Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Draft EIR - Pacific Coast Highway Widening Project
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -4USINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 d (213) 620-5335 August 1, 1985 07-ORA-1 Pacific Coast Highway Response due: October 12 , 1985 TO: RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES, REVIEW AGENCIES AND INDIVIDUALS CONCERNED WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY PROJECT Attached for your review is a copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report/ Impact Statement and the Appendix on the above project; your comments are being solicited in conformance with State (CEQA) and Federal (NEPA) environmental requirements . This report is not an advocacy document, but rather an informa- tional tool intended. to assist in the decision making process. i Reviewers should focus upon the sufficiency of this document' s discussion of feasible alternatives , probable impacts , and ways adverse effects might be mitigated. Comments should include, whenever possible, supporting data or references . Please review this document and respond with any written comments by October 12 , 1985 . A Public Hearing will be held at the Edison High School , 21400 Magnolia Street, Huntington Beach, California, on September 12th at 7: 00 p.m. The project design features and Draft EIR/EIS will be discussed. At 6: 00 p.m. an open house will precede the Public Hearing and provide an opportunity for you to view the various exhibits and talk directly to CALTRANS and FHWA staff . Following the public hearing and review period, an evaluation will be made of the comments received. Based upon these comments appropriate changes will be made in the document and a recom- mended alternative selected. This recommendation will be presented in the Final EIR/EIS which is scheduled for completion in the Spring of 1986 . I r� ' i Responsible Agencies , Review -2- August 1, 1985 Agencies and Individuals. Concerned with the Environmental Effects of the Pacific Coast Highway Project Written comments regarding this Draft document are to be addressed in the final document_ Your comments should be mailed by the response date to: W. B. Ballantine, Chief Caltrans Environmental Planning Branch 120 South Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 Any questions on this document can be directed to Ronald Kosinski at (213) 620-3755 . Very truly yours , C B l t4-d; NE��Ch e Environmental Planning Branch Attachment i k -ti F0 A UL 4:1 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY WIDENING PROJECT ' Report Number: FHWA-CA-EIS-85-02-D SCH Number: 80121150 07-ORA-1 19 .8/25 .9 07210 - 499850 roposed Project: Roadwa wideningfrom 4 to 6 lanes on Pacific Coast Highway, from Rou te 55 to Golden West Street, in the ' Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach , . in Orange County DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ' U.S . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration and ' THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation COOPERATING AGENCIES ' U. S. COAST GUARD U. S . CORPS OF ENGINEERS U . S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ' Pursuant to: Division 13 , Public Resources Code, 42 U.S .C . 4332( 2) (c) , 49 U.S .C. 303 1 S DtLte •i e Office of Environmental Analysis Ca l ornia Department of Transportation a e F A Division Administrator ABSTRACT ' Proposed roadway widening from 4 to 6 lanes on Pacific Coast Highway, from Route 55 to Golden West Street , in the Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach( a distance of 6 miles. ' Alternatives considered are No Pro3ect and Roadway Widening . Impacts of the proposed project include: loss of landscaping; parking; infringement on remnant coastal dunes; loss of foraging habitat for the California Least Tern; and construction impacts--noise, ' dust, loss of access , and detours. Mitigation measures will reduce these impacts. ' The following people may be contacted for additional information concerning this document. GLENN CLINTON W. B. BALLANTINE, Chief ' FHWA District Engineer Caltrans District 7 P .O. Box 1915 Environmental Planning Branch Sacramento, CA 95809 120 S . Spring Street ( 916) 440-3578 Los Angeles CA 90012 ' ( 213 ) 620-5135 Comments on this document are due by October 12 , 1985and should be sent to W. B. Ballantine at the address direc y a ove. 1 TABLES OF CONTENTS 1 Page 1 SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S-1 I. NEED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-1 1 A. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-1 ' B Capacity Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . I-2 C. Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-4 1 D. Public Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-6 E. Bicycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-6 ' F. Bridge Deficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-7 II. ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 ' A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 B. Alternatives Under Consideration . . . . . . . . . II-1 1 C. Alternatives withdrawn From Consideration . . . . II-15 1 III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-1 1 A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-1 B. Regional Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-1 1 C. Socioeconomic Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-3 1 D. Transportation and Circulation . . . . . . . . . . III-6 E. Natural Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-15 ' F. Archaeological/Historical Setting . . . . . . . . III-52 G� Paleontological Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-52 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS - Contd. Page IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-1 ' A. Geological Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-5 B. Stream Channel Modification and Erosion . . . . . IV-8 ' C. Flood Plain Encroachment . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-9 ' D. Biological Impacts and Mitigation for Biological Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-13 E. Related Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-23 ' F. Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-26 ' G. Noise Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-29 H. New Shadows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-36 ' I. Relationship to Local Plans and California Coastal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-36 ' J. Circulation Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-37 K. Effect on Public Services . . . IV-38 ' L. Parking Impacts . . . . . . IV-38 ' M. Impacts on Archaeological and Historical Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-42 N. Pa2aontological Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-44 O. Construction Impacts IV-44 ' P. Scenic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-46 ' V. PROBABLE UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS EFFECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 ' A. Geologic Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 B. New Shadows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 ' C. Vegetation Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 D. Parking Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 . 1 TABLES OF CONTENTS (Contd) 1 Page E. Land Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1 1 F. Construction Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 1 G. Biological Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 VI. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN' S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCE- MENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY . . . . . . . . . . . VI-1 VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE 1 COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-1. A. Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIZ-1 1 B. Construction Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-1 C. Environmental Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-1 VIII. IMPACTS ON PROPERTIES AND SITES OF HISTORICAL AND 1 CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND SECTION106 PROPERTIES . . • . VIII-1 IX. INVOLVEMENT OF LANDS PROTECTED BY SECTION 4 (f) . . . IX-1 1 X. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X-1 1 XI. ENERGY USE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI-1 1 XII. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . XII-1 XIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PERSONNEL . . . . . . . . . XIII-1 XIV. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIV-1 GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIV-4 1 INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XIV-6 XV. SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XV-1 1 LIST OF TABLES 1 Page ' S-1 Project Summary Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . S-3 I-1 Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-3 1 I-2 Recent Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-5 1 III-1 Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-8 III-2 Peak Month ADT,Route 55 to Beach . . . . . . . III-13 ' III-3 Peak Month ADT, Beach to Golden West . . . . . III-13 1 III-4 Regional Trip Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-16 III-5 Existing Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-19 1 III-6 Number of California Least Terns Breeding in the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-49 ' III-7 Breeding Pairs of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrows in Southern California . . . . . . . III-50 ' III-8 Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow Survey . . . . . . III-51 1 IV-1 Environmental Significance Checklist . . . . . IV-2 IV-2 CO Concentrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-28 1 IV-3 Noise Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-31 ' IV-4 Noise Abatement Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . IV-32 IV-5 Predicted Leq Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-33 , 1 IV-34 IV-31 PCH Business Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-40 1 1 1 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Page ' S-1 Regional Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S-2 II-1 Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-2 1 II-2 Typical Section, Beach to Golden West . . . . . . II-4 II-3a Typical Section, Santa Ana River to Beach . . . . II-6 II-3b Typical Section, Santa Ana River to Beach . II-8 ' II-4 Santa Ana River Complex Bridge. . . . . . . II-9 II-5 Typical Section, Santa Ana River Bridge . . II-11 1 II-6 Typical Section, 60th to Santa Ana River o II-12 II-7 Typical Section, Route 55 to 60th II-14 iIII-1 Regional Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-2 1 III-2 Major Activity Centers and Community Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-7 1 III-3 PCH/Golden West Street Intersection . III-9 III-4 PCH/Beach Boulevard Intersection III-10 iIII-5 PCH/Brookhurst Street Intersection . . . . . . . III-11 1 III-6 Distribution of Vehicle Trips III-14 III-7 Soil Types . . . . . . . . . III-22 1 III-8 Newport-Inglewood Structural Zone . . . . III-23 III-9 100 Year Flood Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-27 III-10 Existing Biotic Habitats . . . . III-29 ' III-lla Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . III-30 ' III-llb Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI III-31 1 LIST OF FIGURES (Contd) ' III-llc Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-32 III-12 Topographic Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-34 ' III-13 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-39 III-14 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-40 III-15 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-41 III-16 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-42 III-17 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within THE APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . III-43 III-18 Twenty ( 20) Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-45 IV-1 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-16 ' IV-2 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-17 IV-3 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-19 IV-4 Designation of the APEI and Habitats Within the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-22 ' IV-5 Talbert Valley Channels . . . . . . . . . . IV-24 IV-6 Proposed Channel Mouths . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-25 IV-7 Noise Measurement Locations . . . . . . . . . . IV-30 IV-8 Huntington Beach Historical Properties . . . . . IV-43 ' IX-1 4( f) Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX-3 ' IX-2 Cross-Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IX-4 XI-1 Energy Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI-1 �r rr r� s r� rr rr �r rr ■r rr it rr �■r r �■r rr ■r rr � r 4i 7 ` i 1.� 1 sv�►xY ' Project Location ' The proposed project involves 6 miles of State Route 1 (Pacific Coast Highway) in Orange County, California. The southerly ' terminus is State Route 55 (Newport Boulevard) in the City of Newport Beach. The northerly terminus is Golden West Street in ' the City of Huntington Beach (see Figure S-1 ) . The existing ' facility is a conventional four-lane highway with curbs, gutters and sidewalks in some areas and unimproved shoulders in other ' areas. The project area is within the Coastal Zone. ' Purpose and Need for the Project The project is being proposed in order to alleviate traffic ' congestion and high traffic accident rates which are primarily the ' result of insufficient roadway capacity. Table S-1 is a summary matrix depicting such items as: stages, costs, circulation ' impacts, environmental impacts, etc. ' Description of Proposed Project ' Insufficient capacity can be solved by several means, such as, adding capacity (new lanes) , transit, and TSM. The proposed ' project would add new lanes, increasing Pacific Coast Highway from 4 to 6 lanes. The addition of one new lane in each direction ' would be accomplished by: 1 S-1 1 1 1 1 1 LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY IN <2 Rome 0 +T♦� y ? IYER I DE R S ANAHEIM* es ORANGE COUNTY� a � V Y 1 S ►WESTMINSTER *'TUSTIN \ r SANTA ANALam '* \ _� s COSTA HUNTINGTON MESA 3 ' BEACH :�� IRVINE* ♦o � NE W PO BE H 0 ' IAGUN A N BEACH � toc.�rio�v ay SAN JUAN O� j Aftlkle4 P,r CAPISIRANO t SAN CLEMFNTE SAN DIEGOCOUNTY ' • ! 9 9 C f/GU.PE ,1'-1 M TABLE S-1 SIBBNIty OF PROPOSED PROJECT OESIBN TtM i000 /tATUIIEf TO CONSTRUCTION RIGHT-Sa-BAT BIOLOGICAL BETLAMD M01f[ IMPACTS 'CiRCUlAT10M TIME FOR - M11111llT OBTAIN 6 COST COST IMPACTS IMPACTS OTER NO IMPACTS CONSTRUCTION LANES BUILD Golden Hest a Reduce sedlen width $1,100.000 $40,000 / / 41 - 2 dBA 0 Col-de-Sac It side streets 6 months to a EllNl:ate eo street Miner a Less of 339 porkies spaces Seack Boulevard perk::: a Lose of 11 right-hens turns e Rostrips roadway a Less of 1 left-hood turns Beach Boulevard o Add sew lose and $5.610.000 a Lose of 3 acres of o lacrosse of fresh 42 dl1A o lane closures daring 24 months: to *boulders each ►emnsat coastal wafer highway run- Miner construction Seats Ana Rover direction dome eft late soft o Temporary loss to blkelo%o o Cosstract raised marshes coed i e: Seats has a Construct sew 6- $4.464,000 a lose of 0.61 acres / -2 - •2 dSA o Detour onto new bridge 14 Veers Rover lees bridge with of CLT foreglag Miner Bridge sidewalks and bike- area Jesse a 51.360.000 W Seats An* River a Add woo $*ma, blke- $1,510.000 / / 0 - ♦s 69A a Lane closures during elaeluded Is to Ions 1 sidewalk to Moderate construction Beech Boulevard Sixtieth Street Island olds of PC" a Temporary less of blkelsas to Seats Ana 0 6oastraet raised River media% i fixtletb Street a Add 2 now lease $2,651.000 / e lasi:nlflcest Joss 0 - e2 dSA a Lone closures darlog sloclsded In to carol. Satter S side- of opportu:Istic Mloor constructles Beach Boulevard Newport Beelover reek Imtead aide of reflaa/ flew• to Seats Ana PC" River e Constract raised Nodose e Rostrlpe Project a 6 fhrs lames RTE 3S $13.731.000 $1,600,000 a Loss of 3 oeree of 0 lacrosse of fresh- Minor o Cut de Sae 11 side streets Total Time: Summary to Golden we** reeaeet coastal dome water highway remelt o Loss of 939 parking specs 24* Months e Nov bridge •free- a Less of 0.01 acres onto soft marshes o Lose of If right-bond turns fora, sposelas SAN CLT foraging habitat o Inelgalfleest less of o Less of 1 left-hand turns complex opportaslatle met- a Lone closures daring load flora construcfloo o os to iokstoae during e Detour **to now bridge I - Elimination of on-street parking from Golden West Street ' to Beach Boulevard (State Route 39) and restriping. A reduction in the width of the existing median and the ' cul-de-sacing of some local streets would be a part of the ' project. I Construction of new outside lanes in each direction between Beach Boulevard and the Santa Ana River. This ' would include a curbed median, and eight-foot paved I shoulders in each direction. Construction of a new bridge over the Santa Ana River complex which includes bike lanes. ' From the Santa Ana River to Newport Boulevard (State Route 55) new lanes, shoulder, curb, gutter and sidewalk I would be constructed on the inland side. With the exception of a short reach immediately down coast from the I Santa Ana River the existing curb, gutter and sidewalk would be utilized on the ocean side. Bicycle lanes and ' a raised landscaped median would be constructed. Sound- I walls, where necessary and feasible, would be built. I Six partial takings of unimproved property will be required, four involving public agencies and two involving private ' ownerships. Facilitation of bus activities (access, turning, I stops and turn outs) and bike travel have been incorporated in the project. ' S-4 I The No-Project and TSM Alternatives are not considered viable for ' the following reasons. The no-project alternative does nothing to solve the existing problems. Existing traffic congestion and high accident rates would continue, and in fact increase, as future ' projected demand for usage of the highway is realized. Transit, an exclusive bus/HOV or rail system, was not considered cost effective, practical or consistent with county-wide transit planning. TSM, by itself, is also not an effective alternative to highway widening. Various TSM strategies, such as bus turnouts and signal modification, have been included in the highway widening alternative. Bnvironmental Impacts of the Proposed Project IThe environmental impacts, while important, are focused in a few areas. These impacts include: ' - loss of foraging area for an endangered species of bird, the California Least Tern ' - loss of remnant coastal dune area loss of on-street parking ' - increase in noise in some areas ' - construction impacts in the river area reduction of traffic accidents ' - substantial increase in safety for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Mitigation of these adverse impacts has been included as a part of the project where feasible. Special contractor instructions will ' S-5 1 be included in the construction contract. