U in �e c � O L O - _ 6 G C y w L m c 3 m u 0 U a _ 3 Y� _Qm u y r�. 9 O r •C C 3 O 3_ C _� C Y rLn m m BO: z nY o >u `nt '''e 'o eQ. Cma v 6 d Z O 6 j Y i 2 y uei 6 o E i> ,h U - q u u 6 6C C � W O COv y'�'C .0 0 6.Eaa E O � y? �• w ��LO: (mq (i E 2 Q i E n w �umLz��r� O 9 C W � - p Y V C y L mv2 E vLiEo6 m � u o Y � F � o - m � ° L La L `Y L m y 3m y m x�io« m`z P O C y N V Q _ w Q L u 4 � y G 4 C T C ❑ h - ts \ \2 }\ }\ \} :E ) \ /i\ \\ m u p v p Y ii E 9 ^ m S O S S C 22> V O O N Vl c ° m E' n a E c`c"_ o o w o"� U ui y.mEo w,c u- 'u E °' V ° W .a `m '6n p A 6�m om -O ,Y, pm�_CC' aiC '`' -o'p 'm Lim °s =m9 Ec �m �u qEy E,u�od uE c—= „c8,m'w �E cEmuc. °E,rU � °U�a -a i a�io'iv Tm °. y = � °u'y c�EcwB$UEu °pV�s` °a °aY. sm a °SE m�ucm alm a° 5 .. n S m O L Y v C ` m .- • Y O y O m W C T m o u� V O - D T N c Q 0 p C a 0 O 00 pp - y q E o- FGO Oy v'u OpmC U06 Aa.�G yma COE�'SOdWpY� „LO .�Ey �coE63 E Qi y L gyyz,. yoV a `%' 03.Q 600..9 cLo Ea..O FGnO nC•6iU n0'iUCOG.�J �ty d0A ome Ey:oE= oNm,o, wmum'OOEmh �- p O y W O p'O 0•C a 2 6� L p O O O y p t U a C O q Y 3 T O u q� C^ O m g> A _ E - � w ^ yy a = _ Bs sEa J y N o n E u v 3 h N F ^p a < m C 2 ° c U Op. Q C O 0 A m o a aF O d p^ qu O a L U F N cv� V 6: uUU os�3 p. x K v v U G D N c Q 0 p C a 0 - - ;/§ (y! §7}/ / \(]� ®( EDE \ t\\i: / )f u l ƒ §( \\ \} /)§ \ } \| k\) } City of Seal Beach Comment Letter re: Notice of Intent to Adopt Negative Declaration IP01 -017, Sunset HarhourMarina May 29, 2001 ATTACHMENT B SELECTED PORTIONS OF CITY OF SEAL BEACH SEWER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN, DATED FEBRUARY 1999 Sunu Harbour Marina, Neg D IMI -017= Lever V f 6m °u O om cm om i`P3 m Uc 'o M 3Nlz. N a m m m Pa o y y 'mN� H mU� mUm mUu mm m Um mU= N m a ate; as as o.a as � yd is n n P � 2 C > a d U U U m � vN S 1p _ P m v O m v 9 v P i0 a im i0 � m ON N m a O �� 444111 • n � N a n CI N ^ � m s Y p P p • m m ^ O m El. m ^ m n O N ^ CI (O'1 1� O aFa a °a a °a aoa boa QY)Y) O[O'lY $.YIP nm NNn mP^ ��'� ONO Om_O N 6m 00 O O O w> i`P3 VUIx Uc U M 3Nlz. N E E a c y y Nn H o= o w of 0> w> w w NNo way M E E a c y y Nn H m m m q 6 E a in w n v M E E a c y y Nn o m nZ jy m � N m a ate; as m a E m 3o w 30 c y y Nn nZ jy m � d m 2 0 H m n f n ap@J,� ulepy avod Nyawalay )aMOd ,(mua6)awE slo)iuop uopelRuGA Ilem lam ss=v sdwnd a6y C ° m N E o - o Imm °m ImDm :m Iy m gm im E''"m Pam G0 > V 0 I �C QCO imu Im'm IG Im_ C> I Em iE dw Lw I IZ -° m -° �.pa ti Jm-0 Eo TCI m - CN'0m2 mU Im m.:a6 Cm O -iOUV °3 m 3T IE_ cm Imm L� mm ;E m° :mLLm Ma o °E3 c Im >m ��Om'Em m p m n'.om3m omd oaLD SQ m mcp E °- mE- mal. am !Tm m v�ccmo� ¢gdj0u m�c -° d`oo = mq+m om o -am nPa dO CO lO m nm )¢aIOwC7�Owm pd'.Ea u-O ¢o avl alm �cE U p U I U LL U I m j 1 Imm: I ' C Im L N bl p m I° ml L C E ;aP I E >I am ,a In E =m ¢ °m m oI I,Ea °E O a C b(II PLC mD.i C°I y �mE T p° 00 j C n W O yy vi 30 IZ6 �m Oc9 3 Ind NE' INa a.m^ ° 97 I pG m 0 ^m !m TmUO [ m E. -UN I ?! 3C .2 6m 0pC 1° I�� ico am 3` >m 'E mlSco IEM2 °a cE EoL i`m3 Im mac .gym_ E— m I0 I3 rmmTE LLL� gag � �°�'' °E '�Z Imm_ INS -a 'NJigP hu: gg ma Eu Ec,a �om_ I`ongmm cH `ac Ica1,3am m IW- _ i LL 9i0�'R o mmmm m Em'�'IEc cc- EE'¢¢E c ca¢a!¢U °mm cE cl 3 ya¢U mT 1'i�N -NCIQ I'NQ °LQ O. OIL CL ^N a I o I • I • U ¢ c T 6 e ° Im I o E I h C 'E 'o K jS 'IREm p ^ j^ a m Q —m 0 C d m o. TV� - m q > O � Cd0 - m m mp_ E u = o m a3m E JlL yd � a C C C C E 0 S °o ,q °oc UC7LLe�- C ° m N E o - o Imm °m ImDm :m Iy m gm im E''"m Pam G0 > V 0 I �C QCO imu Im'm IG Im_ C> I Em iE dw Lw I IZ -° m -° �.pa ti Jm-0 Eo TCI m - CN'0m2 mU Im m.:a6 Cm O -iOUV °3 m 3T IE_ cm Imm L� mm ;E m° :mLLm Ma o °E3 c Im >m ��Om'Em m p m n'.om3m omd oaLD SQ m mcp E °- mE- mal. am !Tm m v�ccmo� ¢gdj0u m�c -° d`oo = mq+m om o -am nPa dO CO lO m nm )¢aIOwC7�Owm pd'.Ea u-O ¢o avl alm �cE U p U I U LL U I m j 1 Imm: I ' C Im L N bl p m I° ml L C E ;aP I E >I am ,a In E =m ¢ °m m oI I,Ea °E O a C b(II PLC mD.i C°I y �mE T p° 00 j C n W O yy vi 30 IZ6 �m Oc9 3 Ind NE' INa a.m^ ° 97 I pG m 0 ^m !m TmUO [ m E. -UN I ?! 3C .2 6m 0pC 1° I�� ico am 3` >m 'E mlSco IEM2 °a cE EoL i`m3 Im mac .gym_ E— m I0 I3 rmmTE LLL� gag � �°�'' °E '�Z Imm_ INS -a 'NJigP hu: gg ma Eu Ec,a �om_ I`ongmm cH `ac Ica1,3am m IW- _ i LL 9i0�'R o mmmm m Em'�'IEc cc- EE'¢¢E c ca¢a!¢U °mm cE cl 3 ya¢U mT 1'i�N -NCIQ I'NQ °LQ O. OIL CL ^N a I o I • I • U ¢ c T 6 e ° Im I o E I h C 'E 'o K jS 'IREm p ^ j^ a m Q —m 0 C d m o. TV� - m q > O � Cd0 - m m mp_ E u = o m a3m E JlL yd � a C C C C E 0 S °o ,q °oc UC7LLe�- Hellman Ranch .Pump Station located in the golf course adjacent to the Los Alamitos Retarding Basin. A submersible type design with a dedicated emergency generator is recommended (see Figure 6- 11). Approximately 500 L.F. of 8 -inch pipe must be constructed from the Adolfo Lopez Pump Station through or around the City's Maintenance Yard to the proposed Hellman Ranch Station. 6 -2.2 Aquatic Park Pump Station No. t & 2 General Located in Anaheim Bay, within the corporate boundaries of Seal Beach, but segregated from the Old Town area by the Wildlife Refuge and Naval Weapons Station, is the Sunset Aquatic Park. The 63 -acre park was acquired by the County in 1963 from the Navy and provides boat slips, boat ramps and picnic areas to the public. Sewer service is provided through a small collection system owned by the County, and two submersible pumping stations owned . and operated by the City. Park facilities being served by the sewer system consist of five restroom buildings, the Harbor Patrol building, a dockside cafe, the marina management offices, and the Sunset Aquatic Shipyard. Aquatic Park Pump Station No. 1 was constructed in 1968 and is located within the greenbelt area of the park's parking lot. It is a small packaged type submersible station installed within a concrete vault. The station originally contained two submersible pumps mounted in a small steel wet well with shafting to a dry well motor mounted above. In 1984, the pump and motor arrangement was replaced with two submersible pumps and motors. The electrical control panel was also replaced at this time The pump station collects all of the flows generated at the park and pumps them under a channel through a 4 -inch force main, and an 8 -inch gravity line, to Aquatic Park Pump PVMP STATIONS Station No. 2. This station is located on an island in Anaheim Bay, and is identical to Pump Station No. 1, in all respects except for pump size. It was also retrofitted in 1984 with a new control panel and pumps. From Pump Station No. 2, sewage is pumped through a 6 -inch force main under Anaheim Bay, to Pacific Coast Highway and then Seal Beach Boulevard to its discharge point into the Gigs collection system at Beryl Cove Way and Marlin Avenue in the Marina Hill South area. From there, it flows by gravity to Pump Station No. 35, which lifts the flows into the OCSD system for treatment and disposal. The Aquatic Park System is shown on Figure 6 -4. Figure 6-4 Aquatic Park System a m I " Detailed information on these pump stations are shown in Tables 6 -4 and 6 -5. The City reports that both pumping stations are reliable and that no major maintenance has occurred since 1984. The stations experience frequent power outages. However, these are relatively short in duration and have never resulted in a sewage spill. There has been a failure of the force main under Anaheim Bay, which was difficult to repair and required dredging to locate the pipe. No other station failures have been reported. 6.7 city of Seal Beach The long force main from Pump Station No. 2 has created an odor problem at its discharge point in the Marina Hill area. The City is successfully controlling the problem by injecting enzymes into the wet well at the pump station. Flows Flows are limited to those generated at the five restroom buildings, Harbor Patrol building, dockside, cafe, marina management offices, and the Sunset Aquatic Shipyard. The City does not maintain flow records for the station, however, flows may be estimated from pump running time meters and the pump's rated capacity. From this information, total flow through the facility is calculated at 5.8 mgd per year, which is equivalent to an average day flow of 11 gpm. Peak flow to the station is estimated at 44 gpm. Collection System The collection system tributary to Pump Station No. 1 consists of 6 -inch VCP sewers owned and maintained by the County of Orange. There are no sewage collection facilities which are tributary to Pump Station No. 2. This facility only re -pumps sewage conveyed by Pump Station No. 1. Disposal System Pump Station No. 1 lifts sewage through 935 LF of 4 -inch PVC and cast iron force main under a channel in Anaheim Bay to an island where it discharges into an 8 -inch VCP gravity sewer which conveys the flow to Pump Station No. 2. From Pump Station No. 2, sewage is pumped under Anaheim Bay to Pacific Coast Highway through 860_ LF of 6 -inch cast iron force main. The force main continues west in Pacific Coast Highway as 6 -inch PVC pipe to Seal Beach Boulevard where it turns north. The PUMP STATIONS pipe then proceeds north in Seal Beach Boulevard to Marlin Avenue where it turns west. Table 6-4 Aquatic Park Pump Station #1 Pump Station Name Aquatic Park Pump Station #1 Location Sunset Aquatic Park 30, 30 2901 Edinger Avenue Plan Identification Sewer tome main 1740 1740 S- 0056 -A. S- 0060 -A thru S- 480V 480V 0062 -A Construction Date 1968 Pump Information Hours of Pump No. 1 2 Type of Pump ESSO ESSO 614. 6 Y. submersible submersible Capacity (gpm) 100 100 Head (ft.) 30, 30 HP 5 5 FPM 1740 1740 Voltage 480V 480V Number of 3 3 Phases Hours of 248 285.8 Operation impeller 614. 6 Y. Diameter (in) Force Main Iniop ation Start Point Aquatic Park Pump Station No. 1 Wet Well Invert 0.00 End Point 48' Manhole "at of channel Size (in) 3.37 (control elevations 5.P) Material PVC and cast iron Length (ft) 935 Table 6 -5 Aquatic Park Pump Station R2 Pump Station Name Aquatic Park Pump Station #2 Location Sunset Aquatic Park 0.98 2801 Edinger Avenue Plan Identification Sewer force main of Marlin Avenue S- 0058 -A, 5 -0060 -A thru S. Manhole 229 (Hill atlas map) 0062-A Construction Date 1968 Pump Infonnalion Length (h) Pump No. 1 2 Type of Pump ESSO ESSO submersible submersible Capacity (gpm) 200 200 Head (ft.) 55 55 HP 10 10 RPM 1740 1740 Voltage 480V 480 Number of 3 3 Phases Hours of 5(4.7 465.5 Operation (1998)) Impeller 8' /. 8+4 Diameter (in) _ Force Main Information Stan Point Aquatic Park Pump Station No. 2 Wet Well Invert 0.98 End Point Manhole on Beryl Cover Way, south of Marlin Avenue Manhole 229 (Hill atlas map) Sae (in) 6 Matenal CIP ( -93' then PVC (- 7353') Length (h) 8287 It continues west in Marlin Avenue to Beryl Cove Way where it heads south to Its termination at a manhole in the City's sewer system approximately 70 feet from the intersection. The sewage then flows by gravity to Pump Station No. 35, where it is pumped through a 16 -inch force main in Seal Beach Boulevard to OCSD's Seal Beach Pump Station located at the corner of Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Avenue. From this point, it is pumped into the OCSD gravity system, which conveys it to OCSD's Plant No. 2 for treatment and disposal. PUMP Through most of its alignment, the force main is located in a common trench with a waterline which also services the Sunset Aquatic Park. Center -to- center clearance between the pipes is 2 -feet, with the waterline installed about one foot above the sewer. The force main is encased with 6- inches of concrete along its entire alignment, except for the section which is under Anaheim Bay. The City maintains a 20 -foot easement throughout the force main alignment in the bay and wildlife refuge. Pump Station Ecuioment The existing pumping equipment for the two stations is listed in Tables 6 -4 and 6 -5. All equipment is located in the concrete vault which encloses the wet well and pumps. Deficiencies The pump station deficiencies are primarily due to their age and limited access to equipment. The specific facility deficiencies are described below. They are pertinent to both Pump Stations t and 2. 1. Mechanical Equipment The mechanical equipment is located in the vault surrounding the wet well and cannot be accessed without exposure to a hazardous atmosphere. Check valves, isolation valves, and pipe are corroded and require replacement. Pumps cannot be removed without physically entering the wet well and unbolting them from the discharge piping. _ 2. Concrete Vault The concrete vault surrounding the mechanical equipment is unlined and is subject to corrosive attack from sewer gases. The vault is also not water -tight and allows infiltration from groundwater. 6 -9 City or 5ea/ a each ants- sealOtaNlmOehenpa tea, -,_- 3. Telemetry System There is no telemetry system at the stations. Alarms are therefore undetected until discovered by maintenance crews visiting the site. 4. Washdown Water Washdown water is not available at the site for maintenance purposes. 5. Equipment Access All equipment is located in an OSHA - defined confined space. Special precautions must be taken to inspect or remove equipment at the station. This is both dangerous and time - consuming. 6. .Emergency Power The station has no provisions for the connection of an emergency power source. Power failures can only be mitigated by sending pumping trucks to the site. 7. Wet Well Capacity The 3 -foot tall 1 So gallon steel wet well is of insufficient capacity. Pumps cycle excessively during peak flow conditions. The depth of the wet well does not allow for proper submergence of the pump and pump motors. Adequate submergence is required to eliminate air from entering the pumps through vortexing. Nomtally, a minimum water surface level 18- inches above the pump volute is required. S. Force Main Issues a) Proximity To Existing Water Main - The Department of Health Services requires that all sewer force mains have a minimum horizontal clearance from a potable water line of 10 -feet. PUMP STATIONS This requirement is violated the entire length of the alignment (9200 LF). b) Sewage -Air Vacuum Va Ives - Sewage air /vac valves are located at all high points on the force main. The existing above -grade design can result in raw sewage being discharged onto the ground, where human contact may occur. This is a health and safety hazard. c) Force Main Flexibifity at Bridge Abutment - Flexibility through the bridge abutment is necessary to protect the pipeline from failure due to bridge movement. It is not apparent that this flexibility has been provided. d) Redundant Force Main Under Bav - Failures of a force main under a body of water is difficult, time consuming and costly to repair. Generally, dual force mains in sensitive areas such as these are provided so that sewer service may continue in the event of a failure. This level of redundancy has not been provided. a) Force Main. Sizs - The SAnch force -main from Pump Station No. 2 is unnecessarily large and produces excessive sewage residence time in the pipe which in turn promotes odors. Recommended Imorovements The age and design of the existing pump stations preclude them from being effectively. retrofitted. Total replacement of the existing Aquatic Park No. 1 Pump Station is therefore recommended. A submersible station similar to that shown in Figure 6 -10 is most appropriate here due to the small capacity required and space which is available. The station should incorporate those provisions outlined in Section 6.2. Recommended pump sizing is 264 gpm and is based upon maintaining a minimum 3.0 fVsec self- cleansing velocity in the 6 -inch force main. It is - recommended that Aquatic Park Pump Station No. 2 be eliminated. The station simply re -pumps the sewage collected at Pump Station No. 1 and is not necessary. To eliminate this facility, the 8 -inch gravity section preceding Pump Station No. 2 must be replaced with a 4 -inch force main section. For the force main, the following recommendations are made. Review the design of the made force main and waterline with the Department of Health Services. Exceptions to the basic separation rule are granted on a case -by. case basis. The concrete encasement around the force main may preclude any action being required. Realignment of the force main to protect the public water supply may be necessary. 