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the least tern habitat has been finalized and several mitigation/compensation options are ' being considered. Other Governmental Projects in the Area - Caltrans - widen Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) from 4 to 6 ' lanes between State Route 73 (McArthur Boulevard) and ' State Route 55 (Newport Boulevard) . The estimated date of construction is 1986 . ' - Caltrans - temporary bike bridge attached to existing ' Santa Ana River Complex Bridge which was completed in the summer of 1982 . ' - Caltrans - Route 55 Transportation Corridor Study between PCH and the existing southerly end of the Route 55 ' Freeway. - California Department of Parks and Recreation - the ' addition of 1300 parking spaces at Huntington State Beach between the river and Beach Boulevard. This addition is ' under construction and will be phased over several years. - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - widen the Santa Ana River. ' The project is currently in planning stages with possible construction in the early 1990 ' s. ' S-6 ' I , I �1 �1•,,��Iwl l 1, I � II �1 ,rl 1 - County of Orange - realignment of Talbert Channel at Pacific Coast Highway. City of Huntington Beach - additional improvements to Bluff Park on the ocean side of PCH between Golden West Street and 9th Street. This project includes landscaping beach access and parking and is scheduled for completion in stages during 1983 and 1984 . City of Huntington Beach - widen Brookhurst Street and ' replace bridge spanning Talbert Channel between Talbert Channel and PCH. ' - City of Huntington Beach - construct a bike path beneath Santa Ana River bridge to connect existing bike paths. ' - City of Newport Beach - realignment of Superior Avenue ' where it connects to PCH. ' Project Coordination and Public Participation This project has been planned and coordinated with numerous ' agencies. In particular, the proposed highway improvements have been coordinated with the State Department of Parks and Recreation's Huntington Beach parking lot project, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' proposed river widening project, and the Orange County Transit District' s bus needs. The U. S. Coast Guard has granted advance approval for the new Santa Ana River Complex bridge construction in their Public Notice Number 11-41 , dated ' February 16 , 1982 . Also, the City of Huntington Beach, the City ' of Newport Beach and the Orange County Environmental Management Agency have been involved in the planning process. Various controversial issues have been raised b the public during Y P 9 ' the scoping process concerning the proposed project. These issues S-7 include: impacts on the California Least Tern, Belding' s Savannah ' Sparrow, wetlands and noise. In addition, and as a result of interests and concerns expressed at the Environmental Scoping ' Meeting held in August 1981 , the staffs of Newport- Beach, Huntington Beach and Caltrans have worked closely with interested ' private citizens. The distribution list for this document is in Chapter XI. The following state and federal permits must be obtained prior to ' the construction of this proposal. 1 . Department of Fish and Game ' A 1601 permit Stream Be Modification) will be required due to proposed construction of the new Santa Ana River I Complex Bridge. 2. State Coastal Zone Commission A coastal zone permit and consistency determination are I required as this project is within the coastal zone limits. 3 . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers An Army Corps 404 permit will be required due to ' construction of the new Santa Ana River Complex Bridge. 4 . Regional Water Control Board - Santa Ana Region A permit is required due to construction of the new Santa Ana River Bridge and also for grading close to major ' waterways. 5. Orange County Environmental Management Agency (OCEMA) An encroachment permit will be required from OCEMA for the ' construction of the new Santa Ana River Complex Bridge which will span the Talbert Channel, Greenville-Banning ' Channel and Santa Ana River. All three of these facili- ties are under OCEMA jurisdiction for hydraulics and maintenance. S-8 i1 ' I. PURPOSE AND PEED FOR THE PROJECT A. Overview ' The importance of Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) for both regional and local transportation demands is apparent upon examination of ' its location and relationship to the surrounding circulation system ( see Figure S-1 ) . It is a critical link connecting communities parallel to the coastline for a distance of 30 miles ' from Long Beach to Capistrano Beach. The nearest parallel facility which provides a continuous route serving the regional ' needs of the area is I-405 which is approximately 5 miles northeasterly. Within the project limits, there are only four ' major roadways connecting PCH with Route 405, namely: . Newport ' Boulevard (Route 55) , Brookhurst Street, Beach Boulevard (Route 39) , and Golden West Street. As a result of these circulation ' characteristics in the area, PCH is the only reasonable route for a large number of trips between coastal communities for commuting ' and recreational purposes. ' Golden West Street is considered to be a P logical up-coast terminus 9 ' for the project due to its status as a major highway (Huntington Beach Master Plan of Circulation, 1983 , available in Huntington ' Beach or CALTRANS District 7 Office) connecting PCH with inland transportation facilities and communities. In addition, the 1 character of PCH and its environs substantially changes as it I ' proceeds up-coast from Golden West Street. Implementation of the proposed project will not cause additional pressure for highway improvement northerly of Golden West Street as this land is ' I-1 developed to its fullest as State and City Beaches and the Bolsa Chica Ecological Preserve, and sufficient highway capacity for existing and projected peak hour traffic currently exists. Newport Boulevard was chosen as the down-coast terminus for three reasons: ( 1 ) it is a major State Highway (Route 55) leading inland, (2) a highway widening project ( from 4 to 6 lanes') on PCH down-coast from Newport Boulevard is presently under considera- tion, and (3) a highway improvement project for Newport Boulevard is also under consideration as a part of the Route 55 Corridor I Study. The proposed project would not cause pressure to adopt either of these other projects. I The County of Orange Master Plan of Arterial Highways (available I through the Orange County Environmental Management Agency) classi- fies PCH as a major arterial route at six lanes. The Master Plan Circulation Element for the Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington I Beach also classifies PCH as a major arterial ( six-lane divided) . Pacific Coast Highway is presently improved to only four lanes I throughout the majority of they project limits. This project is included in the 1983 State Transportation Improvement Plan as pro- I ject number 917 , and is in the 1984 RTIP and PSTIP. The proposed ' bridge replacement has a high priority on the FHWA bridge replacement list. ' B. Capacity Deficiencies If no improvements are made to facilitate traffic flow along ' Pacific Coast Highway, traffic congestion will continue to occur ' and will intensify with time. Several of the existing intersec- tions are currently operating under undesirable conditions. Table ' I-2 ' TABLE I-1 LEVELS OF SERVICE* Non-Peak Months Peak Months Signalized Level of Service** Level of Service** Intersections 1981 2000 1981 2000 Existing No Project 6-Lane Alt. Exis inq No Project 6-Lane Alt. AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Balboa Su erior C D E F D E C E F F D F Orange B D C F C D B F C F C F Brookhurst C C E E C C C D E F C D Magnolia B B C D B B B C C E B. C Newland B B C C B B B C C E B C Beach B B C C B B B D C F B E Huntington B B C D B B B B C D B C Lake B B D C B B B B D E C C Main C D D E B D C E D F C E llth B B B B B B B B B D B B w 17th B B B C B B B C C E B C Golden West B B E C C B C C E E C C * These levels of Service were derived using the Critical Movement Analysis Methodologies described in Transportation Research Circular Number 212, by Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, entitled, "Interim Materials on Highway Capacity" , Washington, D. C. , January, 1980. Lane Capacity was assumed to be 1600 Vehicles per hour of green time. ** These levels of service conditions represent the average day-to-day conditions. As previously described under existing traffic conditions, there are 20-25 days per annum when beach parking lots are filled to capacity. At such times beach parking lot entrances are barricaded and the residual approach demand seeking .to park near the beach contributes to the capacity deficiency on Route 1. I-1 depicts the projected levels of service for the year 2000 . By ' 1988 , the majority of the intersections will be operating under ' forced flow conditions. By the year 2000 , if no circulation improvements are made, PCH will experience intolerable congestion, ' a high accident potential (see Table I-2) , possible increased air pollution and energy consumption, as well as excessive user delay. ' The State Parks and Recreation improvements at Huntington State ' Beach will also add to the congestion and delay along PCH during ' peak recreational use. 1 C. Accidents Between January 1978 and December 1980 , unusually high accident ' rates were recorded within the project limits (see Table I-2) . Records from "TASAS" (Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis 1 System) indicate an accident rate of 6 .1 accidents per million ' vehicle miles traveled (MVMT) , as compared to a statewide average of 3.8 accidents per MVMT. The fatality rate during the same ' period was 0.08 fatalities/MVMT as compared to a statewide average of 0.02 fatalities/MVMT. ' A majority of the accidents are rear-end type ( 54%) , followed by ' sideswipes ( 15%) and broadside ( 12% ) . These types of accidents ' are generally associated with high density operation (congestion) and lack of maneuverability (available space) . ' Bicycle accidents on this stretch of highway total 43 for the period 1979 to and including 1981 , 12% of all bicycle accidents in ' Orange County during the same period. I-4 ' TABLE I-2 Recent Accidents by Route Segment 1978 Thru 1981 All Expected Injury Person s bq3ected Injury Fatal Persons D pected Fa Year Accidents Accidents Accidents* Accidents Injured Injury Accidents* Accidents Killed Fatal Accidents Accidents Accidents SDGPIF U (1) RIVERSIDE DRIVE TO SANTA ANA RIVER 1978 5 1979 167 145 S 49 72 51 NS 0 0 0.73 NS 1980 157 139 NS 74 122 49 S** 1 1 0.70' NS 1981 158 142 NS 66 88 50 S** 2 2 0.71 NS 4-Year 687 568 S** 266 405 200 S** 5 5 1 2.85 NS SW.43 TP (2) SANTA ANA RIVER TO BEACH BOULEVARD H 1 to 1978 1979 125 121 NS 43 57 42 NS 3 3 0.61 S 1980 104 118 NS 35 43 41 NS 0 0 0.59 NS 1981 127 118 NS 52 103 41 NS 3 5 0.59 S 4-Year 479 478 NS 173 286 166 NS 11 14 2.40 S** SWMENT (3) BEACH BOULEVARD TO GOLDEN WEST STREET 1§18 240 104 7 11 3 1979 216 104 S** 79 112 36 S** 1 1 0.52 NS 1980 206 104 S** 67 102 36 S** 2 3 0.52 NS 1981 184 102 S** 71 102 36 S** 0 0 0.51 NS 4-Year 846 415 S** 288 434 144 S** 7 8 2.07 S** *Statistical Test of Significance 95% at Confidence **Significant at 99% Oonfidence S - Significant NS - Not Significant D. Public Transportation ' In addition to reducing congestion and decreasing accidents, any improvement to the highway circulation would facilitate the devel- opment of other modes of transportation ( i.e. , transit and bicycle) . Currently, the Orange County Transit District (OCTD) ' operates 10 bus lines that provide services to and along PCH. ' Line No. 1 operates along PCH between Long Beach to the north and Dana Point to the south and has a 30-minute frequency on weekdays ' and a 60-minute frequency on weekends and holidays. In addition to this regular bus service, Dial-A-Ride bus service is also avail- ' able to the residences of the coastal communities. These bus ser- vices provide a valuable mode of travel, transporting both recrea- tional visitors and commuters to and from the project vicinity. ' Caltrans has been working closely with OCTD to coordinate the ' planning and implementation of transit needs. The proposed pro- ' ject would include the construction of bus turnout and layover areas which would greatly facilitate bus movement. ' E. Bicycles ' A temporary bike bridge over the Santa Ana River was completed in ' July 1982 . This low cost, lightweight facility was attached to the existing highway bridge. It is intended that this "stop gap" ' measure will provide interim bicycle safety until a new highway bridge with bike lanes can be constructed. ' The highway bridge ( see following section) , included as part of , 9 Y 9 the proposed project, will provide permanent and safe bicycle ' lanes over the river. These bike lanes would become a part of an 1-6 ' extensive bicycle trail network, extending not only up and down the coast (Bicentennial Bike Route) , but inland as well. ' F. Bridge Deficiencies ' The Santa Ana River Bridge, constructed in 1923 and subsequently widened to four lanes in 1932, is showing definite signs of ' deteriorating with cracking, spalling and corrosion of exposed reinforcing steel is evident. Caltrans Office of Structures and FHWA consider the replacement of this bridge as a high priority in the Bridge Replacement Program. In addition, it has been deter- mined by the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the Orange County Environmental Management Agency (OCEMA) that the existing structure may not survive the effects of a severe storm. 1 r �� . I , � � t +.�;� tf ' ? r ,yy`tiy�"� I .�� fir.� e; ',�,�r a .�, 'Q / � � f �' J� •' '{.k � I '� 3��t � r� y ,,,s N, ,'L:S; i � a. �.,i A „far 1�• �' ;•r^ D k. ;Fh •S;� '� / J �r '' iy � � �� ; 1 rl II. ALTERUATIVES ' A. Introduction The proposed project involves a 6-mile stretch of PCH from Route ' 55 to Golden West Street (see Figure II-1 and Chapter XV, Supple- mental Exhibits) . For the purposes of this document, the project I' can be divided into two stages: Stage I from Beach Boulevard to ' Golden West Street and Stage II from Route 55 to Beach Boulevard. These Stages were chosen due to different improvement methods, ' construction schedules, program funding, and right-of-way require- ments, and may change as future conditions evolve. 1 ' Many concepts have been developed and considered in trying to determine a solution to the identified needs discussed in the ' previous section and would keep the use of the State beach and the degraded salt marsh to a minimum. This section provides a description of the alternatives under consideration and ' alternatives withdrawn from consideration. ' B. Alternatives Under Consideration There are three project alternatives under consideration: Alternative A - Roadway modification I Alternative B - TSM (Transportation System Management) ' Alternative C - No Project I 1 These alternatives were selected after careful review by the ' Project Development Team (PDT) members which included the Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach. Such items as congestion 1 ' II-1 7UElC�YYl6 to . CIF HU' l : Ct BEACM p on File r. with City Clerk relief, displacement of residential and business units, further 1 wetlands impacts, and others were considered. The alternatives under consideration are discussed and evaluated ' below. Final selection of one of these courses of action will be made following the environmental/design review and public hearing ' process. Alternative A - Roadway Modification ' This alternative is the preferred alternative. By providing one additional lane in each direction, roadway capacity would be ' increased, thereby improving traffic flow and reducing traffic accidents. This alternative would also facilitate improved bus ' service and improved bicycle circulation. Unimproved right of way is required from the Department of Parks ' and Recreation, the City of Newport Beach, the City of Huntington Beach and two private ownerships. ' A total of approximately 9 acres would be acquired at an estimated cost of $1 .6 million. Construction at a cost of $13 ,738 ,000 , could begin in 1987 and be completed in 1989 . ' Stage I - Golden Nest Street to Beach Boulevard. ' Construction within these limits would consist of reducing the width of the existing median from 16 to 12 feet, eliminating ' on-street parking and restriping to provide 6 lanes within existing curbs (see Figure II-2) . Existing traffic signals would ' II-3 rr�rv� e' s' Aar ' MOM domm dun rYO�E: rr A-/MP.o mA rr��c�t .rEcrroy e P.oelfrc cVWXr A14OWNY O 6WOeOr be modified and placed on mast arms extending from the sidewalk ' area. In addition, in order to minimize the interruption of traffic flow on PCH, the following local intersecting streets would be cul-de-saced at their junction with PCH: 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 21st, and 22nd in the City of Huntington Beach. Enhancement of existing bus service would be ' accomplished by providing a bus layover (turn-out) between Huntington and Lake Streets. Since there is an existing bike path which parallels PCH (within 25 feet in some stretches) , no provision for bicycles has been made in the roadway. Design features within this stage have been closely coordinated with the City of Huntington Beach and OCTD. Additional right- of-way would be required for a bus layover zone at a cost of $40 ,000 . With an estimated construction cost of $1 ,100 ,000 , work could be started and completed in 1987 . Stage II - Beach Boulevard to Newport Boulevard ' There are 5 elements within this stage. Beach Boulevard to Santa Ana River. One new lane in each direction, plus shoulders and median curbs would be ( constructed (See Figure II-3a) . Parking would be prohibited. This latter feature is a safety precaution to rprevent unsafe pedestrian use. Design features have been coordinated with the City of Huntington Beach. Bus stops and turn-outs, including left-hand turn pockets for ' northbound traffic, together with general vehicular and II-5 g erwizIme 44 i V "�- Z/ Gomm 2/ J l•/ (D_t E,t/1'l//f'G' •�ill�E�JYYE�YT ��w""r�//ylE.PJ�iG'T/OrY1' AMY .!'TOP J"OE I:E",f'iY0li'.v OrY PC,4iY,1' . ��F�c co.�.rr .yr�•��.�� 1 ' pedestrian access to the new and existing Huntington State ' Beach parking lots, have been closely coordinated with OCTD and the State Department of Parks and Recreation. Existing bike trails parallel the highway within the State Beach area on the ocean side and next to the Talbert Channel on the ' inland side. Figure IV-2 depicts these bike trails and the ' proposed bicycle interchange. ' The cost of this element is $3 ,810 ,000 . A design variation for the above reach is also shown on Figure II-3b. This concept reduces traffic lane widths to 11 feet. This variation could be constructed for $200 ,000 less than the full 12-foot lanes. Parking would not be allowed on either shoulder, as these areas would be reserved ' for emergency use. Santa Ana River Bridge. The existing structure has two 10-foot and two 11-foot lanes with no median. In addition, ' there is a wooden decked 6-foot wide sidewalk/bike path attached to the ocean side of the bridge (see Figure II-4) . This recently completed improvement is separated from the ' traveled way by a concrete barrier topped by a fence. The existing bridge would remain in place while one half of the ' new bridge is constructed on the ocean side. All traffic ' would then be directed to the new half bridge while the old bridge is removed and the remainder of the new bridge is I I-7 J PPOPGt�E,O�3/.P.t' � .� 11 GxmE.1' C • V ,11E.OY.9iV i J .�vl�Ei11ENT .1'T.44 ll 0 J Tr,Aplco4, fees/t9 V � TO i9E.4G'� ,�9D1/LEi.4rP/.7 _.— .� �: p"���' A"� �I��Yyl `� " s � y' � �i.. Yp �{tt INIm p, • —�'' rli.E r.�'. �� �v r� ,.-- 1. ��rw'1+,k �,��. Yw1 "� "'i�N 41 Wi" '��II I L �[ii,r•: - -Wl' j'I�l i.Al `' I + ' a��• � ��li '� � al P F � ���4m �Ii �y"II' i rlra ¢ YI [§"II, rra I J � • Y r"drG"�'I�` �tllr�'Y,Y'I�'rpJl'i�k,�gl � r.!' i s I'i -- � IIP1,7^PIG,hlpl iai t a�rEYuGI� �ypila�H���E�`d,R{a`#"� � � a �iJIPI P satP ���� ;��,� � I al I� y ♦. f � Yi , III,'ki i 131 Will e Ifi A - � g�+�a�' II J pb7. ,J r�l klk � i`� a`y-M � i Y, ` � �. t Y�'y; f~'•;,.,J to I���II�Ya�1,"uur N�k411 �r p u w��•'.'� �'J 1 �� � y �4A1�� ^� I ��I I r{s d I �I�,tY�p'�p r �: d Y, }1Mrt f f1 t 'Itlmv'IC I R I ddy'•ry Y dp }' � i - r� ';y14 I 211 N, $ Y^ �;,,�. r f I� 1#,Y, '��rt k �•�,' r [rj �: frl�p ylll'� � i' eY ' � ;•.A� I � �ay°i t'.pll I�p. � ;� l+ �, �a e¢ Mtn, , 1,A ,A' , I I � 11 jq — q(�,,��P 41�N.,141yJ1 J .✓ ��SRt �y��i �M�!„ p rl Ip��', 1 y�M1v _ J Y N rrl,,�:Y •9"� �''�' IJr �,;� "� �' �I Ip���ik I I aI I� I lY� � ,�� — ''� { �tj N pP�IlYf�p V E4 YY w, 1 1 [ I y � '� � B �I 11�Y1 it m M1 y'kl YI ill I. 4'9.. f�q 1 • ' completed (see Figure II-5) . Provision for a bike lane would be made on both sides of the new bridge to connect with existing bike 'trails. Also, there would be provision for a bike trail under the up-coast side of the bridge to connect the inland side trails to the ocean side trails (see ' Figure IV-2) . Bridge design and location has been coordinated with the Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington ' Beach, the U.S. Corps of Engineers, the Coast Guard, State ' Fish and Game, State Parks and Recreation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the County of Orange. The cost of this element is $4 ,464 ,000 . Santa Ana River to Sixtieth Street. With the exception of a short stretch adjacent to the river, the existing ocean side ' curb and sidewalk would be retained. This portion of the highway was widened by 'the City of Newport Beach to six-lane standards on the ocean side only, in 1979. One additional lane on .the inland side, •together with the now existing improvements on the ocean side would complete the proposed six-lane highway design (see Figure II-6) . Bus stops on the inland side would be provided for in the emergency parking ' lane/bike lane. On the ocean side, the existing bus turn outs and sidewalk would be utilized. A raised landscaped ' median would be constructed and left-turns would be allowed at selected intersections. Close coordination with Newport ' Beach has been maintained. ' The cost of this element is $1 ,510 ,000. ' II-10 J IA. Ile & N, �v m J �KR rr�r� Ti,Ob r e4 C �lrV .wio . � 6'a►"' P1' t1' low i AWSO � rlI-NS owlvdtE J � �.4C/F/C Gi��1.1'1 H/GiYII�,�Or ��.rr .r,Wirr,4 ,4W,,4 ,P/liE,P i9,PIM1 cam' cam' � o�n� moo dr bg Yll � W .�R�1.�1/�Y//Y6' A►.iu rifle ."Mr.4 X V..I AlWrwwr yf��r•�~�i��rfe ref rr�lcw sEcriom "00wci�-rc MA47 ,11alld 4y � �,�s,. ,rr,�ET r© TiYE J•/�YT.4 .4iY.�/ .�'l�f�P ' Sixtieth Street to Newport Boulevard. The existing curb and sidewalk on the ocean side of the highway would be retained. ' The equivalent of two additional lanes would be constructed on the inland side combined with complete roadway restriping to provide three traveled lanes in each direction. A new ' curb, gutter and sidewalk would be constructed on the inland side of the highway together with a raised landscaped median ' (see Figure II-7) . ' The cost of this element is $2 ,854 ,000 . ' Bus stops on both sides of the highway, within this entire ' stage, would be provided in the emergency parking lane. This area would also serve as a bike lane. Left-turns would ' be allowed at selected intersections. The connections with Newport Boulevard would remain substantially as they presently are. All Route 55/1 connector improvements con- templated in the Route 55 EIS are adaptable to the proposed PCH improvements. Design features have been closely ' coordinated with the City of Newport Beach. A total of approximately 9 acres of new right-of-way for ' Stage II would be acquired at an estimated cost of $1 ,560 ,000 . Construction of Stage II , at a cost of ' $12 ,638 ,000, could begin in 1987 and be completed in 1989. ' Alternative B TSK (Transportation System Management) As with the No Project Alternative, TSM is not by itself an effective alternative to highway widening. In an effort to solve 1 II-13 one E,rirri .gP.or.�E ' pro JIE.IJ •I(EiYT io 1r' .�,,ff ' 1r' f 1e' irl� ' �►' B' e' now-w GNOW ONE s anuo mmr =me r 4YevvWe )V *VA.fAOJ l e'X¢'�p,�ar�� e' .S'r•4G:E .lrl 4 � .��©cer� ' J 4641"ife b 1111140?11 al, 0/ 1Fly Tell v ,frar,e" ffw. ro .!a erelae Woo"Oo ror at least relieve existing traffic problems in the project area, ' several TSM concepts (new signal, signal interconnects, one-waying a downtown Huntington Beach Street, and elminating some on-street parking) have been recently implemented. Additional TSM measures, such as bus turnouts, which are only practical and feasible when combined with highway widening, are included in the preferred alternative. Alternative C - No Project Although taking no action is an alternative, it is not a solution. Local public officials, private citizens and the travelling public have asked that existing and future traffic problems be solved. fSelecting this alternative would not only leave conditions the way they are, but such an action would be inconsistent with local and ' regional planning. If this alternative is selected, the following ' items would occur. There would be no impacts on parking, the California Least Tern and other biological resources, and no ' increase in noise in some areas. There would be increased congestion, accidents, and the level of service at various intersections would decrease further. ' C. Alternatives Withdrawn from Consideration Transit Any type of fixed guideway system was not considered to be cost ' effective, practical or consistent with county-wide transit planning. Improved bus service by itself was not considered to be an effective alternative to roadway modification. The proposed 1 II-15 roadway improvement alternative affords the opportunity to ' incorporate the few but related improvements that are feasible and beneficial. ' New Parallel Highway Impacts from the acquisition of separate right-of-way for a new ' highway preclude further consideration of this alternative. The once proposed Pacific Coast Freeway was removed from the State , Freeway System by the legislature in 1975 , because of excessive costs and environmental impacts such as residential dislocation. 1 Variations o Unacceptable Design Oa i tions t Alternative A There were 3 highway widening design variations considered and ' ultimately withdrawn from consideration. 1 . Widen to full 6-lane standards from Beach Boulevard to ' Golden West Street. Thisvariation is unacceptable due to ' the large amount of right-of way which would be required. Numerous vacant lots, partial takes from improved ' properties, oil producing property and over 30 homes and businesses would be affected. 2 . Widen the Santa Ana River Bridge on the inland side. This ' variation is unacceptable since it would cause the removal of at least 15 mobile homes and loss of a portion of the Seminouk Slough. The latter impact would necessitate the ' relocation of the end of the slough and its tide gate to the Greenville-Banning Channel (see Figure IV-2) . , II-16 ' 3 . only replace the Santa Ana River Bridge and leave the highway as a 4-lane facility. This would solve the ' deteriorating bridge problem, but it would not solve all of ' the other accident, safety and congestion problems. It also would not improve circulation and access to the beach or ' provide the TSM type improvements as Alternative A does. 1 1 1 ' II-17 'J i JJI 21, MA :(�i,j �� It � ti L• �• ,�� i � 1�a '�777yf u III. ABl6CTBD SAVI1tORMBNT 1 A. Introduction ' This chapter examines the affected environment and provides an ' overview of the environmental characteristics of the study area (Pacific Coast Highway, Route 1 ) , and its relationship to Orange County. The characteristics of Orange County are discussed followed by a detailed discussion of the study area. B. Regional Setting ' The study area for Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) , is located in the cities of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach in the south central ' coastal portion of Orange County (see Figure III-1 ) . . ' The study area lies about 40 miles southeast of downtown Los ' Angeles along the Southern California coastline. It extends about 6 miles in a northwesterly direction from Newport Boulevard, ( Route 55) in Newport Beach, to Golden West Street in Huntington Beach. Newport Beach is bounded by Costa Mesa on the west and 1 north, Irvine on the east, unincorporated Orange County area on the east and the Pacific Ocean on the south. Huntington Beach is ' bounded by unincorporated Orange County, Seal Beach, Westminster and Fountain Valley on the north, Costa Mesa and Newport Beach on the east and the Pacific Ocean on the south and west. ' III-1 � a■� a� a� a a� a a ,a as as �a as as is a� is a� a N YIK'A AYE /- e• •••' - •� a t • w.,k :aRo oN y C urF—,T3� •Y .:• uua a. c c '� �• O ON y . A•u7lASL �u�or: S :1. 'r:o - -- o�auau•cr rwo`oL�:o o L:c i �i: R ST "I r....•• .,•,La r msa.p o.3: 9 x a pur u•Cl RO•«s. -<urru cuoao• o o _ •r" _ �/ /� LKR :AY �I•}i i �•t •v( R• .r cu �g i ••,.'', y ,a �''i S•� ,Qa, '•'q F t � i •.N Y11OItMS 1 t ••� `�40 �o. - n•r..co `w • ' ~C',b♦L N.I.q � A •V v.1R I.NiI � NI LN =J r �� '�i�i. N :u•O� =,' `,L.Or L LK•• \ 1f i L i • y 'LYMGI. Dr,'1' O k � r•••0�S < / � �� — � xrlri Lu � [ 1�{s :. .••ei / Neu,w• cu �a• •O• r•p `�V ♦r 4�4 tAi S Av 3,• r t ,..ew.�.,w•u...Lu. : .. ••�-a=•� - .ni.L{ux•r•u.on icLR -Z4 { �! r` b♦a♦ '. ` N, -�f /� �^..L.►NN, L;i 3i e' •- .« ,''• uu�,�•77p ' ���rrrt�RR���"`"•••ri . .. :•r,• •Lo.o,. •o. / j 3 AY , • -_. �f�.�. ♦ O hir• ♦ rpr Y.xLET I , q '•f Gr t•, ;_, r. .�a y i 3 i i.: ..L,.« ,, t o V V \ 1 LAMA li != t •' p '• — "�� L Y.1 r `C • b mor n to F L...ur. 1♦ M Sr L• • `i N CIO I ••cI• :r"r LrY • o• �fO=Rv/ w y six cLR a�N ' 4. .�• Cr A •N r s{ (.r..oc •-i AII[CIO ` • : r..r /�, 5 T�a ITT i3Tln° •R: ..dn...o• _ In.�..•= •.�R L■ �Si.i. [i' {A'te • ♦ .. ....,r••LIL..p L. =: ,I / f£.ES..t:i.Fl• <csT Ap� ♦ OFTROI fT � �yM w /• T. •(Y 1 4 � . S L.^. Nq.. .Vr--13 .N �f'LLTP oCi• {alY/I[IO OR ;ICN. .., A Sr Y•«ir oc.•.r _ •1--=� ; — _ 1 IiO�•IIcwL Lf HUNTIN6TOPi BEAC ` J � � • ,•. �,,••L � • i":= i,;•,,.;: :: � g `+ , AI rMORE ST ot.. ,.. o• .L_y rr 4ti• < 'c , • ''si. L wu.r :• i i '; •L � . T .♦ NAT T - L• •KW I•�: •�.'.�•' �• .OYIM w0•L� 'i V �Yk� ,�Y� COMGRFf3 LM.� sl = r, r a "u^ AVE V�.. ._. �� :-t..• aTomRoo •r .e lr. •,;. - -3CN ' L.��1. . y.:' YI OM fT� < Y[ `I MAN 4. ' 'a:..' `• a ua•r• UA R .0 I' .. Y.Y.•LL ; _ .. :. •e Y�l„(t• 14<wI� •'+1..`..& IO �1[CN L [DISON AVE �1 <y G=OY[ Y 31 .w ci��• a.x,•r�+•�1. .3 snL .Rwr r.« R.o�r'Y oR.w^_. : 1: •o•RR y p iC1i s*s F l 31 91rACM P+ .�.r . • !... '� • S ini•u�octf /A = 1. _u Y[ f Sl �f� • YLYI '� rc A W.c a oLs, �� • e 1 57 Sl C ....L.wro..K r.r u. •• o.D. .[.. o. D i�• fL < Y •z n.nl uau•/.•a .r•'su1f I�,i� .: j .p 0 31 L-Mr� rw.•w r 1 .......: ' a - W 1 ppli MRa r �rl,•�{{O •• ., }�Dcst_libi DlD rCENTER _fz!M„cu Lir.I CIO o C`o hrl,{`,�� 'f V°.'1' 't ♦ l r `\\q �.LLI Ru IR. .uu �A O LT3./ yr SHE CND f • ; \ x COSTA MESAK .ar{o. r T A '3 ; .r.w•L, FARAD OHM VIT as J yV� •/ ` crrr o/< Sri dE'TLy +• \r — i.w Yc,w. rL ,[ t�� •G loot 37 D (� t —ANOL o��ao ♦ 1 '' •o � \I V + O f•MA WA a1Y7R .• .' �.�L Rw OR •L•"' d y~abb C COINn pACN C �t .O.O ♦� � t e•. r � J NEWPORT BEACH 9 .Y r.. -- --�- - MIN TERM! - ' C. Socioeconomic Setting Orange County is a partially urbanized area contiguous to greater metropolitan Los Angeles. It has a total area of 786 square miles. The development of Orange County has taken place irelatively recently and both Newport Beach and Huntington Beach have experienced growth in population and commerce since 1965. Orange County is the second most populated county in California. 1. Land Use Profile ' The land use profile is broken up into 4 sections: Inland and oceanside of PCH in Newport Beach and Huntington Beach. Oceanside of PCH in Huntington Beach Golden West Street to Ninth Street. This land is part of ' Bolsa Chica State Beach. The area has historically been used for oil production facilities, and is being used as such in Lthe space between the bottom of the bluff and the beach. Between the top of the bluff and PCH, the City of Huntington Beach, in conjunction with State Parks and Recreation, is developing a strip park. This park will include a bike path (completed) , landscaping, beach access and parking. The ' ocean in this area is a favored location for surfing. - Ninth Street to Beach Boulevard. This area is developed with public beaches, parking lots and eating facilities. A cluster of residential units is located between 7th and 9th Streets. ' III-3 Beach Boulevard to Santa Ana River. This area is occupied by Huntington State Beach. The Huntington Beach Least Tern Nesting Area (LTNA) is located at the river .end of the beach (see Figure IV-2 ) . 1300 additional parking spaces are being , constructed utilizing a portion of old Pacific Electric Rail- road (P.E. ) right of way between PCH and the beach parking lot. Inland side of PCH in Huntington Beach - Golden West Street to Lake Street. The area from Lake Street to 12th Street is intensely developed with a mixture of small ' commercial businesses. From 12th Street to Golden West Street the land is primarily undeveloped, with some oil ' production related activity and scattered commercial use. - Lake Street to Beach Boulevard. This stretch is developed with two large motels, 'a small pitch and putt golf course, two trailer parks and a vacant gas station. The trailer park near Huntington Street is• planned for redevelopement to a higher use. - Beach Boulevard to Newland Street. This area has some remnant degraded coastal salt marsh as well as two trailer ' parks and a boat storage yard. The land is owned by Caltrans. 1 III-4 1 Newland to Santa Ana River. This area is undeveloped with ' the exception of the Edison Generating Plant. The land adjacent to the highway is owned by Caltrans, and is made up of remnant degraded coastal salt marshes and remnant coastal dunes. Inland side of PCH in Newport Beach - Santa Ana River to 60th Street. This area is fully developed with a mixture of commercial establishments, two trailer parks and some interspersed residences. - Sixtieth Street to Newport Boulevard. With the exception of a recreational vehicle storage yard near Newport Boulevard and a restaurant at 60th Street, this area is undeveloped. A ' substantial portion of the land abutting the highway is owned by Caltrans. Oceanside of PCH in Newport Beach - Santa Ana River to Newport Boulevard. This area is primarily residentially developed with a few commercial establishments located easterly of Balboa Boulevard and at the entrance of Balboa Coves. In the area of 57th Street, there is a i recreational area with tennis and handball courts. From 58th Street to the river there is an undeveloped strip of former P.E. right-of-way between the residences and the highway. This small area has been set aside for the approach to the ' new bridge, and the accompanying widening of PCH south of the Santa Ana River. ' III-5 2. Major Activity Centers The major activity centers and community resources within the study area are listed and depicted on Figure III-2. , i D. Transportation and Circulation Pacific Coast Highway is the major transportation facility in the area. Table III-1 depicts the existing conditions of PCH between Golden West Street and Newport Boulevard Route 55. The nearest major parallel route is the San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) , approximately 5 miles to the north. Intersecting major north- south routes are Golden West Street (Figure III-3) , Beach Boulevard (Figure III-4) , Brookhurst Street (Figure III-5) and Newport Boulevard. The primary mode of travel is by personal automobile. Extensive bike paths cover the area; they are primarily used for recreational purposes. The Orange County Transit District operates 10 bus lines that provide service to and along PCH. Average Daily Traffic & Peak Hour Traffic Vehicular traffic volumes on PCH within the project limits vary by season of the year. Because of such variation, the expression of Average Daily Traffic (ADT) as an annual averge does not provide the real picture of traffic activity on the facility. Also, , traffic volumes change from street intersection to street intersection. However, it does seem appropriate to look at some average figures to put into perspective the traffic volume variances that can occur due to daily and seasonal traffic fluctuations. To accomplish this, the studied route segment was III-6 y� r , OF HrI _ T T EACH y f. p on File with City Clerk �a ■ ■ imam TABLE II1-1 Existing Conditions of PCH Between Golden West Street and Newport Boulevard (Rte 55) Golden West Street Basch Blvd. (Rte 39) Santa Ana River Santa Ana River 60th Street Superior Avenue to to to to to Beach Blvd. Rte 39) Santa Ana River Bridge 60th Street Superior Avenue Newport Blvd. Rte 55 Right of Way width 100' 90' d 100' - 124' 124' 100' Number of Lanes 2N 8 2S 2N 8 2S 2N 8 2S 2N 6 3S 2N 6 2S 2N 6 2S Shoulders B'N 8 81S 61N h VS - Veriable'N d 81S 0'N 6 8'S H H Median 16' Curbed 4' 15' painted - 15' painted 10'-15 painted 10'-15' painted co Through City Beach Through State Park Bike Bridge 8 Bike Lanes Along Talbert Channe Ocean side N H S N 8 S N d S Parking Metered N & S No Perking No Parking Parking N Only No Parking Parking S Only Number of Signals 7 3 0 2 1 0 N_North S-South I jd IIII i I III Ih� H f Iw,.ti irirl ClprliN w'J,I I + IIIII��l41rf1 N��I I Ildl f '•:�a' r lapll' I �..