2. Relocate all sewage air /vac's below -grade in a concrete vault. 3. Install flexible pipe connections at bridge abutments in Pacific Coast Highway. ESBA Iron Flex -Tend may be used for this purpose. 4.- Redundant Force .Main — The limited service required of the Aquatic Park Pump Station does not justify the .cost of installing a parallel force main under Anaheim Bay. It is recommended that increased wet well capacity be provided to hold 8 -hours of the average day flow (5280 gallons). This would reduce the frequency at which a pumping truck would need to visit the site during a force main outage. The discharge of flow from Aquatic Park into the Marina Hill South System has resulted in 1994 L.F. of 8 -inch sewer to be surcharged during pumping. Additionally, the long residence time In the Aquatic Park System STATIONS has created an odor problem where the force main discharges into the gravity collection system and the manholes immediately downstream. It appears that the City is controlling the situation by injecting enzymes at the pump station, which keeps the hydrogen sulfide in solution, preventing its release. While this approach has been effective, it is also be expensive. Routing the force main directly to Pump Station No. 35 would eliminate the need to upsize surcharged pipe reaches in the Marina Hill South System. It may also eliminate the need for enzyme injection by moving the odor to a less sensitive area. To reroute the force main would require 1500 feet of 4 -inch force main to be constructed from Pacific Coast Highway to Electric Avenue in Seal Beach Boulevard. Estimated construction cost is approximately $60,000 compared to $160,000 to upsize the Marina Hill South System. It is important to re- emphasize that this would not eliminate the Odors, just move them to a less sensitive area. Although previous attempts have proved unsuccessful, a more appropriate solution for the Aquatic Park System would be to turn the facilities over to the City of Huntington Beach. A new 4 -inch, 3,500 L.F. force main would be constructed to the Huntington Beach system in Edinger Avenue and Pump Station No. 1 would still require upgrading. However turning the facilities over to Huntington Beach would eliminate a system which is segregated, and difficult to maintain. Estimated cost to the City for constructing the necessary improvements is $1,000,000. New talks with the City of Huntington Beach should be initiated to discuss the possibilities for the Aquatic Park System. If these talks should prove unsuccessful the improvements identified for upgrading the system should be implemented. 6 -11 City of Seal Beach T.�p(S SG1kPdCOIT00(SGwd9G S.W.' S-1— MaCni I,- Comment Letter re: Negative Declaration IPOI -017 Sunset Harbour Marina, Cowry of Orange City Council Staff Report May 29, 2001 ATTACHMENT 2 "NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION - IP01 -017 - SUNSET HARBOUR MARINA ", COUNTY OF ORANGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, MAY 8, 2001 (COMPLETE) Sunser Harbour Mann; Neg Dec MI -017.CC Suff Report 14 �9�IF04��0 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION In compliance with section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the County of Orange Procedures, notification is hereby given to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, interest groups and the general public, that the County of Orange shall adopt the attached Negative Declaration File Number IP01 -017. PUBLIC REVIEW The proposed Negative Declaration (ND) is being circulated for public review. The dates of this review are noted in the ND. The attached Negative Declaration may be adopted by the County of Orange and become final unless written comments or and Appeal on its appropriateness or adequacy are received by the office listed below by 4:30 p.m. on June 7, 2001. CONTACT PERSON: Lisa Cibellis PHONE: (714) 834 -2089 PUBLIC MEETINGS) /HEARINGS ON PROJECT: Sunset Harbour Marina The proposed project will be reviewed for approval by a decision -maker on the dates listed below. DECISION MAKING BODY: Board of Supervisors DATE: Yet to be determined TIME: Yet to be determined LOCATION OF PUBLIC MEETING /HEARING: see location map below In the event that there is no NO attached to this notice, the Negative Declaration and supporting attachments are available for review at the offices of the PDSD /Environmental 8 Project Planning Services Division, Room 321, 300 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA 92702 -4048. LOCATION MAP OF MEETING /HEARING: ... To=. RHCB/ CUD FORMS SEPT 1998 CRY OF SEAL BEACH ILall MAY — 9 M Project Charge No. DATE POSTED_: DATE FINAL U=�Y n o ytnH NEGATIVE DECLARATION PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARMENT 300 N. FLOWER STREET P.O. BOX 4048 SANTA ANA. CALIFORNIA 927024048 In accordance with Orange County Board of Supervisor's policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the County of Orange has conducted an Initial Study to determine whether the following project may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. On the basis of that study, the County of Orange hereby Curds that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and does not require the preparation of an Environmental impact Report because either the proposed project: has or creates no significant environmental impacts requiring mitigation; or ® will not create a significant adverse effect, because the Mitigation Measures described in the initial study have been added to the project. The environmental documents that constitute the initial Study and provide the basis and reasons for this determination are attached and hereby made a part of this document. PROJECT. Title: Sunset Harbour Site Master Plan File No: IP01 -017 Location: The subject property encompasses approximately 30 acres within the Sunset Marina. The Sunset Marina is located at the westem limits of Orange County, west of the terminus of Edinger Avenue in the City of Seal, entirely within the coastal zone boundaries. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (SBN WS) lies to the north of the marina. Description: Principal revisions to the proposed General Development Plan - Alternative 1 (Site Master Plan Alternative 1, dated May 8, 2000) include a dry boat storage area (dry stand), expanded boat launching tamp parking, hand launch facility, public parking and a 3,500 square foot restaurant. Project Proponent or Applicant: Goldrich & Kest Industries LLC Division/Department: Room No. 321 Responsible for Proposed Project PFRD/Real Property Address: 300 N. Flower St., Santa Ana, CA 927024048 Contact Person — Project Mike Hentzen Telephone: (714) 8344703 Contact Person - CEQA Lisa Cibellis Telephone: (714) 834 -2089 NOTICE: The Negative Declaration may become final unless written comments or an appeal is received by the office listed above by 4:30 p.m. on Jp% j IUOI If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, address your written comments to our finding that the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment: (1) identify the environmental effect(s), why they would occur, and why they would be significant, and (2) suggest any mitigation measures which you believe would eliminate or reduce the efflct to an acceptable level. Regarding item (1) above, explain the basis for your comments and submit any supporting data o references. I NOTE: This document and supporting anachmclir are provided for review by ate general public. This is an information document about nvironmenta effects only. Supplemental information is on file and may be reviewed in the once listed above. The decision. making body will review this document and potentially many other sources of information before considering the proposed project. RA/RXCB FORMS OCT 1997 8& ��:'' INITIAL STUDY PROJECT TITLE: Sunset Harbour Site Master Plan IPOI -017 LEAD DIVISION: Planning and Development Services (PDSD), County of Orange INITIAL STUDY NUMBER: IPOI -017 APPLICANT: Goldrich & Kest Industries, LLC. PROJECT PLANNER: Mike Hentzen PHONE: (714) 834 -4703 CEQA PLANNER: Lisa Cibellis PHONE: (714) 834 -2089 PROJECT LOCATION: The subject property encompasses approximately 30 acres within the Sunset Marina. The Sunset Marina is located at the western limits of Orange County, west of the terminus of Edinger Avenue in the City of Seal. The subject property is located entirely within the coastal zone boundaries. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (SBNWS) lies to the north of the marina. This facility operates as an active military reservation and ammunition storage base, and also encompasses the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Principal revisions to the proposed General Development Plan - Alternative I (Site Master Plan Alternative 1, dated May 8, 2000) include a dry boat storage area (dry stand), expanded boat launching ramp parking, hand launch facility, public parking and a 3,500 square foot restaurant. DECISION MAKER: Board of Supervisors SOURCES OF INFORMATION: 1) Planning Application; 2) Sunset Marina Park General Development Plan — Phase 2; 3) Draft EIR 478 — Sunset Aquatic Regional Park General Development Plan; 4) Addendum No. IP 94 -123 to EIR 478; 5) Final Wetland Habitat Survey Report; 6) Parking Study; 7) Trip Generation Summary; 8) Orange County Standard Conditions of Approval RESPONSIBLE/TRUSTEE AGENCIES INVOLVED: California Coastal Commission; Regional Water Quality Control Board LAND USE ENTITLEMENT SUMMARY: Zoning: INITIAL STUDY DATE: MAY 8 2001 INITIAL STUDY COVER/Environmental & Project Planning Services Division LGU 823/1999 e ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST Project Number Potential Less than Less than No ISSUES & SUPPORTING DATA SOURCES: Significant Significant w/ Significant impact Effect Mitigation Impact 1. LAND USE & PLANNING. Would the protect: a)eraflfl wwt getteml ukn hsigoationdmwng? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Cwfict with applkablc envbomnenW plum in policies ❑ ❑ ® ❑ angmpier witbima&cnan over w maim? e) EimptmdividedephYsiolhrmngementofm ❑ ❑ ❑ muboi cotmnunity (e, . low income minonty)? d) Crafin With adlhetet, esinihe m planmdland user? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ 2. AGRICULTURE. Would project: a) Craven Farmlintr lined as-Rime- ,'Unique" ornt'Stoov,ide Imvo niece no dmwo on the Sm Farmluw Mapping and Monitoring ❑ ❑ ❑ El Program,lo moagricvlmnl use? b]InvolvedM dungesa Weexining eoatonmem wM1icM1,dwto - Neirltearomm�atmgwuwmulrinconversion of Farmlantl ❑ ❑ ❑ to roe- epicultuml use? 3. POPULATION & HOUSING. would project: al Cmnwnively exdetl dogcdmgioml at lain papaldan prolwnom? ❑ ❑ ❑ b)lodwe suGdnto, powft a am+ directly or iMirtetly donnish ❑ ❑ ❑ pointer in m undeveloped w or extension of maim tnhactucturc? c7 DiyWxexating bauving aR <niogasubsuntal number otpwplr? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4. GEOPHYSICAL. Would project result in or expose people to itepticb involving: a) L=l chat niewe? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Seismicoy pouts rhwring m Il tinfin n? _ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ y Havemisinrapabkofudequuelysup aingtb eafupncu or ❑ ❑ ❑ atemmive wain to dtspwal sntems whine sewn are not awiable for the dopoul of. wain? d) Lwdrllden d mudilides? ❑ ❑ ❑ r) Fmrion .cbangerwtopogmpM1Ym' "'._ble roil coMitiom tram ❑ ❑ ® ❑ union it or fit? f Suhmacnaeaftciand? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g)Expell-rain? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ h) Unique ecologic mphyaical funoes? Cl ❑ ® ❑ 5. HYDROLOGY &DRAINAGE. Would the project: al SubatamiwlY Vhte tk <xistin6 Aumge Pauem ocdu rimmarca. induGnpbc alteruioo o(tM1e wurx of a ream m nvtt, in mutiny winch wawa,ewt in n mbrchroolnconnor"hoianon.wal -site? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ tit asubuantial imoren the memamoutn ofsmucnamRin ❑ ❑ ® ❑ mannm whuh would molt in fretting om in oR.ane? it Creme orewmibwe nwff ratr which would cxcted the capacity of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ wtn6 d phoned nwmwun dozen, cannot ar ponde subnuntal W ditwtul awvicei a(wllmrd wqT <) or' within a. floxi food harartl use svunuv whicM1 would ❑ ❑ ® ❑ tmpeae m mairrd noaa nowt? al Expau proplem NU[mrea taanpnrcant rick orlwa. imury or aedh ❑ ❑ ® ❑ nuwvingflaaa�ne. maaaagfwmng asamwlt arwer nine ara Irux or dam, d inundation by uuhe, uunarnt, or madnow? Page r ISSUES & SUPPORTING DATA SOURCES: 6. WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a)vei anywa¢r Ood"romari orwme melm,"arcmanrp b) Subrmually dePleta grear a ruppliea aimera,e wish Marron am recharge rah the date wmid be a. deficit in apuitef volume a a lower, of a i Maritime, table lever c) pherxim m ommielly deeaade wain miry+ 7. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a) Inermi vehicle nips m gone am Boron beyond adogo d pa ickr andrar hme.? b) Emeed ends rary ally or euauldvxy, a kvei ofm— standard eamimaed by the worry cmeatioo mmmeem of army for diom,ated raada or higtwan? I) Safety harmd16om deign framer (a .I rhi I. or demo. inamemions) or mompaaible vacs (e.g. faint r,opmem)+ I) Inadei emergency. or seem to ei urn. e) Imuf karrat parking m1me, on -site or onaiM f) Hinds or tuners far p demon, bkyclirap g) Gorman with adopted policies am ing.1111 ivc tnnrpomma e tan bar .troyak ri III Rail wuamme or ak nafic mMi i) C ,wok traffic I.. Iodine Oder, tat income in traMe Larch or a aharr in Iomm ma multe in mbammi safety naka? 8. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: to a) detmormon beyond projemoo of SCAQ]i au Quality III Eapou a regrow moulnun groups b polimi in even Of aaceptabk kvelr1 a) ate, av ra,m r, mortar[, or mnpaaame or I. any change in clamor, d) Co.ro'emimi don aaeaing a Imes ord number of eari 9. NOISE. Would the project: I) laream scan.. no. kwbi III Expose peopk or mim kve6 eazoor, admnd Comty suotlmds± e) If beard wnhm m,upon land. Plsn m, whet[ mesh pW hn m been adopted, arabin two mile of a Ni is ram or PUblrc am mate". o(io m ample raiding m working in We agar area to...lire noise IevelO 10. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project impact: a) EMmgea4 sheared or tare spears or tdtr M1abitata (mc)udiy to re, banned to wan, fish, u... animele and bird,)+ b) I.ocallr deai"i aped -m.g tnita8e Pea)? a) Lordly dmMad neural wmmumoes (e. g. m4 fore, cwad hareamt, nC)? d) W<Jmd habtm le e- flai roanan ad venal awn? el Wildlife draaml o, ra mom cadtivr? Q Adgd or prepared conaervaEOn plan ad a in(ea Numal C.mmmiry Caron n Plan or Rnourae Mvugemen, near It. AESTHETICS. Would the protect: al Afiat a memo recta m were open m the psi bl ARM a do gmaed mina hghway! y and a m wti de8rdeate eairting vuwl ahuactaaOmaliry ofthe rim and maoundingl+ d) Crean light o, store beyond the physical hm.r of dre prom sit!! Potential Less than Less than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Effect Mitigation Impact Yalta 1 ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ Cl ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ISSUES & SUPPORTING DATA SOURCES: 12. CULTURAUSCIENTIPIC RESOURCES, Would the project: a) mmubmcM1wocrpalemmsmu.. b) Men trammed rtswn<'ea? c) mawthelamaalm wdroaphysied chm,e whichwwmaR t nnyue MWc eulwN wlu.? 13. RECREATION. Would project: e) mmeau the urt of Waling migtbmhmotl and rtpmul Para mMa rzcr.doW a m<t than aubsmail pM1Yaed hnmm�im of the fmiliry would d occur or be accelewed? b) of rondm a rtacrom families iwhich m might ihave e a un anbnow physical °cerium on the mvnONllml? c) Cwfiim with likened .. ?'lout or policies? 14. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Resuln in th<lau o(avillabiliry kf amown mueril rmoume tha would M Mvilu nor the rtVU and she rmiarea ofthe awe? b) R.Wt ire she nom ofavillililiry of a lacalty+mpkrtann mineN rtsource rmdwry sine d<linemed m a IaW 8mml plan, spmifi<Plm m Mm Imo um plan? 15. HAZARDS. Would the project: a) Crtane a haaard no the public mthe mvimnmretthmugh the muane eannpmn,um,mdispoW o(M1Saasdous mmmila? Ill Create a hi aaN in the public or die mvircmmmt outcome rtwmnably fineaeablm upset and aciaml.m .. inwlvimg the mlemeof Mmdous mmmiln me die mvimmnmt? <) EaWSme afpaple m Wsung murtes of M1Wth havNS? d) For. Mjms Imcaed within an amount t Imd um plan m, whom m<h elm her ion here adored, within two mil. of a public iirykn. pudic um •ilpon world the poles rmuh in it mfery M1amd fir people wordwg or worm., in the poles mm? I) For. pmlen within the viam, f Pmme ainmp, would the penal msuln In a m1m, h uni d for purple moding or worgng in the pmlecn 1) hnearimrlememm�koof or onogroly insemmoewipan? m.mpn<r rmpmae plan m emeem..mkaaon plain? g) apom people mswcmrts nod menuti um nak u Iku, injury or dear m..lving witmaM firm, including where wildlanas art reliant m m celood veu or when resume. m immmiam wink wildloods? 16. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would project result in need(s) for new /altered government facilities/services in: it For pouatimn? b) PWice temmim? c) Schools? d) himmreance of public falidmes, including madn' e) oo r ew mint aenn<ea. 17. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS. wood eml., reulrin needs room .wMmnaaltlandkm m. a) PowmmmouW gas ?a b) Ckmmuicvions ryaema? c) tall m seauil wan memncon or dimibudw fmiham? dl Sewn or moral boom, e) Soho wane dimmu? Potential Less than Less than No Significant Significant W/ Significant Impact Effect Mitigation Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ Cl ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ Potential Less than Less than _ ISSUES & SUPPORTING DATA SOURCES: Significant Significant w/ Significant Effect Mitigation Impact No Impact MANDATORY FINDINGS a) Does the pnjm have the pwmtid to depwhe me quality of be mtirvwm4 ❑ ® ❑ wbstandelly reduce the When of a fiW a wildlife pomlatim m drop below ❑ calf sunaim., lemh, avmm on elwinue a pher at mimal <mmuuity. who, Inc owrfiM or redder the mgt of a or eo legin d plm —Is or d minus -,mm mamplm of the majm pmiods a Colifomu historypr "lusory? I) Does the project have Ne potential to be- the shun -tmm enrionmmtal ❑ ❑ ® ❑ guars, de oodvamagsofdw long-tern mvisommGl goals? cl banned butcicumulauvelpy woslidmble? ('cumulaowly c h amble' m�eatuy Cl ❑ ® ❑ We me memoseed sffms of m Individual p cm M onvd<reble whm ewedm cmmccu- with Met W sof perm priects. N< W.I. of Mer • curmt palectt and Ne efimu of Pmbeble Pomrt prolems.) d) Does project have enviromnmul toms which will cause sul meal odwe s, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ <Recu on human beings. either diretly or indi ecdy DETERMINATION: Baud upon the evidena in light of Me whole record documented in Me aaeched environmental checklist csplenathm, cited incorporations and atuchtants, l find Net are proposed pmject: COULD NOT have It significant effect on Me environment, end a negative declaration (ND) will be prepared pursuant to CEQA ❑ Guidelines Article 6,15070 through 15075. COULD have a significant efea be the emim unced, aura will not be a significant efect in this eau beeause Me budget - nteavures havc ban added m the project. A negative declaration (ND) will be prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Article 6, 15070 through 15075. MAY havc a si iii eReen on the envronment which ha not been snalyecd previously. Therefore, an environment impact ❑ mood (EHU is quXd — r � Planner: Trish Envnmrr mul Telephone: (71 NOTE All Person ultmojedabove. may be reviewed by ap,mosessen, only, m the County oJOmnge Planning A Sanm Arm, Cal j nia unless olberwise cJkd An appoinsmeu cnn be made by ATTACHMENT 3 SUNSET HARBOUR SITE MASTER PLAN FOR IPOI -017 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Principal revisions to the proposed General Development Plan - Altemative 1 (Site Master Plan Alternative 1, dated May 8, 2000) are described below. Dry Boat Storage Area (Dry Stand) The proposed revisioris include an expanded dry boat storage area. The expanded dry boat storage area will accommodate a total of 635 boats with an average length of 35 feet. This is an increase of 394 boats compared to the 241 spaces designated in the existing approved GDP. The proposed site will encompass 10.71 acres at the northeast comer of the project site, compared to the 7.3 acres identified in the adopted GDP for this purpose. The boat storage area will be developed in the location of the currently vacant, dredge spoil area. Excess dredge spoils will be removed and the site will be graded relatively flat with slopes to accommodate drainage and control runoff. The boat storage area is planned to be finished with aggregate gravel to reduced site runoff and provide for ease of maintenance. A buffer area will separate the boat storage site from the federal Wildlife Refuge and the Naval Weapons Station. The eastern edge of the facility will abut the Bolsa Chica Flood Control Channel located near the Edinger Avenue Bridge. The western boundary is located adjacent to the proposed public parking area and the expanded boat launch ramp parking area. The landscape plan for the boat storage area consists of moderately dense screening along the main project access road with a combination of trees for shade and long distance screening and four to five foot native vines and shrubs for low level screening. The boat storage area will be separated from the federal Wildlife Refuge and Naval Weapons Station by a landscaped buffer zone. The boat storage area will include fencing with only two access points proposed on the western boundary. The site will be secured with key card mechanical controlled access with sliding or swinging gates. A remote sensing security system can be connected to the harbor master office for gate malfunction or intruder control. A one -acre parcel of the existing boat repair yard facilities is being converted to County uses; therefore, the boat repair yard area will be reduced by this amount. The boat repair yard uses include the long -term storage of boats awaiting repair services. Exnanded Boat Launching Ramp Parkin The boat ramp parking will be increased from 190 spaces to 291 spaces, representing an additional 101 spaces. The vehicle /trailer spaces will be approximately 40 to 45 feet long. The layout will be refined in the final design process to accommodate the maximum number of pull through spaces as practical. The parking area will be asphalt paved and graded to control runoff. In addition, the area will be lighted for security and landscaped to provide visual screening. Hand Launch Facility The proposed project includes a facility for the launching and retrieval of small craft, or the hand launch facility. The purpose of this facility is to provide access for boaters with small vessels that are typically transported on car tops in lieu of trailers. This includes canoes, kayaks, small rowboats, and other human powered vessels or small sailboats. The facility is basically a sloped area to the water and will be a combination of grass and sand. There will be a small courtesy dock with low freeboard to accommodate the users. The users will carry the vessels from the parking lot to the slope area to launch the vessel. The hand launch area is proposed at the westerly edge of the project site and just north of the existing boat launch. The area will be graded to create the ramps and accommodate the small boarding float. The slope will transition from the water edge to a level area adjacent to the public parking lot. . The area will be landscaped with native plants and turf areas well suited to the public uses and to blend into the wetland area. Security lighting will be used on a limited basis in this sensitive area adjacent to the wetland. Fencing will be provided along the wetland boundary. Public Parking Area The revised Site Master Plan includes approximately 75 additional parking spaces for public parking. The parking spaces are proposed to be located adjacent to the public park and the hand launch facility. The parking area will be lighted and landscaped to blend in with the adjacent uses. The parking area will be asphalt paved and graded to control runoff: Restaurant A restaurant building is proposed in the area of the southwest tip of the project area; the structure is proposed to be one -story in height and encompass approximately 3,500 square feet. It is anticipated that the proposed restaurant will be primarily local serving but may attract a small percentage of patrons from outside the immediate project area. The restaurant will be designed to provide important view opportunities. Project design and operation will conform with all applicable codes and regulations. PROJECT LOCATION: The subject property encompasses approximately 50 acres within the Sunset Harbour. The Sunset Marina is located at the western limits of Orange County, west of the terminus of Edinger Avenue in the City of Seal Beach. The subject property is located entirely within the coastal zone boundaries. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (SBNWS) lies to the north of the marina. This facility operates as an active military reservation and ammunition storage base, and also encompasses the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Sunset Harbour Marina separates Anaheim Bay, a major coastal wetlands and estuary system from the inland marina channels of Huntington Harbour. The Bolas Chica Flood Control Channel is located between the marina and the Huntington Harbour Community, which is located south and east of the marina, across navigable channels. Development in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project includes medium density residential, with single- family residential farther south and east. Areas across the Huntington Harbour main fairway along Pacific Coast Highway are developed as commercial uses, including office, retail and restaurants, as well as private marina and medium density residential uses. The subject property is located entirely within the coastal zone boundaries. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (SBNWS).lies to the north of the marina which encompasses the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. The Sunset Harbor area has a highly important role in the scheme of environmental features involved in the Anaheim Bay ecology. The marina park area encompasses an important and highly viable salt marsh community which provides year-round forage and nesting sites for the Belding's savannah sparrow and the light footed clapper rail, two endangered avian species. A third endangered avian species, Cali8fomia least tem, nests in the adjacent wildlife refuge and has used the marina park site as nesting habitat in the past. The quality of the water surrounding the marina park is highly variable, depending on tidal influence and flood control runoff conditions. Huntington Harbour has been designated as a State No- Discharge Zone. The existing soil throughout the developed and undeveloped marina park areas is of very poor quality and consists of dredge materials from the adjacent harbor. CEQABACKGROUND Under Section 15002(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a project is defined as an activity subject to CEQA. Further, the term "project" refers to an activity, which is being proposed and has a potential for resulting in a physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately. Proposed site plan IP01 -017 is regarded as a public project subject to the approval by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. In accordance with Section 15063, an Initial Study was completed on the subject project by the County of Orange, Environmental & Project Planning Division (E &PPD) and it was determined that this document provides appropriate documentation for the subject project. The following is the analysis of the subject proposal and the compilation of pertinent mitigation measures. These mitigation measurestconditions have been updated to reflect the latest requirements of CEQA, in addition to County ordinances, policies and guidelines. 1. Land Use & Planning. Would the project: a. Conflict with General Plan designation or zoning? Less than Significant Impact. Sunset Harbour consists of approximately 30 acres of existing marina, launch ramp, dry boat storage, and support facilities. There are an additional approximately 21 undeveloped acres on the site. The entire site is part of a County- designated recreation/open space area with informally protected habitats for the Least tern and Light- footed clapper mil. The site is designated as a recreational open space and resource protection zone by the City of Seal Beach. The California Coastal Plan, adopted in 1976, designates Sunset Marina as open space and wetlands or estuary. The proposed project is entirely consistent with the land use designations and zoning (recreational open space, etc.) adopted for the site. Project implementation will result in the development of several components approved for Phase U of the Sunset Marina Park General Development Plan (GDP). The improvements proposed by the applicant are generally consistent with the improvements previously approved for the site; however, some modifications are now proposed as previously described in the project description, to accommodate the current and anticipated needs. As a result, no significant impacts will occur. b. Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies of agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Less than Significant Impact. Consistent with the County's resource management and development policy for aquatic harbor parks, the proposed project will facilitate ".. . enjoyment of man-made attractions and water area." The proposed project includes improvements such as the expanded boat storage facilities, hand launch facilities, and other amenities that allow public use of Sunset Harbour amenities. Further, adequate development setbacks for the proposed improvements have been incorporated into the project design to protect existing sensitive resources (e.g., wetlands, etc.). In particular, project implementation is consistent with the two main goals articulated in the Recreation Element of the Grange County General Plan: • To provide a regional recreation network to meet the regional recreation need of existing and future residents of the entire County • To develop regional recreation facility park sites with recreation facilities designed to respond to the diverse regional recreation interest of the citizens of the County. In addition to being consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the County's Recreation Element, the proposed project is also consistent with applicable sections of the California Coastal Act for recreation uses. Specifically, the implementation of the proposed project is consistent with that legislation affecting coastal property in the following ways: • Development of the site as proposed does not preclude access to the coast by the general public (Sections 30211 and 30212). • Public facilities, including parking areas and related facilities are provided to facilitate public access are included in the proposed Phase II improvements (Section 30212.5). • The proposed improvements provide for increased public recreational opportunities (Section 30213). •. The improvements include dry storage areas, a hand launch facility, and related facilities that facilitate recreational boating use of coastal waters (Section 30224). • The existing environmentally sensitive habitat areas adjacent to the existing Sunset Harbour will be protected (Section 30240). • The scenic and visual quality of the affected coastal area will not be materially altered (Section 30251). • Adequate parking is provided to facilitate and enhance public access to the coast (Section 30252). C. Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (e.g., low income, minority)? No Impact. The Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (SBNWS) is located north of Sunset Harbour. This facility is an active military reservation and ammunition storage base encompassing the nearly 1,100 acres of the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge, which is directly adjacent to the site. An additional 3,000 acres of the SBNWS are leased for agricultural use and vegetation control. The Wildlife Refuge separates this area from Sunset Harbour. The Huntington Harbour residential community lies south and east of the park site, across navigable channels. The areas immediately adjacent to the site are zoned for medium density residential development with single - family residential areas located farther into the community. Development within the Huntington Harbour community is essentially completed. Commercial and medium density residential uses have been developed along Pacific Coast Highway, across the main channel from the area in question. The commercial areas include financial, office, retail, and restaurant uses; a small private marina is also located directly across from the Sunset Harbour. The residential land uses in the vicinity of the subject property are mostly waterfront oriented with boat slip facilities. As such, they contribute boat traffic to the channel waters around the subject property. The site on which the Site Master Plan improvements are proposed will not result in the physical division of the existing residential and/or commercial development in the vicinity of the proposed project. The proposed improvements will occur within the limits of Sunset Harbour and will not extend into any of the existing residential or commercial development. In particular, no low - income (residential) community is located on the subject property or in the immediate vicinity and, therefore, will not be adversely affected byproject - implementation. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. d Conflict with adjacent, existing or planned land uses? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the site is surrounded by open space /recreational, residential, and commercial development. With the exception of the restaurant, the uses identified for the Site Master Plan development are low intensity and will not result in conflicts with the existing land uses. Buffer areas have been incorporated into the project design to ensure that such conflicts do not occur. In particular, the buffer areas will physically separate the parking areas and related improvements from the adjacent sensitive habitats and biological resources to the north and west within the National Wildlife Refuge. The 3,500 square foot restaurant is proposed at the extreme western comer of the site and will be physically separated from the residential development in the Huntington Harbour community by the navigable channel and the existing boat slips surrounding the marina area. Further, the project, including the restaurant, will be designed to be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding land uses and will not, therefore, conflict with either existing or planned land uses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. No significant impacts to agricultural soils or resources are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 2. Agriculture. Would the project: a. Convert Farmlands listed as "Prime," "Unique,^ or of "Statewide Importance,^ as shown on the State Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, to non- agricultural use? No Impact. The project site is developed and is located in an urbanized area of the County within the coastal zone of the City of Seal Beach. The subject property does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance- as designated by the California Department of Conservation which has designated the site and adjacent areas as "Urban and Built -up Land." This designation comprises land occupied by structures with a building density of at least one dwelling unit for each 1.5 acres. Therefore, project implementation will not result in the conversion of any prime soils or agricultural resources, to urban uses. No significant impacts will occur. b. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farodand to non - agricultural use? No Impact. The proposed project will not result, either directly or indirectly, in the conversion of existing or potential farmland resources to non - agricultural uses. As indicated previously, the site and environs are developed as a marina facility. Development of the site as proposed will not result in potentially significant impacts to existing agricultural resources. No significant impacts to agricultural soils or resources are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 3. Population and Housing. Would the project: a. Cumulatively exceed adopted regional or local population projections? No Impact. The proposed project does not include residential development. The proposed improvement of the boat launch parking areas and related improvements to the marina facilities will be expanded to accommodate greater use of the marina and coastal waters. No residential development is proposed, or will result from project implementation that would affect adopted regional or local population projections, either directly or indirectly. No significant impacts will occur if the project is implemented. b. Induce substantial growth in an area directly or indirectly through the project in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure? No Impact. As previously indicated, the subject property is currently developed; all of the necessary infrastructure, including roads, sewers, water facilities, and storm drains exist in the area. As a result, project implementation will not necessitate the extension of major infrastructure. Further, the proposed dry boat storage, parking and restaurant improvements will enhance the existing marina facilities. Although the facilities will be improved to accommodate more boating and parking, it is generally consistent with the goals and objectives of the Orange County General Plan and Sunset Marina Park GDP and will not induce substantial growth. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur. C. Displace existing housing affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. The project site does not currently support existing residential development; therefore, no people reside on the property. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in the displacement of either existing housing or people. No impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. No significant impacts to population and housing are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 4. Geophysical. Would project result in or expose people to impacts involving: a. Local fault rupture? Less than Significant Impact. The nearest major active fault along which a rupture or a major seismic event could occur is the Newport- Inglewood Fault zone. Traces of this active fault underlie the extreme eastern comer of the site. Potential impacts resulting from project implementation would be similar to those that would occur to existing facilities within the limits of the subject property. Since improvements are anticipated to be minimal, comprising generally of surface parking to accommodate dry boat storage area (i.e., dry stand), expanded boat launching ramp parking, hand launch facility, and public parking area. The most significant development proposed on the site is the 3,500 square foot restaurant. However, this latter structure is located at the extreme southwestern comer of the property. Therefore, it is not anticipated that potential fault rupture impacts would be significant. Nonetheless, the proposed structure will be designed to meet the seismic design parameters established by the Uniform Building Code and the geotechnical study that will be prepared for the project. b. Seismicity: groundshaking or liquefaction? Less than Significant with Mitigation. The site is located in a seismically active region. As indicated above, one active fault exists on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. The Newport- Inglewood Fault is an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault. As a result, the site and existing improvements we currently exposed to seismic shaking resulting from earthquakes occurring on the Newport- Inglewood Fault or one or more of the other regional faults which affect the area. Although approval of the proposed project has the potential to expose people and structures to ground shaking during a seismic event, this exposure is no greater than the exposure present in other areas throughout the southern California region. In addition, development of the proposed project will be subject to the County's standard conditions and the Uniform Building Code that address structure integrity. The potential impacts resulting from ground shaking associated with seismic activity are minimized and are less than significant as a result of the structural design mandated by these conditions. In addition to groundshaking, liquefaction or the instability of soils during the shaking of an earthquake is considered to be the main cause of damage to structures during a major seismic event. EIR No. 478 acknowledged the potential for moderate to high potential for liquefaction and the design of special foundations. As a result, appropriate mitigation measures were identified to ensure that such potential was minimized on -site. Although the majority of the project consists of parking and dry boat storage, a 3,500 square foot restaurant is also proposed new the southwestern comer of the site that could be subjected to the effects of liquefaction. Without proper design, based on the existing soils conditions and parameters established by the Uniform Building Code, this condition could be potentially significant. However, through proper design as stipulated in the UBC and subject geotechnical analyses, such impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure #1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the restaurant or any habitable structure, the applicant shall submit plans for review and approval that reflect adherence to fault setback zones that have been established for the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone, subject to the approval of the Manager, Subdivision and Grading. Mitigation Measure #2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant of the proposed restaurant and any other habitable structures proposed on the site shall undertake a detailed, site - specific analysis for development that will support habitable structures proposed in any area identified to be subject to liquefaction, subject to the approval of the Manager, Subdivision and Grading. C. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The subject property is currently served by a system of sanitary sewers and transmission facilities. Implementation of the proposed project will not require the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. The proposed restaurant will be connection to the existing sanitary sewer system. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Landslides or mudslides? No Impact. The site is not located in an area that is characterized by steep and/or unstable slopes or other topographic conditions that are conducive to landslides and/or mudslides. The site has previously been graded and partially developed, although a portion of the site supports large stockpiles of dredge materials. Development of the site as proposed will eliminate the topographic high points created by the on -site fills. The site will be regraded to blend with the grades of the existing parking and circulation. By maintaining the same site grades, the proposed project does not include the construction of any slopes which could fail and impact future development. Therefore, it is not anticipated that neither the existing nor proposed dry boat storage and parking facilities will be adversely affected by either landslides or mudslides. No significant impacts are anticipated. e. Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fdl? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated previously, the site contains a significant amount of dredged materials in a large stockpile area. The site grading will be designed to reuse the excess dredge material mounded on the site. It is estimated that approximately 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of material exist in the mounds that must be used on -site or removed. Site grading to create the final elevations could expose the earth materials to erosion. However, as indicated in Section S (Hydrology & Drainage), the applicant will be required to implement appropriate Best Management Practices and other programs to ensure that the potential for erosion is minimized. As a result, potential impacts will be less than significant. f. - Subsidence of the land? Less than Significant Impact. The site is currently developed with some marina facilities, including boat storage and repair facilities, a boat launch ramp and parking facilities. As such, the site is suitable for development as proposed and can support the proposed parking and related facilities and improvements. A geotechnical site investigation is currently being prepared for the proposed project that addresses existing soils conditions, including the potential for subsidence. Based on the information contained in that preliminary geotechnical report, the potential for subsidence is not significant. Potential impacts are considered less than significant. g. Expansive soils? Less than Significant Impact. The site is currently developed with some marina facilities, including dry boat storage, a boat launch ramp and parking facilities. As such, the site is suitable for the development as proposed and can support the proposed parking and related facilities and improvements. Prior geotechnical studies concluded that some subsidence may occur, however, a mitigation measure included a requirement during grading to address regional subsidence in the final grading plans. A geotechnical investigation is currently being prepared for the proposed project that addresses existing soils conditions, including the potential for expansive soils. Based on the information contained in that preliminary geotechnical report, the potential for expansive soils is not significant. Potential impacts are considered less than significant. h. Unique geologic or physical features? Less than Significant Impact. Sunset Marina Regional Park is located at the coastal edge of the Los Angeles Basin within the Transverse Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The site is located in a topographically low area known as Sunset Gap, bounded on the northwest by Landing Hill and on the southeast by Bolsa Chica Mesa. A portion of the property consists of drained dredge "spoil holding areas." The entire site is underlain by thick sections of unconsolidated intertidal and lagoonal sediments of Quaternary geologic age. Although there are no unique geologic features comprising the site, dredge fills have been placed on the portions of the site, resulting in the creation of manmade topographic "features" formed by the stockpiled materials. As previously indicated, the site as currently developed supports extensive recreational boating coastal facilities, including a marina, boat launch, harbor patrol facilities, dry boat storage and repair, parking and related facilities. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to unique geologic features or other physical features. Standard Condition #3 10 Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the applicant shall submit a geotechnical report to the Manager, Subdivision and Grading, for approval. The report shall include the information and be in a form as required by the Orange County Grading Manual. Standard Condition #4 Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. The soils investigation shall include detailed slope stability analysis, subject to the approval of the Manager, Subdivision and Grading. Standard Condition #5 To ensure adequate seismic design, prior to issuance of a building permit, all structures shall be designed in accordance with lateral force coefficients that consider near source factors as contained in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC), subject to the approval of the Manager, Subdivision and Grading. Standard Condition #6 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall show that all foundation systems shall be designed in accordance with sections 1815 or 1816 of the 1997 UBC to minimize the effects of expansive soils, subject to the approval of the Manager, Subdivision and Grading. 5. Hydrology & Drainage. Would the project: a. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in: Substantial erosion or siltation on- or off4iteP Less than Significant Impact. Grading proposed on the subject property will not be significant. The existing stockpiled materials will be utilized in the grading of the site to create the parking and related facilities. Although it is possible that some erosion and/or siltation may occur, the County requires the implementation of standard conditions that will eliminate or minimize the amount of siltation and erosion associated with site grading. Several programs are currently in place to address erosion and siltation, including harbor dredging which takes place biannually or more often, if necessary. As a result, erosion and/or siltation will be less than significant. 11 ii. A substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in manner which would result in flooding on- or off1site. Less than Significant Impact. As described in Section 5.b, below, implementation of the proposed project will not result in a substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff that would cause flooding. A significant portion of the site will remain pervious, allowing infiltration of the storm water and minimizing the amount of surface runoff. Only driveway lanes within the dry boat storage area will be paved, resulting in significantly more impervious areas and minimizing the amount of post-development surface runoff from that development area. The boat launch ramp parking area will be covered with asphalt/concrete; however, post - development runoff will be limited to less than approximately 7 cubic feet per second (cfs) and will not contribute the potential flooding on- or off -site. Finally, less than 1 cfs of runoff will be generated by the parking lot access roadway. All of the surface flows generated on -site will be discharged along the perimeter of the site. No significant flooding potential will occur as a result of project implementation. b. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources ofpolfuted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. A conceptual grading plan has been prepared for the proposed project improvements. This plan was developed to identify potential grading requirements and to identify drainage patterns for the site. The improvement areas include the expansion of the boat launch ramp parking area, the dry stand boat storage area and the Sunset Way road extension. The Site Master Plan improvements have been divided into three new watershed areas or drainage areas and for purposes of the hydrology analysis. All three areas are on the north side of existing site features and improvement of this currently undeveloped area will not impact existing on -site drainage patterns. The northwest watershed is defined as the expansion of the current boat launch ramp parking facility. The new Sunset Way road watershed is defined as the access road to the public and hand launch area parking. The northeast watershed is defined as the dry stand boat storage. These watershed areas and improvements are described below. Section A (Boat Launch Ramp Park Area) encompasses approximately 2.7 acres and will have an asphalt/concrete surface. A portion of this area will be graded to match the drainage pattern of the current ramp parking area where existing drainage patterns will be maintained. A grade break will be constructed such that the remainder of the men will drain towards the project boundary, north of the site, as sheet flow. The perimeter of this site will be lined with curb and gutter. There will be at least two curb outlets with mechanical filters (i.e., "Fossil Filters ") installed along the perimeter of the parking area to capture potential pollutants resulting from intermittent runoff. These outlets will direct the flow to a vegetated buffer zone that will serve as a secondary filter for runoff from 12 this area. Maximum flow for this is estimated to be less than approximately seven (7) cubic feet per second (cfs) and will be confirmed during the final design process. Section B (Parking Lot Access Roadway) encompasses approximately 1.5 acre. The road will be graded to provide sheet flow towards the buffer zone along the east edge of the roadway. Runoff from the asphalt road will flow into the landscaped buffer zone in this area The vegetated area will serve w a filter for the drainage as it flows towards the project boundary. Maximum flow is estimated at approximately 0.4 cfs and will be confirmed during the final design process. Section C (Dry Boat Storage Area) is the largest component of the proposed project, encompassing approximately 10.7 acres. The majority of this area will be finished with aggregate base. Only the drive aisles between parking rows will be covered with asphaltic concrete. The entire area will be graded to control drainage on -site. It is estimated that storm water will percolate through the base and will not contribute a significant amount of surface water to the total Wino££. Place within a 700 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is located in Flood Zone A. However, with the exception of the proposed restaurant, no significant structures are proposed that would either impede or redirect storm flows. The majority of the facilities proposed include parking areas, dry boat storage areas, and the hand launch facility, none of which will be adversely affected by potential flooding. As a result, potential impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Pursuant to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and County of (range requirements, the future restaurant must be constructed outside the limits of the 100 -year flood zone. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. d. Fxpose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less than Significant Impact. Although the subject property is located within the limits of the Prado Dam inundation area, the implementation of the Santa Ana River Main Stem Federal Project and other Santa Ana River improvements along with regional and local flood control facilities should provide Orange County with appropriate flood protection safeguards. Construction of the project began in 1992 and is anticipated to be completed by 2005. Seiches and tsunamis are secondary effects of seismic activity. Although the site is located in an area that could be subject to seiches (i.e., oscillation of sloshing of water caused by seismic activity or landsliding) or tsunamis (i.e., seismic sea wave generated by an undersea earthquake, landslide, etc.), the Orange County coastline is shielded to the west by the Channel Islands and to the north by Point Conception. As a result, the potential damage caused by such secondary effects is significantly reduced. Therefore, potential impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. 13 Standard Condition #7 The grading plan shall include sufficient provisions for erosion control during the rainy season, considered to be October 15 to April 15 of each year. This shall prevent sedimentation of the existing storm drains and public streets. Standard Condition #8 Prior to the issuance of certificates of use and occupancy for any building, the applicant shall complete Section "E" of the Elevation Certificate, identifying the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) and certifying the as built lowest floor, including basements, as constructed, is at least one (1) foot above the BFE, in a manner meeting the approval of the Manager, Building Inspection Services. (NOTE: To eliminate FEMA requirements for flood insurance, the lowest elevation of any part of the structure, not only the lowest floor, must be above the BFE.) 6. Water Quality. Would the project: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact. Although implementation of the improvements may result in the generation of some contaminants, they will be limited largely to potential sedimentation during construction activities and from limited storm runoff that will enter the surface waters. However, the potential impacts to water quality will be minimized m a result of the placement of only a limited amount of pervious surfaces on the site. Because only the driveway aisles in the dry boat storage area will be impervious, percolation will be allowed to occur, resulting in a reduction in the amount of surface runoff into the more sensitive wetlands areas. Water quality impacts will be further reduced through the implementation of on -site mechanical and biological filters. As indicated above, post development surface water flows will be increased by only a very minor amount. Nonetheless, mechanical filters (i.e., "Fossil Filters ") will be installed along the perimeter of the parking area to capture potential pollutants resulting from intermittent runoff. These outlets will direct the flow to a vegetated buffer zone that will serve as a secondary filter for runoff from this area Runoff from the proposed asphalt road will flow into the landscaped buffer zone in this area. The vegetated area will serve as a filter for the drainage as it flows towards the project boundary. It is estimated that storm water generated in the dry boat storage area will percolate through the base and will not contribute a significant amount of surface water to the total runoff and, therefore, affect water quality. In addition to these design features, Best Management Practices (BMPs) and related measures will be incorporated into the project design during both construction and operation to ensure that water quality impacts are minimized. b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of a local groundwater table level? 14 Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will not result in the depletion of any groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge, as the site is not located within a groundwater recharge area. With the exception of the proposed restaurant, none of the uses will create a demand for domestic water resources, particularly at a level that would adversely affect existing groundwater supplies. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from project implementation. C. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact. The landscaping for the proposed project will be designed to serve a variety of purposes, in addition to the typical visual enhancements. Specifically, landscape zones will be created to serve as secondary filters for storm water control and zones to create a buffer between the wetland area and the proposed project. As indicated previously, mechanical filters will also be installed along the perimeter of the parking area to capture potential pollutants resulting from intermittent runoff. The outlets will direct the flow to the vegetated buffer zone that will filter the runoff before it is discharged off -site. These buffer zones, which act as additional filters to the mechanical filters, will ensure that project- related surface runoff will not significantly degrade water quality in the area. Standard Condition #9 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the County for approval. The WQMP shall specifically identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on -site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The WQMP shall identify at a minimum the routine structural and non - structural measures specified in the Countywide NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) Appendix which details implementation of the BMPs whenever they are applicable to a project, the assignment of long -term maintenance responsibilities, and shall reference the locations of structural BMPs. Standard Condition #10 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the County for approval. The SWPPP will establish BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion. The County of Orange will ensure that the requirements of the SWPPP are defined on permit plan cover sheets as either general or special notes. Standard Condition #11 A Notice of Intent (NOI) with the appropriate fees for coverage of the project under the General Construction Activity Storm Water Runoff Permit will be submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to initiation of construction activity at the site. As required by the NPDES permit, a SWPPP will be prepared and will establish 15 BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion. The County of Orange will ensure that the requirements of the SWPPP are defined on permit plan cover sheets as-either general or special notes. 