` �, hl�l�Il I, drll"I H1SIuliI {)u �I c I IJ[II18 CS I r a, •I� � w u l I I � JJ ', 1 H wu (I y alu IW II� I I III $I I N I dln M. ' I a1ll. " � , I rN� .. �I �Ih� �W.,YIId1 II '�� Iro I" I p nd {• �ar1�N HFI d' wip I N ri1 l d1 uv..� '' 16111irJI ( h N ddyll �Ilp+x f ,. �1M fillipp dN IIY 11J1 IllN (�r..:l ' I I� �^ a � � II�1ry1�1��Illol �h����J�� �I� �I NI xrl x"•..,1 � ���Ir��•r � � : u dl I�� � �-" 4� r 1 INFII W° ill�I lif h�y I�li N i4! Y '3� H^r. M �[dP 1�9! � I f�lt+�{Illllw��, i1 �.Pdbr� 41 { ul1�I a ! 1` Ipl Y ��. +: IIN ���H, �n`�^+ INI � tl� I r �I t, �141��k1 p ,�•. {, n 1 l' E-r e PNS����� W � ,F, I. i i >, 1�'+rl • �N �hr ����"Pr k N I F � ? 1�� I '� k �. ' � � #w"�II h I 11! W I �' W ' u 4 fe s' " F � a rl itl I 60p1' N�HNx{ ta L'p w ��h �I N { v� x �y �I�hi rmI U ial rtu�IP g Ylr�p r d^ I+ s aI °�r'ux�rl'�h �� i,1'^gw ta. s d P '� 4H dw�,yrWq i+r I t 8 '• e1 15 M ' i �i� rI 'I i y�'till; I i. '�9, '� "'{"I,..� ?a'r�,,+'�+ ii lkr �u4"'�.�„ \ ��1. 1��JpI� I• � TwdI di.� i' f � 'aN N N I IYI� 'Iv- w t+ 'I° '�• r ri M1fSpyl {��P16h 1�7��„� : � �H� r `> II x '�da ux N i C I M hail I�k I � ^t SIN r rd + P i Ur � r �� `'- �Y �v"w'ud•� yy. '� II�r� '��, N �a, � r�+pdwr `��� ��ry r-1 1 , r Ad i dyVi�Id' Y 11 I i a 1 N x �" . IHI r 'i t �� i� ' �p �I��� �IG41ii'��Nld I � � I.�I I M ♦ I 'I'd u lkN' I� I d- , r'. CA ,a ��r � �� Y � P , I x �:�,l�iI N�1�i�iu�I,�,.. � � I•�I��.,� I � ��Ipp'I p�1,JIU��d��,�1��1■�.y� ,� .�a a " y, {�I��L;N H [14 ui v.1 I G l If I N �N 11 III i ° F'i ti III yPP I li' I l � 4 rtI� '� I,�qY ' {Nhll"111�' III Id�vir I I I I � III ���N h I�rINN+ > 4 • ' � yy' Qd b �,e a 1 N� la Ip11" I,Ir I �4lrldlllN qI r, II ,� IIII I �r I �SI,GIhI I fN � a drl�, IIINII �` '�• � ' �IraII�IIIINI ln�� III III I a INIII w � N �, �� F hr• ,IIIII�N�N�11 I I t � l' j � 1j1� III��� Irw ���J h '� Iu' I I�r1 I I N I � I J III I�� 11 I •y� +. �N I 1� �1 I.d ial,IV r I Mau'AI 11 ,y I I I II11 a �j�! I' I� ✓r I � 11 � IVI I II Ii � x a1 I I I I I �. f,H a �I I I I r-. 1 a I I d�II G' 13 IH I I I IrN III II�ti x 1N'b ! xx H♦tl �� � I 11 :� � i,�,. � �NI,�N I�I�'gl�lill I q�' �s�N�l IIII,��p 4 MI���� •� �'.� I �I�h ��I''. d� l i t III I I q d I oly Hi I i II C'Ix I �`r a v fi r l J �„ u� �� � �H � � INN �w��luiRl. �ll'' I' I i'i iIVI�"Iry Ill '4 11 �1��► v" 4� 'Il I 'i, I N•I III Ix I I I I..I i I ry Id �d. ��"�� k I .I ��� Ixl I�„ I IIIIIIh �I IIIII Ill' u I I N'II IIIII I.I', �,wz "b,' IN�i�I I r — J •_ram '_" - ° � - _ - - 3 Mew - s _ Vol PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY � J - 'PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY/BEACH BOULEVARD INTERSECTION � 11 a�pp7 �i I Ipl Mp II tlN! V I 1�� III� 1XI11� p iP h.N! X dp I h�W I �.. 111 X 17 I "pll 1�'41 iR v r rq a I � lit ��w w I IN � Il,fl � ��� ,N�yluN I�ilby�1lr I WYW .ldl w✓ k' I i I m XN:pX tl r�, ti, 9 II' I „Xiik M pII IplllllryllGl+ p dIGI�NV bYw YII 5 ' � "IIyNP�rprl 81 I a n7Nr N ��,Iu"x l V1. � y M" X, 7 a ' � ! rIIuG w rl • 1NI pG p I w X �" M w h'$ N�. a i al'w .1 mX' h yu'�''4 1w p tl �y r W�a ,5 I W ww.t kp �Id,l R4'< NaM WWr wuKpri .r :X1 u"C• F �'rwr -.' gg Ityw 1 iM rW��� ,'1�'�j�{�dRI�' �' : • ZD It n"jj 1�."t, mp - $ I $ tl "x.55 � wjF pX X f{� W" �I 7 N le 1 rA w W OF w al r'M1�,. 'N ",7,,m ,. "r " y, lip . '7E v ,^n WpF ✓rlh .p R x i xXp Nlp r + w r ad`WJ", r ,W it a+ �Mp m �a• w M '� „ _ W x �n 1 4� �_. yr tr"'. 1 + w i�iwC'�,y Xp Ir a w n 4pXppwrka `. F. �tl r ypy�'II N' I a '� wh r " I I �m o-1 Mlr y. pp'." "•� r r MAN N I I IW W^d W � swd t w. rwrp ;d,4 I'hwjW W a I W�p" P X�W a 4 WI r a W p a w e 'II ur w d 14 x11 I,III g I unuW xG P tl* p.Wr..: n`w "16 0114 G ��'l4'X N(W�. r II Idp 'h w I rrd W h a .5 ar I 4 •rak ,w„��' � C'Jp*wr XY h xi!I �P^III II � H rr" Y INw"X.1,. �q q Iw �Ir�l�u x ddr �1 h.kh,�l��Illlp X" i I Irl Id ,� ��I I G��hur .Ir �f broken into two links: (1) Routs 39 (Beach Boulevard) To Route 55 (Newport Boulevard) and (2) between Golden West Street and Route 39. The averaging effort evolved into development of sets of ADT' s representing (1) Peak Months (June, July, August) and (2) 1 Non-Peak Months (remaining months) activity. In addition, peak hour volumes by direction were included. The results are seen in Tables III-2 and -3. Table III-2 data indicate a 13. 8% increase in Peak Months ADT over Non-Peak Months ADT. AM peak hour during Peak Months increases by 5. 3%, but decreases in two-way percentage of ADT by 0.6%. PM peak hour, during Peak Months, increases by 22. 8% and in two-way percentage of ADT by 0.6%. Table III-3 data indicate a 13.2% increase in Peak Months ADT over Non-Peak Months ADT, AM peak hour during Peak Months increases by 5.9%, but decreases in two-way percentage of ADT by 0. 4% . PM peak ' hour during peak months increases by 20. 8% and increases in two- way percentage of ADT by 0. 5%.- Beach Usage Traffic Because the Pacific Ocean beaches play such an important role in attracting trips to the project focus area, it is of some importance to examine the regional distribution characteristics of beach users. A license plate survey was conducted and the results are shown on Figure III-6. Surprisingly, only 11. 7 percent showed a homebased III-12 TABLE III-2 PCH Between Route 55 and Route 39 Nork-Peak Mont. , T AM AM AM PM PM PM Direction ADT Split Peak split %ADT Peak S lit %ADT W/B 16,700 50% 890 36% 5.3 1660 60% 9.9 , E/B 16 700 50% 1560 64% 9.4 1110 40% 6.6 Peak Months W/B 19,000 50% 960 37% 5.1 1920 57% 10.1 E/B 19 000 50% 1620 63% 8.6 1480 43% 7.8 8.9 TABLE III-3 PCH Between Route 39 and Golden West Street Nork-Peak Mont T AM AM AM PM PM PM Direction ADT Split Peak Split %ADT Peak Split %ADT W/B 16,150 53% 1190 58% 7.3 1110 49 6.9 E/B 14 250 47% 860 42% 6.0 1150 51 8.1 Peak Months W/B 17,400 51% 1250 58% 7.2 1340 49 7.7 E/B 17 000 49% 920 42% 5.4 1390 51 8.2 III-13 ' 8 � •G4Nc,�r�FP � f2 Ar Ol 3 •s.,Ni O�'1�O�Y i9�.P�✓.PA/ 1 ellliE.?l//J�"�O 1�941ovfl� .o. Al ® ,r=rr/5AWIY c,441rFa-UlAW Arrvc. �p U-M 4 _ OF SrRr1-f r1C,4e yo of aE.f�rCGE T,Pi�.r E" / �Y T X.l' 4P G O .QG 1'.4l/1'r/C,4V .4,P". o GE.!'.S' TiY,4iY la /• />/.!'T.P/i9!/l/DiY if/OT.!HOM'�! , 'b ,off.-= AFMIO �� eo�.�r.Q��arror .�. �E.�®c�E Mpl000 r trip end within Huntington Beach. Orange County as a whole showed 34 percent of the home based registration matches. Nearly two-thirds of those parked in the beach lots, then, were non-residents of Orange County. In addition to the varied distribution of beach users parked in the city/state off-street parking lots, their mean trip length was shown to be in excess of 27 miles if both trip ends were assumed to be (1) the beach, and (2) the matched vehicle registration address (see Table III-4) . As the distribution pattern of the beach clientele suggested by Figure III-6 indicates, the beaches are truly regional trip attractors, not merely attractors of local residents. E. Natural Setting 1. Aesthetics Pacific Coast Highway, from Long Beach to San Diego, has been declared eligible for designation as a Scenic Highway. The Highway' s primary attribute in the project area is its close proximity to the ocean and beaches. As described in the Land Use section, a substantial portion of the property adjoining the highway is undeveloped or used for beach parking. As a result, the highway traveler has a feeling of openness, with wide, expansive vistas. 2. Climate The climate of this study area is classified as Mediterranean rfollowing the Koeppen System of Climate Classification. The ' III-15 TABLE III-4 HUNTINGTON STATE & CITY BEACHES REGIONAL TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTION % -- OF VEHICLE TRIPS 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 •18 20 +----•--------------•----.---------•----•----*----• CUHX COUNT 0• 0.0 OCOUNT 5. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.6 9 .6 293 10. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7'.7 17.3 234 15. .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 29.5 373 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 39.0 291 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 0 47. 0 243 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 54.2 219 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 62.4 251 40. . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 16.2 '8.6 494 45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8 68.4 299 W5 0• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5.2 93.6 1 0 0 •55. . . . . 1 .7 9E "3 51 60. 60 0.8 96. 0 23 65. 9 . . . 1 .4 97.4 43 70. 00000 1 .8 99.2 55 • T 80. • 0.3 99.6 10 4J 85 . 0. 1 99. 7 4 0. 1 99.8 2 a 90. 0. 0 99•.6 0 95. 0. 0 99.8 0 ►�- 100. 0.1 99.8 2 105. 0. 0 99.d 0 11U. 0. 1 99.9 2 115. 0. 1 100 . 0 3 120. (ALL REMAININU COUNTS ARE ZERO) 0 . 0 100 . 0 0 MEAN VARIANCE STD DEV SUM COUNT -. -------- ------- ------------- 27.218 280.587 16. 751 3052 III-16 average temperature is 61 .30 F and receives an average of 11 .41 inches of rain per year (John Wayne Airport Master Plan Draft EIR, available through John Wayne Airport) . Most .of the rainfall occurs between the months of November and April with less than one-inch falling between May and October. ICoastal fog is also another feature of the micrometeorology of the study area. This fog predominates in the summer months beginning in the later afternoon or early evening and dissipating the next morning, generally before noon. Temperature inversions are found to occur frequently over the study area. These inversions occur when a layer of cool marine air moves inland from the ocean and is unable to mix with the warmer inland air. 3 . Air Quality An air quality study was conducted and is included in the Physical Environmental Report. The project area, being adjacent to the coast and generally under the influence of prevailing on-shore winds, experiences much better air quality than inland air. This section of the South Coast Air Basin is upwind of densely populated, high emission areas and seldom exceeds Federal or State air pollutant standards. 4. Noise Noise measurements were taken at 25 locations which were con- sidered to be representative of sensitive receptors within the III-17 project limits and are shown in Table III-5. Most measurements were taken during the months of July and August, traditionally the heaviest traffic periods. The location of these measurement sites are shown on Figure IV-1. All noise levels reported in this study are in decibels on the A- weighted scale, using the Leq noise descriptor. The A- weighted decibel scale is used as it most nearly matches the response of the human ear to sound. Leq is defined as the continuous steady state noise level which would have the same total A-weighted acoustic energy as the real fluctuating noise measured over the same time period. 5. Topography The proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone of Orange County on PCH, paralleling the ocean within a few hundred yards. The area is characterized by ocean vistas, beaches, coastal bluffs and wetlands. The Santa Ana River, an important natural feature of the area, also serves as the border between the cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. The topography of the project area is primarily flat. The section of PCH between Route 55 and Seminouk Slough runs along the base of Newport Mesa. Between Beach Boulevard and Golden West Street, PCH runs along the top of the western edge of the Huntington Beach Mesa. 6. Soils The predominant soil underlying PCH between Route 55 and Golden III-18 Mao i i TABLE III-5 SUMMAW OF EXISTING NOISE (dBA) DATE SOURCE* SITE LOCATION RECEPTOR MEASURED CALCULATED ADJUSTMENT TIME DISTANCE FACTOR as ie PCH at M3ch & Bay KZI.Le 6 e Port 7-8-81/1112 41 ' 72 71 +1 2 Eastside PCH N/O Highland Street 7-7-81/1033 51' 67 68 -1 3 Eastside PCH N/0 Walnut Street 7-7-81/1013 59' 65 67 -2 4 Eastside PCH at 61st Street 7-7-81/0947 33' 71 69 +2* 6 Eastside PCH N/O Boat Storage Yard 7-8-81/1025 86' 66 65 +1 8 Westside PCH Seashore @ Sonora. 7-7-81/1058 144' 62 61 +1 1-4 1.4 �• 10 Westside PCH Seashore @ 59th Street 7-9-81/1017 134' 64 64 0 �o 10A Westside PCH West Newport Park 11-13-81/1220 97' 64 64 0 10B Westside PCH West Newport Park 11-13-81/1235 40' 70 70 0 11 Westside PCH River @ Bruce Cres 7-7-81/1128 50' 68 70 -2 12 Westside PCH Joanne @ Bruce Cres 7-7-81/1146 56' 67 69 -2 13 Westside PCH Caryl @ Bruce Cres 7-7-81/1205 75' 64 67 -3 14 Westside PCH North End Balboa Caves 7-9-81/1040 78' 64 65 -1 15 Westside PCH South End Balboa Coves 7-9-81/1105 .80' 65 66 -1 16 Westside PCH east Edge Least Tern Nesting Area 8-11-81/1110 305' 57 57 0 18 Eastside PCH Vacant Land N/O Superior 8-22-81/1405 82' 67 67 0 *Distance between receptor and centerline of nearest highway lane. TABLE III-5 (cont' ) SUMMARY OF EXISTING NOISE (dBA) -rm SOURCE* SITE LOCATION RECEMR MEASURED CALCULATED ADJUSTMENT TIME DISTANCE Lon Lea FACTOR 20 Eastside ri o Trailer ar - - 21 Eastside PCH Driftwood Mobile Hane 8-20-81 52' 61 60 +1 22 Eastside PCH Driftwood Beach Golf Course 8-20-81/1102 90' 67 64 +3 23 Eastside PCH Huntington Shores Mobile Homes 8-21-81/1025 62' 62 63 -1 ,.., 25 Eastside PCH Huntington Shores Motel 8-21-81/1025 72' 63 63 0 ~ 26 Eastside PCH Between 2nd & 3rd Street 8-21-81/1043 63' 64 63 +1 N O 27 Eastside PCH Between 9th & 10th Street 8-20-81/1150 68' 67 65 +2 28 Eastside PCH Between 12th & 13th Street 8-20-81/1210 68' 68 65 +3 29 Eastside PM Between 19th & 20th Street 1 8-20-81/1230 68' 65 64 +1 *Distance between receptor and centerline of nearest highway lane. West is classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service as beach. This type of soil consists of sandy, gravelly, or cobbly coastal material that has been washed and : rewashed by tidal and wave action. This soil unit would support little or no vegetation and would have no agricultural value. other soil types underlying PCH includes riverwash at the mouth of the Santa Ana River and Marina loamy sand, generally occurring on the coastal terraces of Huntington Beach. A significant portion of PCH is immediately adjacent to tidal flats (the inland area between the Santa Ana River and just northeast of Huntington Street) . Figure III-7 depicts these soil types and how they relate to PCH. 7. Geology The project is located along the coastal plain within the south- east portion of the Los Angeles Basin. For the most part, the section of PCH included in this study traverses the Santa Ana gap, an alluvial valley formed by the Santa Ana River in geologically recent times. This geomorphic feature is about 2. 5 miles wide and extends about 4. 5 miles inland. Elevation varies from sea level along the beach to about 25 feet farther inland. The deposits range from the fine sand and silty sand to coarse sand and gravel. The area' s predominant structural feature is the northwest trending Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone (see Figure III-8) . This zone consists of two groups of parallel faults - the dominant trend is northwesterly, but these faults are truncated by a north III-21 ?Uef ame u ; I, :.,Ot BEACH t r ;aa , � OF HC.I. l NG SEACH ■ to northeasterly trending set. The location and extent of these faults has been determined from oil well and groundwater data. The faults act as an effective groundwater barrier. a. Seismicity and Seismic Phenomena The project lies within the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone. The zone is active and has an assigned maximum credible earthquake magnitude of 7.5 (Richter) . Ground shaking would be the most damaging seismic phenomena. Estimated maximum expected bedrock acceleration is 1. 0g, with a duration of shaking of 24 seconds or more. Liquefaction potential in the Huntington Beach Mesa, between Golden West Street and 3,000 feet westerly of Beach Boulevard, is low. The remainder of the project is characterized by high 1 liquefaction potential. Sand boils were observed in the area just northerly of this portion of the project in the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake (Magnitude 6. 3 Richter) . Ground rupture can take place along the trace of a fault during an earthquake. Segments of the Newport-Inglewood Fault cross the ' proposed project near the intersections of Pacific Coast Highway with Brookhurst Street and Superior Avenue. At these locations, ground rupture may take place along the fault trace during a rmoderate or large seismic event. III-24 Tsunamis are seismically-induced sea waves. Although infrequent, seismic sea waves have been reported at various locations in Southern California during its relatively short historic record (about 210 years) . The origin of these waves is still a matter of controversy, with some researchers attributing them to activity on the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone, and others citing the waves as evidence of an active offshore fault system. A recent report by the California Division of Mines and Geology , projects that most tsunami damage will occur in coastal areas below the 20-foot elevation above mean low water level. A Tsunami , Risk Map of the Orange County Coast indicates a moderate tsunami runup risk in the immediate vicinity of the mouth of the Santa Ana River and a half-mile east and west of Beach Boulevard. These locations are designated as areas that may be inundated by waves of 100 years ' recurrence. b. Erosion and Sedimentation There will be little or no change in the existing rate of erosion as a result of this project. Erosion can be mitigated by prompt landscaping of cut and fill slopes as soon after construction as practicable (see Chapter IV, Section B) . ' c. Subsidence and Settlement Subsidence will not be initiated by the project. Subsidence has occurred in the project area. Orange County Surveyors data r indicate that in the six-year period, 1976 to 1982, up to . 34' ' III-25 settlement has occurred at the northerly end, and a .2 ' at the southerly end. The central portion of the project shows a slight increase in elevation, with a maximum rise of .04' . Subsidence is a large-scale areal settlement and has had no structural effect on the existing Pacific Coast Highway. It is ' related to the extraction of oil from the Huntington Beach and the West Newport oil fields. Subsidence can be expected to continue with additional pumping. Minor settlement may occur locally if approach fills are constructed for the bridge widening over the Santa Ana River. 8. Hydrology With the exception of the westerly area in downtown Huntington Beach, PCH in the project area, lies on the flood plain of the Santa Ana River (see Figure 'III-9) . Stormwater, in general, flows southward from the coastal areas and crosses the highway to reach ' the ocean, which parallels the- highway, about two hundred yards away. Because of the beachside location, groundwater in the vicinity of the highway is only a few feet below the surface. In the area traversed by the highway, rainfall averages twelve inches a year, as compared to the peak recorded rainfall of thirty-two ' inches in the 1940-41 season. Detailed hydrology data for the Santa Ana River Basin is given in the Environmental Impact State- ment by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated September 1980. III-26 ..a�x "Um I C 'OF Hll1TI :N BEACH m p on File with City Clerk 3 9 . Water Quality A water quality study was conducted and is included in the Physical Environmental Report. Composite core samples were taken ' from the Talbert Channel , Santa Ana River and Greenville - Banning Channel . Figure IV-2 shows the approximate sample locations. The samples were analyzed for heavy metals, pesticides and herbicides. The contaminant levels are not of concern when related to an ocean environment discharge based on the Regional Water Quality Control Board , Santa Ana Region, pollution discharge standards . Pesticides and herbicides are below detectable levels . 10 . Biotic Habitat The project area, located in the Coastal Zone of Orange County, ' contains six habitat types; Urban, Beach, Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex, Upland , River and Channel , and Coast Dune and Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex ( Figures III-10 and III-lla,b,c) . Each of these habitats is described below. Special attention is given to the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex because of its ' importance as wildlife habitat. Three endangered species ( i .e. , ' California Least Tern, Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow and California Brown Pelican) utilize the project area environs . a. Urban Habitat The Urban Habitat is characterized by intensive use of the land ' for human residential and business purposes. Urbanization usually results in the extirpation of most of the native biota and 1 replaces it with a depauperate biota consisting of organisms that live in association with man. This process has occurred in the iIII-28 ?Ue�omeo - -- x OF HU'NT LEACH ■ 1 1 1 1 �i A , o. a ���� �a „ � .� ��� �g ✓z � spa z � s .z� s�:; o ���9�� ��, � �5 �� e�" ��� ,�:�, �� ✓ �a� � .a�� �a :,w�� �2a,,� :4 a 4 a� t � �a�. ,c.,� �;�a . q, x a �$aka 3��: g�z� �����x�v�e,e 1 ARE ItTAT',C,mf . DESIGNATION, O(— ._1 H .pAryp, yp pAN H i } I FIGURE III-11 A rr r� r� r r rr � r +r� r r � r � � r ■r r � x CC AR ifiA<:KIS}1 tMA7E:l:t MARSH �" ! t# .y..,- `..* •' •` � aaae a aw a aas a rr a®e a ,.... . a ��'� � k � o T a" s fi r .ro ux DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI y � x G) C � J H H H I � b7 ,e O r g� k s ! Y �rlv H � FlgURE III-11 C ' APEI leaving the urban habitat without biological resources of significance. The vegetation consists primarily of cultivated ornamentals and weeds. The fauna consists of urban adapted species such as the English Sparrow (Passer domesticus) , House Finch (Carpodacus mexicanus) and House mouse (Mus musculus) . Pets contribute significantly to the fauna of the urban habitat. Sensitive species use of the urban habitat in the APEI is minimal . There are no extraordinary significant biological resources in the urban habitat. b. Beach Habitat The Beach Habitat consists of the sandy beach non-urbanized areas between Route 1 and mean lower low water. This habitat was originally a barrier bar which separated the Pacific ocean from the low lying marshland across which the Santa Ana River meandered. Figure III-12 shows the situation as it existed in 1875 . over time, the mouth of the river would shift and the iconfiguration of the dunes would change. With the urbanization of Orange County and the development of beach recreation, this habitat was greatly modified ans simplified. Today the Beach Habitat can be divided into two segments, the public recreation beach, and the Caifornia Least tern nesting area. Use of the public recreation beach is heavy. Facilities supporting public recreation such as parking lots and equipment storage area have been construted. I The California Least Tern nesting area is located on the beach just west of the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The nesting area is 5.1 acres in size and is managed exclusively to provide nesting III-33 i w ►�► � � , Illjj� iil:� • a //%iol habitat for the California Least Tern. The nesting area is isolated from the public recreation area of the beach by a chainlink fence. The vegetation that grows inside the nesting area is removed approximately yearly and sunshelters have been ' laced in the nesting area to protect the young birds. P P r - .Most of the original biota of the beach habitat has been extirpated. No significant vegetation remains in this habitat area and little remains of the fauna. The remaining species are those which either coexist with large amounts of human disturbance or for which human management is intense. The Least Tern nesting area is extremely important for the survival of the California Least Tern (Sterna antillarum browni) . The remaining areas of the beach are characterized by open sandy stretches nearly devoid of ' life. The remaining plants are characterized by plants such as ' Sea Rocket (Cakile edentula) , and Beach Primrose (Cammisonia cheiranthifolia) . A variety of gulls and wading birds forage on the beach. A considerable amount of material consumed by the birds is probably washed into the Beach Habitat from the Nearshore rMarine Habitat Complex because the benthic fauna of the beach has i relatively small populations. During the survey of the beach, few living invertebrates were seen. The Beach Habitat (except for the ' Least tern nesting area) contains no significant biological resources, r c. Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex This portion of the APEI is located in the Southern California Bight which is part of the California Fish Faunal Region (SCCWRP 1973) and the California Molluscan Faunal Region Province rIII-35 1 (Valentine, 1966) . The Nearshore. Marine Habitat Complex has a ' rich and varied biota. It contains biological resources of Statewide significance. Two endangered species, the California Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus) and the California Least Tern (Sterna r atillarum browni) , forage in the Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex of the APEI. The resources of the APEI are significant for the ' survival of the California Least Tern. d. River and Channel Habitat ' The River and Channel Habitat includes the Santa Ana River, the flood control channels and Seminouk Slough. Water in this habitat is derived from three sources, rainfall in the drainage, urban t runoff wastewater, and seawater from the Pacific Ocean. Rainfall is only important during the winter rainy season. Urban runoff ' wastewater is the only source of fresh water in this habitat during the summer. Except for brief periods of time during storms, seawater makes up most of the water in this habitat. ' During the summer, the Greenville Banning Channel can become ' blocked, creating stagnant low quality water. Dissolved oxygen is monitored during the summer by the Orange County Flood Control District. If it becomes too low, the sandbar is bulldozed ' allowing ocean exchange. The vegetation of the River and Channel Habitat is relatively inconspicuous. Marine algae is the predominant vegetation, but ' III-36 the algae is not particularly conspicuous because it is grazed by the abundant marine fauna. The Santa Ana River, Talbert Channel, Huntington Beach Channel, .and Greenville Banning Channel have rock riprap or concrete sides. ' The bottom sediments in the river and channel habitat range from ' sandy to muddy. The California Least Tern forages heavily in the River and Channel Habitat. This habitat is particularly important to fledglings who ' are learning to forage. It appears that the young birds need relatively quiet water to learn how to forage. The Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis californicus also forages in this habitat. ' Because of this activity, this habitat is considered a biological habitat of statewide significance. e. Upland Habitat The Upland Habitat of the APEI consists of the open nonurbanized areas east of the Santa Ana River that do not contain wetland vegetation. Within the APEI , this habitat has been greatly modified by human activity. Hence, none of the usual vegetation type names is applied to the area. This habitat is utilized by a variety of small animals and birds. At the present time, the Upland Habitat is not of great significance in Southern California. ' III-37 f. Coastal Dune and Coastal Marsh Habitat The most striking feature of the APEI is the presence of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex. The APEI contains about 384 .7 acres of coastal marsh (DFG, 1982 , Coastal vancy, 1982) ; 114 .7 acres are located west of the Santa Ana River. The ramainder is located east of the Santa Ana River. Two small patches of marsh are located east of the main marsh (see Figures III-13 , 14 , 15) . One is located at the eastern end of Seminouk Slough, and the other is located near Superior Avenue. About 8 .7 acres of Coastal Dune Habitat exists in the APEI . This area is 35% of the remaining Coastal Dune Habitat in northern Orange ' County (DFG) . In this report, these habitats are considered part of a single complex because of the ecological interactions between r the dunes and the marsh. In addition to the above, there are 2 .9 acres of upland vegetation dominated by Mock Heather Haplopappus ericoides and Phacelia Phacelia ramoosissima included as part of ' the complex. This area was historically coastal marsh but now contains upland vegetation. This area is located just northeast ' of the intersection of Route 1 'and Brookhurst Street (see Figures III-16 and III-17) . ' The Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex is a remnant of a once extensive wetland and dune system that existed at the mouth ' of the Santa Ana River. Originally there were about 2 ,950 acres of wetland in this area. Both the wetlands and the dunes ' underwent significant reductions. The segment of coastal marsh west of the Santa Ana River has been formally classified as wetland by the State of California since at least 1971 . III-38 t e J V ae� � ;P ma's` ,°$"* '9i � ..4f�� ,�`'�� �� hX'��� ,� � 9s'v�✓�n , e2 ear �a�asq�°�fi ,g�%�r�: �a,a �, c � � �. �_r�� % a� ,g�� x.a z�� �a � �e�€aa✓/ �f � a x� ,:': � r 3 a s a r -a. �:.. a aaa�s"� � r..�y��,:�•s� ��aaaa�r:�� a�a�e��� ��; s�� ,%�� r'� r� .r` ,,. �a��ksr'� � at:.. � as �g,: �.�z a v ,a, : � x. � � k;;�k 8rrz � �.a.� rA.,a:. �.�� �� a,l.�. �qa � �� ���k :�aR��. �' r`� ?s � �` � � .✓ � -r. a ,a qa;� B x a��# d �X �° d �,° �T y '➢ P.b './ �v; �t9g� ?A �"�� a.�..fa ,Y�, i .ITAT$'WITHIN THE I FIGURE III-13 i 1 � 1 e SEtv11R�t3lIK�:St��st1G}=� o ;ea n a n r� €���'� a � �� �.r� ��a���✓fi �,`a�' ,�� � �z �,� � �� �'�� � �a �.:a ����q���,� .n��s�����'� �,� r a°�'�r� �� ��� s � n : ' FIGURE III—I4 ate► r J F F +^ 4 Y N ivo COASTAL bUNC HABIl AI rr'•, rT` ,",� ;. �{' ✓1 fJF C;HA�I."1F) Ad,T MARSH �"� a y,� r C; ✓ v�✓�, M*.� rt�1�r Y'"li" it p"t:.:'�oi��h��{�Ij ili.:l; COASTAL MARSH HABITA Moe hill,S�" DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. �. IN Tlil H 0 J c H H \ H I Cn k z H `r e " a e"a,T � � r- �► rr -� � r rr� �� r ems; r rr � � r rw �. e e h s o' w e � d ,w a �aw AG lS sf RESIGNATION OF THE Al ANb HABITATS WITHIN THE APED. e , e H C rl H H � I J The sand dunes, although supporting upland vegetation acts as a buffer between the degraded marsh and highway. They also supply ' refugia for marsh animals- when the marsh is flooded. The Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex, as it currently exists, is of statewide biological significance because of its value as wildlife ' habitat for unusual and endangered species in addition to its significance as a wetland. (See Figure III-18) . A small wetland exists on the north side of Route 1 near Superior Avenue (Figure III-17) . This area is a brackish water marsh probably caused by runoff from the bluff and a high water table. Characteristic vegetation includes Cattail Typha angustifolia, ' Salt Grass Distichlis spicata, Pickleweed Salicornia virginica, and Scirpus sp. Tule. ' Vegetation in the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex responds to rather minute differences in topography substrate, ' salinity, and soil moisture creating a very patchy mosaic of species. However, between the Edison Plant and the Santa Ana River there is a general pattern. As one proceeds from the ' highway inland, one passes through the Coastal Strand/Dune Zone, the Dune Slack Zone, a brackish water transition (either the Juncus or the Scripus zone) , and finally the Coastal Salt Marsh Zone. ' 11 . Sensitive, Rare and Endangered Species a. Sensitive Species ' Several sensitive species utilize the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex. Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus ' III-44 " iic���Aiii " D it it iv ;R — _ © •iNaati/a ham': ��;i � � •uta►��At aaa �.aan 16 w�=Sam— �., .a.aan•aaaataaa i = � � tat = aa•tataaaa•aa _ _ �i1 aaatalaaaa•�� r tOutaaatth� • ago--- small , test �• u uccctattttt:c►t�� � . �+ - sandwichensis beldingi) , which is a state listed endangered bird, nests and forages in the Coastal Salt Marsh Zone of the coastal marsh. This subspecies also takes insects in the .coastal dunes and the salt flat. Belding' s Savannah Sparrow is an obligate salt marsh bird, that is, it requires the Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat in order to survive. The wandering skipper (Pano uina errans) is a small butterfly that q is restricted to the Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat. This butterfly is always found in close association with Salt Grass (Distichlis s2icata) . Larva of the Wandering Skipper seem to live only on Salt Grass that is at least periodically wetted, and high humidity seems to be required for larval development. The population of ' the Wandering Skipper has declined primarily due to the filling and dredging of coastal wetlands. This butterfly is of scientific ' interest because, unlike many other insects, it can tolerate large amounts of salt in its diet. ' It also has been used as an indicator species for viable Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat (Nagano pers. com. ) . One was captured -in the APEI during the Caltrans vegetation survey. The importance of the APEI to the survival of the wandering skipper is unknown. However, a small population of this butterfly is known to exist between the Edison Plant and the Santa Ana River. r Wandering Skipper (Panoquina errans) - The Federal Register (Vol. ' 49 , No. 100 , Tuesday, May 22 , 1984) included this species on a ' list being considered for listing as endangered and threatened. III-46 The common name given in the Federal Register is Salt Marsh Skipper Butterfly, and the scientific name is given as Panoguina panoguinoides errans. However, it is now considered a separate species. i Currently, the wandering skipper is a candidate species only and -is not legally protected by the Endangered Species Act. However, it is possible that in the future, this species could be listed I and impact the project. The California Legless Lizard (Anniela pulchra) is a lizard which inhabits loose friable soil. Its population in Orange - County is declining primarily due to loss of habitat. The coastal dune division contains good habitat for the California Legless Lizard. ' None of these lizards were found during the biological survey of the APEI , but no systematic search for this species occurred. ' Sensitive bird species are listed in Appendix A. These sensitive ' species are those listed as endangered, threatened, or rare by the ' state or federal governments, those species fully protected by state law, plus harvested species, and those species considered sensitive by the Bureau of Land Management or the U.S. Forest Service. ' b. Endangered and Threatened Species This section describes the occurrence of endangered and threatened species in the APEI . The list of species presented here is derived from field observation after a literature search and contact with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the III 47 i California Department of Fish and Game. All species listed or proposed as endangered' or threatened by the Federal government, and all species listed as endangered or rare by the State govern- ' ment are listed herein. Other species which are of special concern because of limited or declining populations, or because of ' scientific interest, are discussed in the' d"iscussion of the ' particular habitat in which they live. rCalifornia Brown Pelican ( Pelecaus occidentalis californicus) - Federal-Endangered, State-Endangered. The California Brown Pelican forages in the Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex and 'in the River and Channel Habitat of the APEI. Use of the APEI by the California Brown Pelican is periodic , and by relatively small ' numbers of these birds. The APEI does not make up a significant