7. Transportation/Circulation. Would the project result in: a Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion beyond adopted policies and/or forecasts? Less than Significant Impact. Although morning and afternoon peak hour volumes will increase, implementation of the proposed project will result in an overall reduction in daily trips when compared to the land uses evaluated in EIR 478. As presented in Table 7 -1, project implementation will result in the generation of 217 trips per day, compared to 401 daily trips from land uses evaluated in EIR 478. Although morning and afternoon peak hour trips may increase, the increases are not anticipated to adversely affect roadways and/or intersections in the vicinity of the project, as most of the trips will be weekend oriented. Nonetheless, mitigation measures were prescribed as part of EIR 478, including the construction of the main roadway serving the project to properly connect with Edinger Avenue and the County project to widen Edinger Avenue bridge to accommodate four travel lanes, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian sidewalks. Table 7 -1 Trip Generation Summary - Sunset Harbour Expanded Dry Stand Boat Storage Land Use Trip Generation Rates Unit of Measure Daily I AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Public Park Acre 6.00 0.20 1.40 Marina Slips 4.00 0.09 0.17 Dry Boat Storage Spaces 0.10 0.04 0.04 Boat Launch Ramp Pk Stalls 0.33 0.15 0.25 Hand Launch Ramp Pk Stalls 1.00 0.15 0.25 Restaurant TSF 10.82 5.57 9.02 16 EIR 478 Generation Public Pak 11.70 70.20 2.34 16.36 Marina 72.00 288.00 6.48 12.24 Dry Boat Storage 90.00 13.20 5.28 5.28 Boat Launch Ramp 90.00 29.70 13.50 22.50 Hand Launch Ramp Restaurant Totals 401 28 56 Proposed Master Plan Trip Generation Public Park 1.20 7.20 0.24 1.68 Marina 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Dry Boat Storage 635 63.50 25.40 25.40 Boat Launch Ramp 101 33.33 15.15 25.25 Hand Launch Ramp 75 75.00 11.25 18.75 Restaurant 3.50 37.67 19.50 31.57 Totals 217 1 72 103 Differences in Trips -184 +44 +47 b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact. Edinger Avenue, within one mile of the Sunset Harbour entrance, is currently designed for one lane in each direction of travel and a maximum capacity of 10,000 vehicles per day. Maximum measured periods exceed 7,000 vehicles per day with traffic throughout the year averaging 3,000 vehicles per day. With the buildout of residential and commercial areas serviced by this section of Edinger Avenue virtually complete, the remaining potential generator of traffic appears to be the existing Sunset Harbour Marina itself when the Site Master Plan improvements are completed. It is estimated that this additional traffic generation by the improvements proposed on the site will remain under current Edinger Avenue capacities. C. Safety hazards from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (eg., farm equipment)? 17 Less than Significant Impact. The project has been designed to realign a portion of the access roadway into the subject property from the terminus of Edinger Avenue to facilitate on -site circulation and parking as well as the boat launch and proposed land launch facility. The parking facilities have been designed to County standards. As a result, no significant safety hazards or other adverse conditions will result from project implementation. d. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will not significantly impact emergency access. Edinger Avenue provides direct vehicular access to the site. In addition, emergency access is also provided within the harbor area by way of boats. In particular, the Harbor Patrol provides water - related emergency response to activities occurring in the marina area. Implementation of the proposed improvements will not result in significant impacts to emergency vehicles. insufficient parking capacity on -site or off site? No Impact. A parking study was conducted for the proposed project that evaluated the parking demand based on the proposed land uses and compared it to the supply. Table 7- 2 reflects parking demand based on parking rates established by the County of Orange; in addition, the existing and new parking supplies are also presented in Table 7 -2. As can be seen, the proposed project will create a demand for 281= parking spaces, including 275 regular parking spaces and six handicap parking spaces. When completed, the proposed project will include 1,282 parking spaces, including 291 parking spaces dedicated to the launch ramp, 75 public automobile puking spaces, 635 spaces dedicated to dry boat storage, and 281 parking spaces for boat slips; six handicap spaces will be provided consistent with the requirements. The parking plan developed for the proposed project will adequately accommodate the proposed project. No significant parking impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. 18 Table 7 -2 Parking Study Expanded Dry Stand Boat Storage Units Quantity ParkingRate ParkingSpaces Handicap Parkin Demand Spaces Marina Slip 240 0.6/Slip 144 3 Restaurant SF 3,500 izrSF 35 1 Public S aces EA N/A 102 2 Totals 281 6 Pa king Supply Exist. Ramp Parking New Ramp Parkin EA EA N/A N/A 195 96 New Car Parkin EA. N/A 1 75 Existing Boat Storage New Boat Storage EA EA N/A N/A N/A 635 Existing Slip Parking New Slip Parkin EA EA N/A N/A 224 57 6 Totals 1,282 6 SOURCE: BLUEWater Desi 'Grou G &K Industries. f. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? No Impact. Project implementation will not result in the creation of any hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists. A local Class II (i.e., on -road, striped lanes) bikeway exists along Edinger Avenue from Gothard Street in Huntington Beach to Sunset Harbour. The proposed project can accommodate bicyclists who may also access the property via the site access road from the Edinger Avenue entrance. Although the site will accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists, the circulation system will be adequate to do so without exposing either to potential hazards. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. g. Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e 9, bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The project is consistent with the County's Transportation Element. Access to the site is also available via other forms of transportation, including public transit, bicycles, etc. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. 19 h. Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No Impact. The proposed improvements will not affect either rail or air traffic facilities or activities. However, the enhanced boat storage, dry boat facilities and improvements to the boat launch will facilitate boating activities occurring and anticipated to occur within the area. However, no significant adverse impacts to any of these modes of transportation will occur if the improvements are implemented. i. Change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. No Impact. Project implementation will not adversely affect or change existing air traffic patterns. The proposed improvements will not result in increases in air traffic levels or substantial air safety risks as the site is not located within a crash hazard or impact zone of any airport. The Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center is the nearest airport to the project; however, neither its location nor current or future activities and operations pose a threat to safety for the proposed project. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. No significant impacts to traffic and circulation are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 8. Air Quality. Would the project: a. Exceed any SCAQMD standard or contribute to air quality deterioration beyond projections of the SCAQMD? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will not result in significant air quality impacts. As indicated in Table 7 -1 (refer to Section 7), project implementation will result in a net reduction in daily vehicular trips as compared with the approved project buildout. This net reduction in vehicular trips will, therefore, result in a reduction in air emissions that would have occurred based on the existing Phase II development plan. Although grading the site will produce some dust and particulate matter as well as emissions from construction equipment, the potential emissions are not considered to be significant when incorporating the standard dust control measures mandated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Once construction is completed, the short-term air emissions will cease. Mobile -source emissions resulting from the proposed improvements, including the restaurant, will be less than significant, based on the Thresholds of Significance standards prescribed by the SCAQMD. b. Expose sensitive population groups to pollutants in excess of acceptable levels? Less than Significant Impact. The only sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site are the occupants of the single - family residential development located south of the site. The greatest amount of pollutants generated by the proposed project will occur during the 20 construction phase. In particular, grading operations to prepare the site for construction of the parking and dry boat storage facilities and the construction of the restaurant will result in the generation of short -term pollutant emissions; however, the emissions will comprise mostly dust and particulate materials that will be dispersed in the area of operations. However, such emissions will be controlled through the implementation of standard conditions and rules prescribed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated. Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within an urbanized area. The project site is located in the Sunset Harbour. The land uses in the vicinity of the project site include single- family residential development to the south, and related existing marina facilities immediately adjacent to the site. The Anaheim Bay National Wildlife Refuge is located in the vicinity of the site. Implementation of the proposed expanded marina facilities would not result in significant development on the site. In particular, the improvements will not significantly alter air movement, moisture, or temperature and will not result in adverse changes in the climate. No significant impacts are anticipated. d Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. Objectionable odors are not currently present within the project site or environs. Approval of the proposed project would not ultimately result in the creation of objectionable odors. Construction of dry boat storage, parking and a restaurant will involve activities and the use of equipment typical of development projects of a similar size and type. The emission of significant odors is not anticipated either during construction or during operation of the facilities. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Standard Condition #12 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, fugitive dust throughout the site shall be controlled by the use of a watering truck as necessary, and/or the use of an environmentally -safe chemical dust suppressant. Controls shall be applied to all onsite unpaved roads and ramps, stockpile areas, actively excavated or exposed sites, and all areas that may be temporarily inactive but include exposed (unvegetated) or disturbed surfaces. Standard Condition #13 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, that all grading and excavation should be curtailed during periods of high winds (e.g. over 25 miles per hour) if dust is being generated and cannot be controlled by watering alone. 21 Standard Condition 414 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, all materials transported offsite shall be sufficiently watered or covered to prevent excessive fugitive dust. Standard Condition #15 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that, mobile heavy equipment (e.g. scrapers, haul trucks) on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to an onsite speed that avoids dust impacts offsite. 9. Noise. Would the project: a. Increase existing noise levels? Less than Significant with Mitigation. Construction activities, although short-term in nature, will create noise during the construction of the proposed structure (i.e., restaurant) and related facilities. Although such future temporary noise levels will be similar in nature to those associated with typical grading and construction activities, the subject property is not located adjacent to existing residential development, considered "sensitive receptors." The nearest residential development is located south of the affected property. Temporary construction noise impacts vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The earthmoving sources are seen to be the noisiest with equipment noise ranging up to 90 dBA at 50 feet from the source. The loudest earthmoving noise sources may be detectable above the local background levels well beyond the immediate area of construction activity. It is possible that construction activities, might occur in the vicinity of sensitive species (e.g., California least terns, Belding's savannah sparrow, light- footed clapper mil), particularly during the breeding season. Therefore, it will be necessary to prepare a noise mitigation plan that addresses construction- related noise. Nonetheless, construction noise levels will be short-term in nature and will be strictly regulated by the County's noise ordinance, which limits construction activities. Therefore,. potential future impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of a construction- related noise mitigation plan. Mitigation Measure #16 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a construction noise mitigation plan that establishes specific parameters for construction activities occurring in proximity to sensitive species and, if necessary, restrictions on construction during the breeding season. b. Expose people to noise levels exceeding adopted County standards? 22 Less than Significant Impact. The project site and vicinity are located within an urbanized area. The site is not located adjacent to major roadways that accommodate high traffic volumes and generate high noise levels. It is anticipated that approval of the proposed project would not expose existing single - family residential development, a sensitive receptor, located well south of the site to increased noise levels associated with the vehicular traffic on the adjacent streets; project- related traffic will not increase to contribute significantly to ambient noise levels. Therefore, potential impacts are considered to be less than significant. C. If located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve Center is the nearest airport to the subject property; however, that facility is located more than two miles north of the site. The subject property is not located within the limits of an airport land use plan nor is it located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, project implementation will not subject people to excessive noise levels. As a result, no significant impacts will occur. Standard Condition #17 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate the construction contractor shall incorporate feasible muffling features into construction vehicles and equipment and into construction methods, and shall maintain all construction vehicles and equipment in efficient operating condition. The County inspector will be responsible for ensuring that contractors comply with this measure during construction. Standard Condition #18 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that, construction activities shall be limited to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. weekdays) with no construction on weekends and holidays. The County inspector will be responsible for ensuring that contractors comply with this measure during construction. 10. Biological Resources. Would the project impact: a. Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fah, insects, animals or birds)? Less than Significant with Mitigation. Three biological communities comprise the Sunset Harbour property: (1) terrestrial community; (2) salt marsh community; and (3) marine community. The majority of the subject property includes a variety of habitats: pampas grass/disturbed pampas grass; adventive grassland, marine mudflat (intertidal), terrestrial mudflat. A substantial portion of the site is disturbed and is characterized by a 23 significant amount of dredged soil material stockpiled on the central portion of the property. Project implementation will result in the recontouring of the subject property and the construction of the parking, dry boat storage and related improvements, including the 3,500 square foot restaurant. Such grading activities and subsequent improvements will result in the elimination of the on -site habitats and the vegetation that it supports. The majority of this habitat includes the terrestrial mudflat, pampas grass associationtheavily disturbed/open pampas grass association; along the perimeter of the site, particularly to the north and east, intertidal habitat exists. The elimination of biotic materials within the project area is limited primarily to disturbed, non - native open terrestrial mudflats and pampas grass. The more sensitive intertidal areas and mudflat communities in the northwestern portion of the property will be enhanced as a result of the project implementation. The remaining areas are not considered to be biologically significant and are largely unproductive. The project will not impact any of the known existing habitat of the California least tern, light - footed clapper rail, or Belding's savannah sparrow. In addition to the direct impacts to existing plant communities that will occur during grading and site development, indirect impacts are also anticipated to occur as a result of construction noise as well as from increased usage of the proposed improvements. In order to reduce excessive light, noise and motion, particularly along the northern and northwestern portions of the property, a buffer zone has been incorporated into the project design. These boundaries will also be fenced to ensure that direct access to the National Wildlife Refuge and more sensitive areas is precluded and wildlife harassment by visitors to the park and, specifically, the proposed improvements, is minimized b. Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? No Impact. No heritage trees exist on the site where improvements are proposed. Therefore, no significant impacts to designated species will occur. Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oakjorest, coastal habitat, etc.)? Less than Significant Impact. Although the site is located within a coastal environment, adjacent to the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge, the subject site does not support significant species. As indicated above, the majority of the habitat that will be eliminated is heavily disturbed by prior activities and, most importantly, stockpiling of harbor dredge materials. As a result, project implementation will not significant impact natural communities, with the exception of wetlands as described below. Wedand habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? Less than Significant with Mitigation. A preliminary wetlands investigation was conducted in 1997 on the subject property to determine the nature and extent of wetlands that existed on the site. Based on the conclusions of the field survey, w well as a field confirmation conducted in 2001, it was determined that approximately 0.7 acre of wetland habitat existed within the 60 -foot wide corridor along the northerly and westerly property boundaries. This habitat included middle and high salt mush, intertidal, and 24 alkali flats. Pickleweed, alkali heath, fleshy jaumca, suaeda, sea lavender, and salt grass were the dominant salt marsh species present during the survey. The loss of 0.7 acre of salt marsh and alkali flats is considered to be significant and would require mitigation which includes implementation of a wetlands restoration plan in accordance with resource agency requirements. Mitigation Measure #19 The applicant shall contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to determine the need for a Section 404 discharge permit that impacts waters of the United States and shall be required to mitigate the loss of 0.7 acre of wetland habitat at a ratio determined appropriate by the California Coastal Commission and U.S. Army Corps or Engineers for development within the coastal zone for a coastal development permit. Mitigation Measure #20 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall stipulate that Construction activities that create turbidity in waterways adjacent to the National Wildlife Refuge shall be curtailed during the months of mid -March through the end of August. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? Less than Significant Impact. Anaheim Bay is situated on the Great Pacific Flyway, the basic corridor of annual migration for bird species in the western North America. On an annual basis, the wetlands on and in the vicinity of the site play host to a number of species. However, the proposed improvements will not significantly affect wildlife dispersal or migration associated with the Great Pacific Flyway because the improvements will not significantly change the intensity of the uses existing within Sunset Harbor. No significant impacts me anticipated. f. Adopted or proposed conservation plans and policies Ie g., Natural Community Conservation Plan or Resource Management Plan)? Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is not covered by a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). However, extensive resource planning has been prepared for Sunset Harbor in order to protect the existing sensitive species that include the California Least Tem, Belding's savannah sparrow, and Light - footed clapper rail. 11. Aesthetics. Would the project: a. Affect a scenic vista or view open to the public? Less than Significant Impact. The area proposed for development is currently undeveloped. It has limited vegetation and the topography is varied. Mounds of dredge spoil material dominate the landscape. The area has been used to stockpile disposal 25 material from local County dredging projects. The primary feature of the site is a mound that is approximately 10 to 18 feet above the typical roadway elevation. The mound is approximately 300 to 500 feet long. Its presence blocks any views from the property into the wetland refuge or views across the property from adjacent developments. Project implementation will result in the removal of the existing spoils mounds. Native plants will be installed to landscape the area. The proposed improvements are all constructed virtually "at grade" levels. The typical use for the boat storage includes boats on their trailers that are typically no more than five to 10 feet high. There may be sailboats stored with their masts in place; however, these boats are typically no more than 30 feet in length with a mast height of approximately 20 feet. Existing views through the subject property from adjacent properties will be improved as a result of the elimination of the existing dredge material stockpiles which will be replaced by native landscaping and views of boats in the storage areas. The view of the dry boat storage area will be consistent with the appearance of the existing marina. Exhibit 11 -I provides a cross - section view through the site, extending from the hand launch ramp to the eastern limits of the property. implementation of the proposed project will not result in significant visual or aesthetic impacts. Affect a designated scenic highway? Less than Significant Impact. Pacific Coast Highway is designated as a " Viewscape Corridor" along its entire length through Orange County. That designation is intended to minimize the impact of the highway and land development upon the significant scenic resources along the route, in this case, the wildlife refuge and aquatic park within the coastal environment. The Transportation Element of the Orange County General Plan requires sufficient setback from the scenic corridor for the purpose of preserving the scenic quality of the corridor. However, no development is proposed within the corridor. Although some views of the subject property from that arterial highway are available from the northwest, the majority site development (i.e., dry boat storage, parking, etc.) will not be visible from Pacific Coast Highway. It is likely that only the proposed restaurant located at the extreme southwestern comer of the property will be visible from Pacific Coast Highway since it is located across the bay. Nonetheless, its development will contribute to the visual character of the area. Residential development to the south will effectively block views of the site from Pacific Coast Highway. Therefore, project implementation will not significantly affect views within the Pacific Coast Highway viewscape corridor. C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the existing stockpiles will be removed and the site graded to accommodate the parking over the majority of the site. The only structure proposed is a 3,500 square foot restaurant at the southwestern comer of the site. Development of this structure will not, however, be located within the designated "scenic corridor" of Pacific Coast Highway. In order to enhance the visual in character of the'proposed project, a landscape plan will be prepared that addresses views into the site, including the area of the restaurant. It is, therefore, set back significantly from that arterial highway, located across the bay, and will not degrade the character of the "viewscape corridor" as prescribed by the Transportation Element. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation (Attachment 2). As indicated previously, the buffer zone along the northern perimeter of the property will include a nature trail composed of crushed decomposed granite and fencing to secure the area. The fencing may be similar to a three -foot high split rail fence with wire mesh backing to prevent potential predators from entering the adjacent land. The topography in this area will include undulations to provide interest as well as serve as a physical barrier to the adjacent wetlands. The parking lot areas on the site will be planted with islands and trees for shade and also to enhance the visual character of the site. The plantings will be attractive, low maintenance features and will serve as visual buffers to the on -site uses which include boat storage and parking. These design features will ensure that the potential visual impacts remain less than significant. d. Create light or glare beyond the physical limits of theproject site? Less than Significant Impact. Although some parking lot and security lighting will be introduced with the improvements, the effects of the lighting will not be significant, as no direct light will extend beyond the limits of the subject property. The lighting will be designed to ensure that the direct rays do not extend beyond the limits of the site. As a result, no significant impacts will occur. Standard Condition #21 Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that all exterior lighting has been designed and located so that all direct rays are confined to the property in a manner meeting the approval of the Manager, Building Permits. 12. Cultural/Scientific Resources. Would the project: a. Disturb archaeo or paleo resources? No Impact. A significant amount of dredge materials has been placed on the subject property, which do not contain any cultural or scientific resources. Further, because of the disturbed nature of the site and the limited surface grading, it is not likely that cultural and/or scientific resources would be adversely affected. Although no significant impacts are anticipated, the County of Orange will require that an archaeological and paleontological monitor will be present during site grading to ensure that any potential resources that may be encountered can be evaluated and salvaged, if necessary, to ensure that such resources are not destroyed. b. Affect historical resources? 27 No Impact. No significant historical resources are located on the subject property that would be affected by the improvements proposed for the marina. As previously indicated, the site will be graded to create the parking and dry boat storage facilities. These grading and construction activities will not adversely affect historical resources. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? No Impact. Project implementation will not result in a significant change to the existing property that would affect cultural values. The site has been substantially altered by past grading and dredging operations and currently supports some parking and boat launch, dry boat storage and related facilities; it is not recognized as a unique cultural resource. No significant impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Standard Condition #22 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project applicant shall provide written evidence to the Manager, Subdivision and Grading, that a County- certified archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pre- grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the project developer, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the project developer, for exploration and/or salvage. The archaeologist shall submit a follow -up report to the Manager, Harbors, Beaches & Parks, which shall include the period of inspection, an analysis of any artifacts found and the present repository of the artifacts. Excavated finds shall be offered to the County of Orange, or designee, on a first refusal basis. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources shall be subject to the approval of the Manager, Harbors, Beaches & Parks. Standard Condition #23 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the project applicant shall provide written evidence to the Manager, Subdivision and Grading, that a County - certified paleontologist has been retained to observe grading activities and salvage and catalogue fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the project developer, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit sampling, identification, and evaluation of the fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered, the paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the project developer, which ensure proper exploration and/or salvage. Excavated finds shall be offered to the County of Orange, or its designee, on a first - refusal basis. The paleontologist shall submit a follow -up report for approval by the Manager, Harbors, Beaches & Parks, which shall include the period of inspection, a catalogue and analysis of the fossils found, and present repository of the fossils. These 28 actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to approval by the Manager, Harbors, Beaches & Parks. 13. Recreation. Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. Project implementation is consistent with the long -range plans adopted for Sunset Harbour. These improvements are intended to facilitate increased use of the park facilities and provide for enhanced coastal access, consistent with the California Coastal Act policies. However, the increased use envisioned by project implementation will not result in the deterioration of any of the regional facilities that exist or are proposed. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in the construction of additional dry boat storage and related parking that will support the existing marina. With the exception of the loss of approximately 0.7 acre of wetlands, project implementation will not result in significant adverse impacts to the environment. Mitigation measures and standard conditions have been incorporated into the project design that will adequately offset the potentially significant impacts to the wetland resources. Conflict with adopted recreational plans or policies? No Impact. Although the project proposes revisions to the Sunset Marina General Development Plan, no aspect of the proposed project will conflict with the provisions of that plan or those adopted by the County of Orange. Consistent with the California Coastal Act, coastal access is maintained and not adversely affected by the proposed project. Further, the project is consistent with the County's long -range plans articulated in the adopted Recreation Element. As indicated previously, the boat storage, parking, and restaurant proposed for the site will also facilitate the existing coastal - dependent uses occupying the marina. As a result, no significant impacts will occur. No significant impacts to recreational facilities and/or services are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 14. Mineral Resources. Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 29 No Impact. No mineral resources are known to exist on or adjacent to the project site. Further, the site is not identified on the County's or City of Seal Beach long -range land use plan for such use. As previously indicated, the site is partially developed with marina facilities. Approval of the proposed expanded and enhanced marina development will not result in the loss of the availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region. No impacts will occur. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. As indicated above, no mineral resources are known to exist on the property and none are identified and/or recognized in the long -range plans adopted for the subject property. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in impacts to locally important mineral resources. No significant impacts to mineral resources are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 15. Hazards. Would the project: a Create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. Project implementation does not include the transport, use or disposal of any hazardous materials on the subject property. As indicated in the Project Description, the uses proposed for Site Master Plan development within Sunset Harbour would not create a hazard to the public. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated. b. Create a hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in the creation of a significant hazard to the public. None of the proposed improvements will constitute a hazardous condition or utilize or involve hazardous materials during their construction and/or operation. As a result, no significant impacts will occur. C. Exposure of people to existing sources of health hazards? No Impact. No aspect of the proposed project will expose facility users to potential health hazards. The site is currently partially developed as a marina and supporting facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. 30 d. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located either within the limits of an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport. Project implementation will not result in any potentially significant safety hazards for users of the proposed facilities. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. e. - For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Project implementation will not result in any potentially significant safety hazards for users of the proposed facilities. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The project proposes only refinements and revisions to the approved GDP. Access into the marina is provided via Edinger Avenue at the eastern end of the site. The proposed changes will not affect the existing emergency response plan or evacuation plan adopted by the County of Orange. As a result, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. g. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. Fire protection service is provided by the Orange County Fire Authority. The site is located within the marina component of Sunset Harbour and is not subject to wildland fires. No significant impacts are anticipated. No significant hazards or related impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 16. Public Services. Would the project result in need(s) for new /altered government facilities /services in: M Fireprotection? Less than Significant Impact. The Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) provides primary response to a fire within the limits of Sunset Harbour. In addition, the Huntington Beach Fire Department also provides fire protection service to the site under 31 an ,automatic aid" agreement with the County of Orange. The Harbor Patrol boat also responds to any fire emergency. As previously analyzed, implementation of the GDP components will attract more visitors /users to the park, which could lead to a potential increase in risk of fire- related hazards. The existing fire protection service and facilities are adequate to serve the marina and park. Implementation of the proposed Site Master Plan will not materially affect the existing or projected level of services. Therefore, potential impacts to fire protection service are anticipated to be less than significant. b. Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. Law enforcement services to the marina and park are provided by the Seal Beach Police Department and Orange County Harbor Patrol; emergency assistance is also provided by the City of Huntington Beach. No significant increases in crime or criminal activity are anticipated as a result of the proposed revisions to the GDP. Therefore, no significant impacts to the level of service provided by the City of Seal Beach Police Department and Orange County Harbor Patrol will occur as a result of project implementation. Schools? No Impact. The subject property is located within the jurisdiction of the Los Alamitos Unified School District. Although project implementation will not result in any direct impacts (i.e., generation of school age students), the proposed restaurant will be subject to the statutory school fees based on the gross area of the building. Maintenance ofpublic facilities, including roads? Less than Significant Impact. Although additional parking and related improvements (e.g., landscaping, lighting, etc.) will be developed on the subject property, they will not require extensive maintenance that would significantly affect the County's ability to provide an adequate level of service. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated. e. Other government services? Less than Significant Impact. Sunset Harbour is owned by the County of Orange. Government services are provided by both the County of Orange (fire protection, and City of Seal Beach (police protection). With the exception of the public services and facilities described above (i.e., police, fire, roadways and facility operation and maintenance, and schools), project implementation will not create significant demands for governmental services. No significant impacts we anticipated. Standard Condition #24 Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the developer of the proposed restaurant will be required to pay the applicable State statutory school fee imposed by the Los Alamitos Unified School District. 32 17. Utilities & Service Systems. Would the project result in needs for new or substantial alterations in: Power or natural gas? Less than Significant Impact. The Sunset Harbour does not utilize natural gas. Electrical service is provided by Southern California Edison via an existing, above ground power line. Project implementation will not necessitate the use of natural gas. Although parking lot and security lighting are proposed, the revisions proposed at the present time will not significantly increase electrical usage. Therefore, no significant impacts to either natural gas or electrical service will occur as a result of project implementation. Communications? No Impact. Telephone service at Sunset Harbour is provided by General Telephone. Implementation of the facilities proposed for the Site Master Plan will not require additional telephone service. Therefore, no significant impacts to communications service and/or facilities are anticipated. Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Less than Significant Impact. Water service and facilities supporting the project site me supplied by the City of Seal Beach, by means of a 10 -inch water main, which extends below Bolsa Channel from Pacific Coast Highway. The unused rated capacity (per the County of Orange) is 75 gallons per minute. The project component that would generate a demand for domestic water is the proposed restaurant. Although the capacity of the restaurant is not currently known, it is anticipated that such a facility would generate a demand for 50 gallons of domestic water per seat (the same factor as assumed for sewage generation); this demand can be met by existing supplies and facilities that currently serve the project site. Therefore, it is anticipated that implementation of the proposed project will not significantly affect the capacity or adequacy of the existing water supplies and/or facilities. Potential impacts are considered to be less than significant. Sewer or Septic Tanks? Less than Significant Impact. Sanitary sewer services and facilities are also provided by the City of Seal Beach. A sewage lift station connects the existing city sewer main to the Sunset Harbour site through an existing 6 -inch line. With the exception of the proposed restaurant, none of the remaining project components will result in the generation of additional raw sewage. It may be anticipated that the restaurant will generate 50 gallons of raw sewage per seat. Therefore, the total amount of raw sewage generated by the restaurant would be relatively small based on the 3,500 square feet of floor area currently proposed. Further, the existing sewer facilities and treatment 33 capacity are adequate to serve the property. As a result, the additional raw sewage generated by the proposed project is considered to be less than significant. e. Solid waste disposal? Less than Significant Impact. Solid waste is collected at the site by a solid waste contractor and disposed at one of the landfills owned and operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department. Although some additional solid waste may be generated by the proposed project, the County has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed uses. No significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Standard Condition #25 Prior to the issuance of a precise grading permit for the restaurant, a site plan delineating the capacity, number, and location of all proposed solid waste and recyclable collection areas shall be submitted to the Manager, Current Planning for review and approval. DETERMINATION: A. CEQA Mandatory Findings: ]. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of 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 the major periods of California history or prehistory ? Less than Significant Impact. The project site has been impacted by past activities (e.g., placement of dredge soils, etc.). The site is currently designated for regional recreation and future improvements pursuant to Phase II development plans that have been anticipated since adoption of the General Development Plan by the County of Orange. Implementation of the recreation - oriented (dry boat storage, hand launch, etc.) and visitor - serving commercial improvements (i.e., restaurant) will not significantly degrade the quality of the environment. No significant impacts to the sensitive biological habitat and/or species that occupy the wetlands and National Wildlife Refuge located to the north and west are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Further, no cultural or historical resources are known to be located on the site. In particular, project implementation will not substantially reduce the habitat of 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 major periods of California history or prehistory. 34 Z Does the project have the potential achieve the short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of the long -term environmental goals? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in Section 1 above, project implementation is entirely consistent with the long -term goals of the County of Orange and is consistent with the long -range plans reflected in the General Development Plan for Sunset Marina Park. The applicant is proposing to implement the improvements that will facilitate improved public access and recreational opportunities that will not result in significant environmental consequences. Although some sensitive biological habitat and resources exist on the affected property, appropriate mitigation measures and procedures will be implemented to ensure that the long -tern environmental established by the County of Orange and other agencies (e.g., California Coastal Commission, etc.) are not compromised as a result of site development. Therefore, no long -term environmental goals will be compromised and no significant impacts will occur after implementation of the mitigation measures and standard conditions prescribed in this analysis. 3. Does the project have possible environmental effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ( "cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant Impact. As indicated in the preceding environmental analysis, development of the subject property has been anticipated for several years, since the General Development Plan for Sunset Harbour was approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors. As such, the EIR and subsequent environmental documents prepared for the GDP and revisions evaluated potential future impacts and cumulative impacts of buildout of the GDP for the Harbour, including future development of the site as currently envisioned (i.e., expanded marina - related facilities, parking, etc.). The proposed project, which refines the previously approved Phase II improvements to reflect current trends and recreational needs (including the development of the restaurant), will not materially affect that analysis and the conclusions presented EIR No. 478. Implementation of the proposed project does not have the potential to generate project - related impacts that may be cumulatively considerable (e.g., air quality). Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the change of zoning for the site. 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact. Although project implementation will result in physical change to the largely undeveloped portion of the property, the alterations are not anticipated to result in significant changes to the environment that cannot be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of standard conditions and/or mitigation measures. Construction and operation of the proposed improvements are entirely consistent with the General Development Plan adopted for Sunset Harbour. The potential impacts of site development as proposed have been evaluated previously in 35 EIR No. 478 and in subsequent environmental analyses prepared for revisions to the GDP, including the preceding analysis. Based on those evaluations, the proposed development will not have the potential to generate significant environmental effects which could cause adverse effects on humans, either directly (e.g., traffic and circulation, etc.) or indirectly (e.g., contribute to deficiencies in public services and/or facilities). Therefore, potential significant impacts are anticipated to be less than significant after the incorporation and implementation of standard conditions and mitigation measures identified in this document. B. FINDINGS & DETERMINATION: Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the attached environmental checklist explanation, cited incorporations and attachments, the County of Orange Planning & Development Services Department makes the following Findings: I. The project would not have any impacts on fish, wildlife habitat or communities, rare or endangered species or any periods of California history. 2. Due to the project's small scale, no long -term environmental goals would be compromised. 3. Due to the mitigation measures described above there are no known effects from other projects that would result in significant cumulative impacts. 4. The project would not have any adverse effects on human beings. The mitigation measures described above would reduce the adverse effects below the level of significance. Prepared by: Date: Trish McNally, Chief L Environmental & Project Planning Services Division 36