portion of the foraging area of the California Brown Pelican. i California Least Tern ( Sterna antillarum browni) - Federal-Endangered, State-Endangered. The California Least Tern nests and forages in the APEI. Recent use of the APEI by this bird is shown in Table III-6. The APEI is of critical importance to the existence and recovery of this species. Correspondence between Caltrans and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service concerning the California Least Tern is attached to the report in Appendix D. ' The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will soon begin an in-depth study of the Huntington Beach Least Tern Colony as part of the ' Santa Ana River Flood Control Project. ' Belding's Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldings) - ' State-Endangered. Belding' s Savannah Sparrow nests in the III-48 Table III-6. The Number of California Least Terns Breeding , in the APEI Year Number of Pairs Number of Fledglings , 1969 15 -* 1970 12 -* ' 1971 8 * , 1972 13 Several 1973 16 16 1974 5 -* 1975 8 3 1976 11 -* 1977 45 60 1978 75-90 100 1979 80-95 90 1980 70-85 85 ' 1981 105-115 1982 85-111 50 1983 85-91 60 ' *No data ' III-49 I pickleweed (Salicornia) of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat ' Complex. Recent use of the APEI by Belding' s Savannah Sparrow is shown in Tables III-7 and III-8. The APEI is important to the ' maintenance and recovery of this species. Table III-7. BreedingPairs of Beldin 's Savannah Sparrows in 9 P Southern California. From Zedler 1982 . Number of Pairs Location ' Tujuana Estuary 100 95 South Bay Marine Reserve 25 South Bay salt ponds 100 E Street Marsh 18 Sweetwater Marsh 40 Paradise Creek Marsh 16 ' Beacon Island ( in Mission Bay) 4 San Diego River Marsh 70 Mission Bay Marsh 45 Los Penasquitos Lagoon 160 52 San Diequito Lagoon 0 9 San Elijo Lagoon 17 30 Batiquitos Lagoon 0 20 Aqua Hedionda Lagoon 37 16 Buena Vista Lagoon 0 5 Santa Margarita River 125 106 ' Upper Newport Bay 130 83 Huntington Beach 34 Bolsa Chica 40 186 Huntington Harbor & Sunset Aquatic Park 6 ' Anaheim Bay 125 106 Los Cerritos Wetland Channel 5 Playa del Rey 25 37 Mugu Lagoon 175 250 Ormond Beach 17 McGrath Beach State Park 12 ' Carpenteria Marsh 100 34 Goleta Slough 50 28 ' III-50 TABLE III-8. Results of the May 1983 Belding's Savannah Sparrow ' Survey (Carl Wilcox Pers. Com. ) Santa Ana River to Brookhurst Street 0 birds 0 pairs ' Brookhurst Street to Magnolia Street ' 71 birds 35-36 pairs Magnolia Street to the Edison Plant ' 55 birds 27-28 pairs Area Just East of Beach Boulevard ' 56 birds 28 pairs Total 182 birds 90-92 pairs 1 1 1 1 t III-51 r 1 1 ' F. Archaeological/ Historical Setting ' 1 . Archaelogical A record search and archaeological field reconnaissance for the proposed PCH widening project revealed no archaeological resources ' within the proposed Area of Potential Environmental Impact (APEI ) . ' 2. Historical The only area of historic importance which is within or adjacent ' to the APEI is the old central business district of Huntington Beach which lies along and adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway between Lake and Seventh Streets. The Historic Property Survey ' Report identified two significant buildings within the APEI . One building, the Gardiner House at 114 Pacific Coast Highway, has ' previously been determined eligible for inclusion in the National ' Register of Historic Places. The Golden Bear Cafe at 306 Pacific Coast Highway is also eligible. See Figure IV-8 for these locations. G. Paleontological There are two sites within the APEI which have been identified as ' bearing paleontological remains. Also, the historic Bitter Lake ' area, through which the project passes, has the possibility of yielding paleontological remains. 1 '. III-52 I � �1 WI Atr •�7. 4oftbqftb jp vo � � •s :rig �i f r � I ' IV. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES AND MITIGATING MEASURED ' Determining whether or not a project will have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgement based on ' scientific and empirical data. To assist in making this determi- nation, an interdisciplinary project development team used a comprehensive environmental checklist (see next page) to focus this report on the physical, biological, and socioeconomic factors which might be impacted by this project. ' Several technical studies were developed to provide background data and to assist in evaluating the environmental consequences of the proposed project. The following studies are incorporated by reference into this Draft EIS: i 1 . Physical Environmental Report for the Proposed Widening on ' Pacific Coast Highway (Route 1) between Newport Boulevard and Golden West Street, Caltrans Environmental Investigation Section, District 7, March 1985, ( this contains air, noise, water, energy ' and solid waste studies) . 2. Archaeological Survey Report for the Proposed Route ORA-1 ' Widening Project, Caltrans Environmental Planning Branch, April 1982. 3. Historic Property Survey Report for the Proposed Route ORA-1 Widening Project , Caltrans , Environmental Planning Branch, June ' 1982. ' IV-1 EmniammunSIGIIFICANM CEMCIWSr Yes ox See* PHMCAL. Will the proposal either directly or indirectly: No Sections) 1. Change the topography or ground surface relief features? No 2. Destroy, cover, or modify any unique geologic or physical features? No ' 3. Result in unstable earth surfaces or exposure of people or property to geologic or seismic hazards? Yes A 4. Result in or be affected by soil erosion or siltation (whether by water or wind)? Yes B ' 5. Result in the increased use of fuel or energy in large amount or in a wasteful manner? No 6. Result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? No 7. Result in the substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources? No 8. Violate any published Federal, State, or local standards pertaining to solid waste or litter control? No 9. Modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or ' any bay, inlet or lake? Yes B 10. Encroach upon a floodplain or result in or be affected by floodwaters or tidal waves? Yes C 11. Adversely affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ' groundwater, or public water supply? No 12. Result in the use of water in large amounts or in a wasteful manner? Nc 13. Affect wetlands or riparian vegetation? Ye: D ' 14. Violate or be inconsistent with Federal, State, or local water quality standards? No 15. Result in changes in air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any climatic conditions? No 16. Result in an increase in air 1pollutant emissions, adverse effects on or deterioration of ambient air quality? Yes F 17. Result in the creation of objectionable odors? No 18. Violate or be inconsistent with Federal, State, or local air standards or control plans? No 19. Result in an increase in noise levels or vibration for adjoining areas? Yes G 20. Violate or be inconsistent with Federal design noise levels or State ' or local noise standards? No 21. Produce new light, glare, or shadows? Yes H SICEMICAL. Will the proposal result in (either directly or indirectly): 22. Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora, and aquatic ]plants)? Yes D 23. Reduction of the numbers of or encroachment upon the critical habitat ' of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? No 24. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? No 25. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop or commercial timber No 26. Removal or deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? Yes D 27. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish , benthic organisms, insects of microfauna)? No 28. Reduction of the numbers of or encroachment upon the critical habitat of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Yes D 29. Introduction or new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? No ' *Impacts are generally significant IV-2 , 1 ISIQIIFICl B CMMCM.TST (Omitd) Yes o See*r CIM Sections) AND � C. Will the proposal directly or indirectly? No 30. . Cause disruption of orderly planned development? No 31. - Be inconsistent with any elements of adopted community plans, policies ' or goals? No I 32. Affect the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? No 33. Affect life-styles, or neighborhood character or stability? No 34. Affect minority or other specific interest groups? No 35. Divide or disrupt an established community? No 36. Affect existing housing, require the acquisition of residential improvements or the displacement of people or create a demand for additional housing? No 37. Affect employment, industry or commerce, or require the displacement of business or farms? No 38. Affect property values or the local tax base? No 39. Affect any community facilities (including medical, educational, scientific, recreational, or religious institutions, ceremonial sites or sacred shrines)? Yes J 40. Affect public utilities, or police, fire, emergency or other public ' services? Yes M 41. Have substantial impact on existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Yes J ' 42. Affect vehicular movements or generate additional traffic? Yes J 43. Affect or be affected by existing parking facilities or result irr demand for new parking? Yes L 44. Involve a substantial risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous ' substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions? No 45. Result in alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? No 46. Affect public health, expose people to potential health hazards, or create a real or potential health hazard? No 47. Affect a significant archaeological or historic site, structure, object, or building.s Yes M 48. Affect natural landmarks or man-made resources? No 49. Affect any scenic resources or result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Yes p 50. Result in substantial impacts associated with construction activities (e.g., noise, dust, temporary drainage, traffic detours and temporary cess, etc.)? Yes O LMM; FIMIIGS OF SIGNMCAMCB Yes or No 51. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate importatant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Yes 52. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time, while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) No *Impacts are generally significant IV-3 r sic i rzc wm c Ba mr (font'd) Yes or No 53. Does the project have 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 projects which interact with project and, together, are considerable. Yes 54. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IV-4 1 i 4. Biological Assessment, Caltrans, Environmental Planning Branch, November 1981; Translab, May 1984. 5. Travel Demand Forecast, Caltrans, LARTS Branch, September 1982 6. Geotechnical Report, Caltrans, Engineering Services, January 1983. 7. Flood Assessment, Caltrans, Engineering Services, October 1982 February 1984. 8. Technical working Papers, Caltrans, Headquarters & Headquarter Translab, 1983. I These reports are available at Caltrans, District Office, 120 South Spring Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. Certain actions are necessary 9 to mitigate adverse project impacts. ' The mitigation measures are presented as commitments and are part of the proposed project. ' A. Geological 6aaards The proposed project lies in a seismically active area (See Figure III-8) . Soil liquefaction, ground shaking and rupture and ground settlement are potentially significant damaging phenomena requiring consideration. IV-5 Ground shaking and rupture are the primary causes of structural damage during an earthquake, and they are the most likely damage- producing earthquake phenomena for the proposed project. Ground shaking, duration and vibration frequency characteristics will vary greatly depending on the distance from the study area to the epicenter, the depth of the shock, and its magnitude. Historical records of past earthquakes indicate that ground surface disrup- tion is likely to occur in the study area in future earthquakes of magnitude 5 or higher on the Richter scale. While it is possible to predict that surface ruptures will occur, it is impossible to anticipate where the damage will occur. Some consolidation of , foundation solids can be expected because of ground shaking. The amount of consolidation would vary with the type of soil, distance to the epicenter and the earthquake' s magnitude. The project lies within the Newport-Inglewood Fault zone, which ' possesses a maximum credible magnitude of 7. 5 on the Richter scale. Estimates of horizontal acceleration during the first few seconds of the 1933 Long Beach earthquake, caused by this fault, range as high as 1. 0 gravity. The magnitude of this earthquake was 6. 3 and the epicenter was off Newport Beach. The probable ' maximum magnitude earthquake produced by movement on the San Andreas Fault would produce moderate ground accelerations in the study area with a relatively long duration of 40 seconds or more. Thus, ground shaking could pose a significant hazard to the roadway users. Liquefaction of cohesionless soils, which occurs , when unconsolidated water-saturated sediments behave as a fluid, can produce severe damage. The ground failure at the lower San Fernando (Sylmar) Dam is an example. The highest potential for IV-6 t r liquefaction occurs where saturated, clay-poor, granular sediments with relative densities less than 65% are within 50 feet of the ground surface. Over most of the study area, the liquefaction potential is high, it is reasonable to assume that conditions ' conducive to liquefaction damage exist in areas where the water table is shallow, particularly in the vicinity of the Santa Ana River. Thus, sediment liquefaction could pose a significant hazard to the roadway users. The proposed project will cause no general subsidence. Settlement will be insignificant, except where the proposed project will cross estuarine deposits. In these areas, considerable settler�ent- and foundation instability will occur without mitigation. j The following mitigation measures will aid in reducing seismically rinduced damage: r 1 . Embankments that consolidate and constrain foundation soil to reduce the potential of liquefaction damage will be constructed. 2. All structures will be designed to survive the maximum credible earthquake without collapsing. The seismicity and soil response of the site, as well as the dynamic characteristics of the structure, will be considered in all designs. 3. Improved structural features including the following will be used a. Hinge restrainers to hold together superstructure elements during extreme motion. IV-7 r a b. Heavy keys that limit movement between the superstruc- ture and the abutments. C. Increased column tie reinforcement. 4 . During preliminary engineering, a study of the estuarine .deposits in the project area will be conducted to determine the extent of these deposits and their potential to produce foundation instability. In those areas where foundation instability is determined to be a problem, construction techniques that minimize ' the instability problem will be used. The actual techniques to be used will be selected when the potential for instability is established. B. Stream Channel Modification and Erosion Construction of the new bridge structure crossing the Greenville- Banning Channel , Santa Ana River, and Talbert Channel will require new bridge piers and abutments. The 5 piers which are known to be needed will not reduce the channel capacity and water flow will not be impeded by the new bridge design. These piers will also have no impact on the existing water quality. 1 In the construction areas of the disturbed remnant coastal dune, on the inland side of the PCH, between the Santa Ana River Complex and Beach Boulevard (see Figure III-10) , revegetation will be done with native coastal dune vegetation after the removal of all the existing ice plant, Carpobrotus edulis and other introduced non-native species. Native coastal dune vegetation to be used include, Abronia maritime, Lupinus chamissonis, Ambrosia , IV-8 ' chamissonis, Ambrosia chamissonis ssp. bipinnatisecta, Camisonia cherianthifolia, Rhus integrifolia, and any other native dune species that are available. The installation of a box culvert into the Seminouk Slough northerly of Superior Avenue will not significantly alter the characteristics of the Slough. This installation will only channelize existing runoff and prevent it from using the highway to reach the slough. There will be also the installation of a box culvert to Newport Bay at vicinity of Route 55. C. Flood Plain Encroachment Hazards The proposed project will be constructed within a base flood plain of the Santa Ana River. The widening does not significantly increase the 100-year base flood backwater ( 3" ) . Pacific Coast Highway is not a significant longitudinal encroachment of the base flood plain in the project area. There are no areas where there will be a 100-year coastal flooding due to wave action with velocity. The proposed project has a transverse encroachment on the Santa Ana River flood plain (see Figure II-9) . The transverse encroachment is an existing condition and would be continued in the proposed project, as combined with the existing highway. The proposed action calls or widening that will be to the line and grade of the existing highway, except for the raise in grade of the Santa Ana River Bridge. IV-9 1 . Transportation Facility Operations ' Pacific Coast Highway in this area is not the only evacuation route available to the residents in the general area. There are numerous alternate routes. Large vehicles would be able to traverse the flooded portions on Pacific Coast Highway to ' provide emergency services. There would be no significant interruption or termination of the transportation facility for ' emergency vehicles. 2. Risk Since the proposed project is only widening the existing highway, the encroachment does not increase consequences associated with the probability of flooding. Huntington Beach' s low areas will have an average flood depth of six feet, with higher. floodwater depths in ponded areas and at major obstructions to flow. At present, the highway centerline elevations vary between 7 .0 and 9 .2 feet for the portion west of the river. The rollingprofile grade line has two principal sa P 9 P 9 locations, one at elevation 7.8 and the other at elevation 7 .1 . With the proposed widening, the shoulder elevations at these locations will be about 6 feet. Therefore, because of the Corps' estimated flooding depth of 6 feet or more, it is probable that the highway will be overtopped in a standard project- flood ( 500-year flood) . IV-10 , This proposal will not significantly increase the base flood backwater elevations and it will not increase the already existing risk of overtopping the highway or damage to adjacent property (see Appendix C) . This project's encroachment does not create a significant risk. 3. Natural and Beneficial Flood Plain Values The proposed project will have impacts on the natural and beneficial flood plain values. The impacts on these values 1 are due to the construction of the bridge over the Santa Ana River and the highway on the coastal and beach dune habitat bordering the project that are discussed in the following sections in this chapter: Section B, Stream Channel 1 Modification and Erosion, and Section D, Biological Impacts and Mitigation for Biological Impacts and Appendix A. Measures to minimize flood plain impacts are also discussed in these sections. The impact on the flood plain value would be the permanent loss of about 0.8 acres of foraging habitat for the California Least Tern (CLT) but this would be mitigated. The mitigation for this impact can be referenced above. There would be no significant impacts on the natural and beneficial 9 P flood plain values due to this project. Taking the information from the above. 3 points Pacific Coast Highway is not a significant transverse encroahment of the Santa Ana River flood plain. The following issues are addressed in response to federal irequirements for projects in flood plain areas: IV-11 1 1. The risks associated with the implementation of the proposed project would create interruption of traffic services ' but would not be significant. It will not increase the already existing moderate risk of overtopping the highway or damage to adjacent property. The risks associated with the ' project are not significant. 2 . There will be no significant impact on beneficial flood plain values such as fish, wildlife, plants and open space. , ( For an elaboration on this issue see Section D of this chapter and Appendix A) . 3 . There are a large number of persons presently living in the Santa Ana River flood plain. Population growth in the , lower basin has slowed due to decreasing availability of developable land. This project will not support incompatible flood plain development because the Cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach are both members of the National Flood Insurance Program. They are enforcing flood plain management practices for new construction such as requiring that the lowest floor for new residential construction, including ' basement, be elevated to or above base flood elevation or depth number specified on the NEIP Maps. For other requirements see Appendix C. 4 . The proposed means of minimizing the risk to the proposed , project - is to use rock slope protection around the abutments of the new Santa Ana River complex bridge. IV-12 _ r Erosion control measures, also included as part of the project, will prevent erosion, siltation and subsequent degrading of water quality. No mitigation is available to reduce existing risk to the developed areas of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach. 5. The measures to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial flood plain values impacted by the proposed project are described in Section B and Section D of this chapter. Based on the above discussion, the project does not constitute a significant flood plain encroachment as defined in the Federal Highway Program Manual ( FHPM) 6-7-3-2. Location Hydraulic Studies (Flood Hazard Report) is on file at the Los Angeles Caltrans office. D. Biological Xppact and !litigation for Biological Ispacts Some of the material appearing here is from the Biological Assessment report which appears in Appendix A. It is Caltrans' policy to mitigate negative impacts to the maximum extent. This discussion does not commit Caltrans to any mitigation during the tDraft Stage. IV-13 The following impacts assume that Caltrans will not dewater the Santa Ana River complex for the construction of the bridge but will instead construct a temporary trestle and cofferdams to be used for construction of the permanent structure. See letter to Bruce E. Cannon from E. W. Blackmer dated 6-13-83 in Appendix D. Alternative A. The following impacts are anticipated if the roadway is widened as described in Chapter II. There acres .of foraging 1 . T re would be a permanent loss of about 0.8 o g g habitat for the California Least Tern (CLT) . This loss would occur because the new bridge would be larger and higher. The new bridge would cover a larger area and have a larger "dead zone" on ' each side where the CLT may not .forage. This was observed during the biological survey of the area that this species does not forage under nor within about 50 feet of the bridge. Rather, as these birds approach the bridge they will bank and turn or climb to cross the highway at highway altitude before reaching the bridge. It is estimated that the increase in the altitude of to the bridge will increase the CLT foraging dead zone 70 feet. While the loss of 0.8 acres is small in comparison to the available foraging area within a short flight distance from the nesting - area, 70 acres inland and a much larger area offshore, it is prudent to protect the existence of this endangered species by providing replacement area. Caltrans is investigating the IV-14 following area to mitigate this loss on a 1 for 1 basis. a. The area between Brookhurst Street and -the Santa Ana River which is currently under Caltrans ownership. This could be used for replacement area by installing two 48"x90' RCP from the Talbert Channel to the Caltrans parcel. This would provide a high quality foraging area since there would be subject to tidal action ( see Figure IV-1) . This would restore .9 acres of water surface. Caltrans feels this is excessive mitigation. b. The area between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River could be used for replacement area by digging out a pond with 0.8 acre of water surface and diking it off from the remaining portion of the parcel. This may provide a . high quality foraging area if it were connected by pipe with the Talbert Channel and subject to tidal action and sufficient areas of mud flats are created as a part of the pond construction. C. Victoria Pond. Replacement area could be provided here by enlarging the present pond by 0.8 acre, channeling winter runoff to the pond, removing the drains that currently drain the property, and providing a source of brackish water in the summer. The area would have to be monitored by Caltrans to see if the water quality were of high enough quality during the summer when the CLT forages. If not corrective action would be taken. (See Figure IV-2) . d. Ed;ison Power Plant Pond. Replacement area could be provided here by enlarging the present pond by 0.8 acre and by pumping in water. Since this is the property of the Southern iCalifornia Edison Company Caltrans would have to negotiate an IV-15 t 4 ° s ° ° f s� e" �+My}*■ Qy�� �ry9Y�/r�y,g�e�a {y�r� yyy g�ur yy ��yy yg ii �qP y�pea [ ° @ I T' 4, EIW FIGURE IV-1 i l 4 �a s INS �I a�. *, as SHORE 'k,11AAR , E HABITAT CC DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATSE APEL FIGURE ICJ-2 agreement with the Company to ensure that the area would be maintained as a high quality foraging area for the CLT. (See Figure IV-3) . The above Mitigation Alternatives are proposed in the United • States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Letter to Mr. Bruce E. Cannon, August 18 , 1983 (see Appendix D) . 2. Possible temporary loss of CLT foraging area due to mixing of sulfide bearing mud with the waters of the Santa Ana River could occur. There is a possibility that sulfide bearing mud may occur below the top sediment surface of the river bottom. Excavation for the bridge footings could find its way into the r"iver waters thus, polluting these waters making it toxic for the marine organisms on which the CLT relies for food. 1 Caltrans will monitor the chemical content of these excavated materials and if the sulfide content becomes significant will truck the material to an upland dump site approved for the disposal of this type of material. 3. The nesting of the CLT may be disturbed by the construction of the new bridge across the Santa Ana River 65 feet closer than the existing bridge. At present there is a fenced off nesting area for the CLT at the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The new bridge will be constructed approximately 245 feet from the nearest corner of the nesting area. It is estimated that the noise level will be IV-18 !- —— i w � . . �� w �� a � � o �a w�� � e � �:. � ;,'�c �' �� ��; � �� � � �� s �$ s$ � ���e. ,:;,� � a9 ?r. s a ? �, � u ^` � 4g „ �`,E ♦ ,� � y �3 r ti w. e � pp � _ $ 1 � � �. � � b Y � �e a � i e x, aax A • �� — � raised by the presence of traffic 2 to 4 dBA. There is possibility that the increase noise level and/or the presence of dust and fumes from the vehicular traffic could disturb the birds during their nesting period. Caltrans will mitigate this possible impact by negotiating with the California Department of Beaches and Parks for the moving of the seaward fence of the nesting area 65 feet so that a larger nesting area will be available to the CLT. Preliminary indica- tions from the Department are that they are amendable to the proposal as part of the contract to widen the highway.. Caltrans will also require the contractor to construct the bridge in two stages with that part closest to the nesting area being constructed during the time of year when the CLT is not nesting. This would be between August 1 and April 1. Dust pallatives would be required for construction of the highway approaches to the bridge so that dust would be kept to an insignificant level . And construction activities would be restricted to the daylight hours. 4. The loss of 1 .0 acre of coastal marsh habitat. A small amount of coastal marsh habitat will be removed in the area of Superior Avenue ( figure IV-2) . This habitat occurs opportunistically primarily due to a hill slope and highway runoff. This loss is not sigificant and no mitigation is proposed. A box culvert approximately 500 feet long will be constructed into the Seminouk Slough. This channel will be rock rip-rapped on the IV-20 1 down coast side while the up coast side would be a natural slope. This channelization will not have a significant impact on the habitat of the slough and no mitigation is proposed. 5. The habitat of the Belding Savannah Sparrow could be reduced. The proposed highway widening will increase the freshwater runoff from the highway into the salt marshes northerly of the highway between the Santa Ana River and the Edison Power Plant by approxi- mately 25%. The marsh area is about 300 acres and the highway widening will be about 16 acres. ( See Figure IV-4) . Conse- quently, the rainfall will be much higher on the marsh area than on the highway. However, the runoff from the highway to the marsh may be concentrated on certain areas. This could lead to the increase in growth of fresh water species at the expense of salt ' water species. These latter species are the habitat of the Belding Savannah Sparrow, a State listed endangered species. Caltrans will monitor the possible reduction in habitat and take corrective action to divert the runoff if the loss becomes significant. 6 . Los*s of 3 acres of coastal dune habitat area. Widening of the highway will require a strip of degraded coastal dune area on the inland side of the existing highway. Caltrans will mitigate this loss of coastal dune habitat by revegetating the remaining dune ' area as explained in Section B paragraph 2 of the Chapter. IV-21 aa� a-� X g S�g5k ' 1 $ S g wa e OVERVIEW x � FIGURE IV-4 E. Related Projects Santa Ana River Project - At this point in time, it is unknown rwhether or not the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Santa Ana River flood control project will ever be built. If it is built, it could greatly change the nature of the area. For instance, the mouth of the Talbert Channel could be moved westward dividing the degraded marsh into two segments. Also, some of the marsh east of the Santa Ana River would be restored to tidal flow. From the restoration, tidewater eventually could be brought into the vicinity of Victoria Pond easing the problems inherent in attempting to enlarge the pond. The EIS for the Santa Ana River protection proposals states that the Corps intends to seek the restoration of tidal flow culverts in the Talbert Channel Levee. Brookhurst Street Widening Project — Huntington Beach has plans to widen Brookhurst Street. This project would have significant wetland impacts. They could, however, be mitigated on the parcel between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River along with the impacts of the Orange 1 widening project. The Orange County Environmental Management Agency has plans to enlarge and relocate segments of the Huntington Beach and Talbert Channels located within the APEI. Figures IV-5 and IV-6 show proposals for this project. IV-23 ■Aim- T `M tl L • Ai IS -49 FOUNTAIN VALLEY . ... ap wi .• ..... ...... U, Reach I I 7' -mS. os • w - RETARDING .7 ;A, ASIN SITE I 2 jU C. Z707 1 T ,0,-5 RETARDING ' Reach 91 I BASIN SITE 2'"" I L All t HARDING KH SITE Pd r LBASIN 3 RETARDING w BASIN ITE 6[[[ p cc LT COSTA MESA H I T N ".1.4 z 1111E w It I N', I-)w 03 AL61" We- p ' RETARDI RETARDING 7 -BASIN SITE 41 a. RETARDING mtj BASIN SITE 5 .7 Ln J N ,cy t BEACH .._v NEWPOIIT 1 1 1 Ilk 4.j l �00 1 AV y 41W ZQ•5EwF-g - t CHANme :'*i.- x bREENVILLE-B .i F. Air Quality Impacts This summary information was taken from the Route 1 Physical Environmental Report. No significant damage to air quality will occur as a result of this project. The study area for this project was confined to areas within 500 jfeet of the roadway. A mesoscale analysis was not conducted since this project is not expected to affect traffic volumes on alternate route systems. The maximum decrease in carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations due to the project will be 3 parts per million (ppm) for the 1-hour averaging time and 1 ppm for the 8-hour averaging time. Neither the Federal 1-hour nor 8-hour standards, 35 ppm and 9 ppm respec- tively, will be exceeded in• 1988, the expected time of completion, or in 2000 with or without the project. The state 1-hour standard of 20 ppm will be met at one location. Table IV-2 depicts the 1 & 8 hour maximum CO concentrations for this project. Vehicular emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) will increase slightly if the project is implemented. The emissions of all other pollutants will either decrease or remain unchanged. This overall slight benefit in air quality will be caused by an increased operational speed of the vehicles using the highway. CO Analyses were made at several sites using only "worst case" conditions. Both 1 and 8 hour concentrations were predicted. IV-26 i The receptors were located at the R/W line or, for those areas where there are bikeways, at the center of the bikeway. I . The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 require that the State prepare an Implementation Plan (SIP) to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The SIP includes transportation control measures designed to reduce transportation related air pollution in areas where the air quality standards are exceeded. This particular project is in an area where the ozone ' and carbon monoxide standards are currently being exceeded. The Clean Air Act also requires that all transportation plans, programs and projects be consistent with the measures set forth in the SIP. If they are not, the Federal Government will not participate in funding. This project is listed in to Regional Transportation Improvement Plan. This plan was reviewed by the Federal Highway Administra- tion and found to be in conformance with the control measures and predictions listed in the SIP. The regional plans are the basis for the State Transportation Improvement Plan. The State Plan was reviewed in June, 1984, by the Federal Highway Administration and was found to also be in conformance with the SIP. ' Since this project is included in transportation plans which conform to the SIP it follows that it also conforms to the SIP pursuant to Title 23, part 770 of the Code of Federal Regulations ( 23CFR770) and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 Section 176(c) . The SIP itself was conditionally approved by the Environmental Protection Agency in July, 1984. IV-27 W TABLE Iv-2 MKI" 00 OCNCENTRATIC M (PPM) 1988 2000 1980 NDD Build Build No Build Build lhd 8hr Ihr 8hr Ihr 8hr 1hr 8hr 1hr 8hr Balboa Owes Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 5 9 5 Westside Raadwa - - 3 3 PCH y 8 7 9 3 9 3 Rte 55 to Balboa Total 11 6 15 7 14 7 18 8 18 8 Lido Sands Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 5 9 5 Balboa to 59th St. lay 11 6 15 7 13 7 19 9 16 8 c West Newport Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 5 9 5 Westside PCH Roadway - - 8 3 8 3 11 4 10 4 00 59th to Santa Ana River Zbtal 11 6 15 7 15 7 20 9 19 9 West Newport Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 5 9 5 Eastside PCH Roadway - - 5 2 5 2 7 2 6 2 59th to Santa Ana River Zbtal 11 6 12 6 12 6 16 7 15 7 Santa Ana River to Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 5 9 5 Beach Boulevard Foadway - - 7 3 5 3 8 4 6 3 Eastside PCH Total 11 6 14 7 12 7 17 9 15 8 Beach Boulevard to Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 4 9 4 Golden West Roadway - - 5 2 5 2 6 2 6 2 Eastside PCH Total 11 6 12 6 '12 6 15 6 15 6 Beach Boulevard to Background - - 7 4 7 4 9 4 9 4 Golden West Roadway - - 5 2 5 2 6 2 6 2 Westside PCH Total 11 6 12 6 12 6 15 6 15 6 G. Noise Impacts This summary information was taken from the Route 1 Physical Environmental Report. I Figure IV-7 depicts the 25 locations which were considered to be representative of sensitive receptors within the project limits. Existing traffic noise levels ranged from 57 to 72 dBA Meq) , and are expected to increase up to 4 dBA at some locations by the year 2000 with noise levels ranging between 59 and 72 dBA. If the ' project is constructed, the impacts will vary from -2 to +4 dBA, with noise levels ranging from 61 to 73 dBA. Table IV-3 presents a summary of the predicted noise levels for the year 2000 and the resulting noise impacts for the "build" alternative. Table IV-4 states the Federal Highway Administration Noise Abatement criteria, including the definitions of the activity categories. The noise impacts are not in themselves substantial (-2 to +4 dBA) . Where there are noise level increases, they would be barely discernable to the human ear. However, these increases ' would cause the noise levels to meet or exceed noise standards at some locations. Table IV-5 shows barrier heights, where they are feasible, to reduce these noise levels. ' Normally, barriers are an effective way to mitigate traffic noise. ' Traffic noise follows a direct path from source to receptor; therefore, an effective barrier must be of sufficient height and r IV-29 f 1 ■ TABLE IV-3 WISE IMPACTS YEAR 2000 PRISE LEVELS EXISTING ACTIVITY SITE ND. 1981 ND BUILD BUILD CHANGE CATEMRY* 1 72 72 70 -2 B lA 72 72 0 B 2 67 69 71 +2 B 3 65 68 69 +1 B 4 71 74 76 +2 B 6 66 68 70 +2 D 8 62 64 68 +4 B 9 63 64 +1 B 9A 69 70 +1 B 10 64 65 66 +1 B 10A 64 65 66 +1 B 10B 70 71 73 +2 B 11 68 68 69 +1 B 12 67 68 69 +1 B 13 64 66 66 0 B 14 64 67 67 0 B 15 65 67 67 0 B 16 57 59 61 +2 D ' 18 67 69 71 +2 D 20 63 65 67 +2 B 20A — 62 64 +2 B 20B — 60 62 +2 B 21 61 64 65 +1 B 22 67 70 72 +2 B 23 62 66 67 +1 B 25 63 66 67 +1 B 26 64 68 69 +1 C 27 67 68 69 +1 C 28 68 69 70 +1 C 29 65 67 68 +1 C *See Table IV-4 for definitions. IV-31 I TABLE IV-4 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION NXSE ABATIIKENP CRITERIA Activity Design Noise Levels - dBA Description of Activity Category Category r Leq Tracts of land where serenity and quiet are of extraordinary Al 57 significance and serve an important public need and where (Exterior) the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. Such areas could include amphitheaters, particular parks or portions of parks, open spaces, or historic districts which are dedicated or recognized by appropriate local officials for activities requiring special qualities of serenity and quiet. Bl 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports c (Exterior) areas, and parks wich are not included in Category A and w residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rocros, schools, `v churches, libraries, and hospitals. C 72 Developed lands, properties or activities not included in (Exterior) Categories A or B above. D — Undeveloped lands (FHFM 7.7.3 paragraphs lla and c). E2 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting roams, schools, (Interior) churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums. 1. Parks in Categories A and B include all such lands •(public or private) which are actually used as parks as well as those public lands officially set aside or designated by a government agency as parks on the date of public knowledge of the proposed highway project. 2. Interior design noise levels apply to parcels where no exterior activity is identified (FHHK 7.7.3 Paragraphs 8c, d and e). a� � � .ter .a .� � r � � it .� r .� � � i �■r r +� r it it rr r� rr rr rr aE err ■r r� r� r� rr rr s �■r TABLE IV-5 PREDICT® Leq WISE LEVELS IN YEAR 2000 BARRIER HEIGHT ALTERNATIVES j LIMITS BDGIN/END REFERENCE LAND USE NJ BUILD BUILD WALL STATIONS ELEVATION 6' 8' 10' 12' 14' Site 1 North End Beach & 72 70 646+10/650+40 Highway EP 62 60* 58 56 54 Bay Mobile Hanes -- Residences Site lA South End Beach & 72 72 650+90/652+65 Highway EP 61 60* 58 56 55 Bay Mobile Hrames Residences Site 2 Residences 69 71 Wall not feasible Site 3 Residences 68 69 Wall not feasible C w Motteel 74 76 Wall not feasible Site 6 Undevelo 68 70 Undevelo land Site 8 Residences 64 68 646+00/660+80 Highway EP 61 60* 58 56 55 Site 9 Residences 63 64 668+00/671+30 Hi hwa EP 61 59 58* 56 54 Site 9A Park 69 70 668+00/671+30 Highway EP 61* 59 57 55 54 R Residences 65 66 672+20/681+50 Highway EP 61 60 58* 56 55 Site l0A Park 65 66 672+20/681+50 Highway EP 62 60* 58 56 55 Parkk 10B 71 73 672+20/681+50 Highway EP 59* 56 55 54 53 Site 11 Residences 68 69 684+80/687+50 Hi hwa EP 59* 57 54 53 51 NM: *Lowest height that breaks line of sight between 11.5' truck exhaust stack and receptor. TABLE IV-5 (Contd) PREDICTED Leg NOISE LEVELS IN YEAR 2000 T.TMT'1'$ REFERENCE BARRIER HEIGHT ALTERNATIVES LAND USE NO BUILD BUILD WALL STAATTIIONS ELEVATION 6' 8' 10, 12' 14' Site 12 Residences 68 69 687+50/694+00 Highway EP 59* 57 55 53 52 Site 13 Residences 66 66 694+00/706+20 Highway EP 59* 56 55 53 51 Site 14 Residences 67 67 716+80/724+00 :ffHighway i hwa EP 59 57* 55 53 52 Site 15 Residences 67 67 725+00/732+00EP 59 57* 55 53 52 Site 16 Bird sanctuary 59 61 Site 18 Undeveloped 69 71 Site 20 Residences 65 67 'Wall not feasible Site 20A u, Residences 62 64 Site 20B Residences 60 62 Site 21 Residences 64 65 Site 22 Golf Course 70 72 Wall not feasible Site 23 Residences 66 67 494+20/501+15 1 Highway EP 55* 53 51 51 50 Site 25 Motel 66 67 Wall not feasible Site 26 Mixed Ommercial 68 69 Site 27 Mixed Commercial 68 69 Site 28 Mixed Commercial 69 70 Site 29 Mixed Commercial 67 68 NOTE: *Lowest height that breaks line of sight between 11.5' truck exhaust stack and receptor. i � � .� � .r � r � i � � � � � � as � a■ r length to break the line-of-sight between the two. Since PCH is an uncontrolled access route, the owners of abutting property have the right, or easement, of access to the highway through driveway rconnections. If noise barriers were installed where many openings would have to be provided in order to maintain existing access to the highway, only a few residences would receive the full mitigation benefits from the barriers. The locations where these conditions exist are Sites 2, 3, 4 , 22 and 25. Barriers at these locations would be neither cost effective nor aesthetically pleasing. 1 At Site 20 a noise barrier is not being considered because only 4 I of the 24 first-line receptors would be exposed to a noise level which meets the FHWA abatement criterion. Noise levels at the other 20 receptors will range from 62 to 64 dBA depending upon their distance from the highway. Due to the location of the 4 qualifying homes in relation to the Cabrillo Trailer Park driveway ' and property line, only a partial barrier could be built . This barrier would adequately protect only 2 of the 4 homes, thereby, making it economically unfeasible. i The areas where barriers would have an overall benefit are listed in Table IV-5 and graphically depicted on Figure IV-7 . All ' proposed barriers are a preliminary determination and merely show where barriers -are fesible. They may be altered or deleted prior to the approval of the final environmental document. The final report will identify the location of barriers which are likely to ' be incorporated in the project. IV-35 H. New Shadows ' Currently the existing bridge shadows the Talbert Channel, Santa Ana River, and Greenville-Banning Channel by approximately 18.7 thousand square feet. The proposed bridge would shadow the same area by approximately 36 thousand square feet. This additional 17.3 thousand square feet will have no significant impact other than that mentioned in Section D of this chapter. I. Relationship to Local Plans and California Coastal Zone The proposed project in consistent with the local plans of both Huntington Beach and Newport Beach. Huntington Beach identifies PCH as a major arterial in their Draft Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report 82-2 (available through the City of Huntington Beach) . This project is included in this report and will not impact their coastal zone management plan elements. In Newport Beach' s Pacific Highway Coast Improvement Project FEIS, ' (available through Caltrans or the City of Newport Beach) , PCH is identified as a major arterial which is consistent with their project proposal and the planned circulation system of the County of orange. The status of the Local Coastal Plan will be reviewed by the Coastal Commission and should be approved in 1985. This project, along with its mitigations, is consistent with and in accordance ' with the California Coastal Plan of 1972. , The Coastal Conservancy is working with the City of Huntington Beach to determine the uncertified area of the Land Use Plan. The , IV-36 ' uncertified is bonded by the Santa Ana River, Pacific Coast ' Highway, Beach Boulevard and the Talbert Channel. This certifi- cation is needed to approve the Local Coastal Plan. The Coastal Conservancy will desigate the areas of wetlands and areas for ' possible development. They will also determine in what form the owners of the uncertified area will be compensated. Caltrans owns property in the uncertified area that is being considered for use as mitigation for this ORA-1 project. J. Circulation Impacts As a result of this project, circulation along PCH will improve as the two-way capacity will have been increased. Cul-de-sacing of 11 existing through streets will effectively reduce vehicular cross traffic by 50%. This will result in a lower accident rate even with the forecasted increase in traffic volumes as the motorists will have more room to maneuver on the roadway. ' There are no businesses which will be significantly impacted by the widening of PCH or the cul-de-sacing of the Huntington Beach streets. Some residents may have to alter their travel routes as a result of the cul-de-sacing in Huntington Beach. No additional traffic should be generated as a result of this project. ' Existingbike lanes will be upgraded and/or provided for both P9 ' northerly and southerly travel on PCH. Bike lanes will be included in the design of the new Santa Ana River bridge with a bicycle interchange (see Figure IV-6) , connecting to the existing bike paths through the Huntington Beach State Park and along the IV-37 Talbert Channel. These improvements to the highway bike lanes should alleviate the bicycle/motor vehicle accident rate between Route 55 and Golden West Street. This alleviation will be due to the further separation of the bicyclists and motorists. A total ' of 43 injury accidents occurred between these limits from 1979 to and including 1981. f K. Effect on Public Services ' In the City of Huntington Beach, the cul-de-sacing of 11 streets which presently exit onto PCH, will cause the rerouting of ' emergency vehicles onto parallel through streets. This should not significantly increase the response time for emergency vehicles. ' No mitigation is proposed. There will be no effects on public services in the City of Newport Beach. ' The appropriate agency will be notified in advance of any , construction that would disturb any geodetic control survey monuments. The cost of relodating any such monuments will be ' included as mitigation for this project. ' L. Parking Impacts Between Beach Boulevard and Golden West Street, widening from four to six lanes will be accomplished by restriping. Restriping will impact an estimated 28 businesses in the downtown area by elimi- nating 539 parking spaces in and near the downtown business dis- trict on Pacific Coast Highway, of which only 32 are being used for business parking. For discussion purposes the area is broken into three subareas . ' They are listed below: , 1 . On the seaward side of Pacific Coast Highway, there are only three land uses that will be affected by the elimination of IV-38 parking. They are the Harbor and Beaches Department, Maxwell 's Restaurant, and finally the Huntington Pacific Condominiums. All of these facilities have ample on-site parking . However, the number of visitors to Huntington Beach during the warm summer months often strains the capacity of these lots. Therefore, the use of these streetside parking lots often alleviates the overloaded parking lots at these establishments The elimination of the streetside parking may directly impact the patronage at the restaurant, while for the Harbor Department and the condominiums, it may simply be an inconvenience. 2 . Between Golden West and 17th Street , most of the surrounding land use is vacant lots, oil extraction, and some strip commercial ; e.g . , a grocery store , motel , a fast food outlet , and a gasoline station. For the most part, the curbside ' parking is used by beach goers and not to serve the retail establishments. The elimination of streetside mitigation parking would most definitely impact beach area parking. i 3 . The greatest impact would occur on the landward side of PCH, between 17th Street and Lake Street, in the downtown or old town area of Huntington Beach. Here, there are a number of businesses that rely upon curbside parking for their parking needs. A breakdown of the businesses from south to north and their existing parking is outlined in Table IV-6. ' As can be seen, out of the approximate 25 businesses that are affected, only two will be significantly impacted by the elimina- tion of streetside parking. Those businesses are an auto repair store and a surfboard store. The reason for the major impact is that there is no on-site parking available at these stores and they must rely on adjacent curbside parking. The elimination of the street parking may pose an indirect impact upon the busi- nesses, for those that rely upon or are oriented towards drive-by IV-39 TABLE IV-6 PCH Business Parking Number of On-Site Curbside Parking Spaces Available Jack in the Box 0 Yes Huntington Bikinery 3 Yes Touring and Sports Auto Service 0 Yes Wayne' s Auto Parts 3 No Golden Bear Club 3 Yes ' Jack' s Surfboards 1 No Capri Lounge 1 Yes ' T Shirt 1 Yes ' Touch of East 1 Yes Zap 1 Yes Things for Your Head 1 Yes Infinity (Boutique) 1 Yes E1 Don Liquor 1 Yes ' Wimpi ' s 0 Yes Richard' s Coffee Shop 1 Yes ' Wind/Sea Surfboards 0 Yes D' s Donuts 2 Yes ' Sav-Mor Gas Station 0 Yes Pacific Coast Deli 2 Yes Taco Bell 0 Yes Sun N Surf Motel 2 Yes Century 21 Real Estate 4 Yes ' Surfboards 2 Yes Huntington Surf/Sport 2 Yes , The Clark Co. 0 Yes IV-40 patrons. Specifically, there are four businesses that rely upon drive-by patrons. These businesses are a liquor store, and auto parts store, a donut shop and a real estate office. within that ' group, the liquor store would suffer the severest impact, since the store serves both local and the tourist trade. Especially the ' latter, a liquor store must be highly visible and easily acessible in order for it to capture trade. The elimination of curbside parking could prove to be a major inconvenience and hinderance* to the economic well being of this retail outlet. As for the other ' stores, the removal of parking from the curb could be a minor inconvenience, depending upon the individual store' s parking availability, the location of the store (near a vacant lot) , the nature of the establishment; e.g. , a tavern or clothing store , and finally, the time and/or season; e.g . , summer has a greater volume of trade than winter, etc. The only other problem associated with ' the elimination of parking would be an heightened competition for on-site parking space around the stores , possibly illegal parking ' on Pacific Coast Highway, and increased traffic in the alleyways behind the stores. This latter issue , however, would be properly raddressed by the municipality. ' Caltrans will cooperate with -the cities of Huntington Beach to avoid the displacement of permanent on-street parking by coordinating project implementation with adjacent redevelopment setbacks, or to provide one-for-one replacement sites by locating and developing new public parking, or using other strategies such as joint use of parking provided by commercial development in proximity to coastal resources. ' The following new parking, in the immediate vicinity of the above mentioned losses, will be created as a result of features of this project or as a result of actions planned by other agencies: IV-41 Approximately 216 spaces are included in the plan for Bluff Park between 9th Street and Golden West Street. The parking would be for beach patrons. The City of Huntington Beach plans to build the parking area in the future. This park was completed in the summer of 1984. Approximately 1300 additional spaces at Huntington Beach State Park. Phase I of this project completed and Phase II is scheduled to be completed early in 1985. These ' spaces will be located between Beach Boulevard and and the Santa Ana River. This project is under the jurisdiction of the State Parks and Recreational ' Department. M. Impacts on Archaeological, and Historical Resources 1. There are no known prehistoric cultural resources ' within the Area of Potential Environmental Impact (APEI) of this project. Caltrans Specifications state that if cultural resources , are encountered during construction, all work will halt until a qualified archaeologist is able to evaluate the significance of ' the findings. 2. There are two Historic Properties within the APEI of this project, the Gardiner House at 114 W. Pacific Coast Highway, and the Golden Bear Cafe at 306 W. Pacific Coast Highway, both in the City of Huntington Beach. See Figure IV-8. Under the proposed project, the only impact would be the removal of 2 and 3 ' on-street parking spaces, respectively, in front of these two properties. No other impacts, such as air, noise, or visual, will occur. This will have no effect on these two sites as there is ' adequate parking, 30 spaces for the Gardiner House and 50 spaces for the Golden Bear Cafe, either off- or on-street, in the immediate vicinity of each site. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurs in these findings (see Appendix E) . . IV-42 �. , 5��," --- _ y s:_a • r - -- GARDINER HOUSE _ -— . 114 1d. PCH GOLDEN BEAR CAFE - - 306 wo PCx r• — — - - -- - — — — — 4 — — �r \ HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY BEACH PARKING LOT _ 3 HUNTINGTON BEACH HISTORICAL PROPERTIES N. Paleontological Resources ' Construction in the southern portion of the project could uncover significant fossil material. In order to protect any scientific data uncovered, these mitigation measures will be followed. 1. Caltrans District 07 Environmental Planning Branch will initially examine any fossil material uncovered. 2. The Natural History Foundation of Orange County or appropriate academic institution will be contacted to determine the significance of the finding. 3. Should the findings be significant, steps will ' be taken to properly protect, retrieve, and/or record data from the findings. ' 4. Any findings will be donated to the Natural History Foundation of Orange County or an appropriate academic ' institution. ' O. Construction Impacts Any major project will have short term construction impacts. The types of construction impacts that can be expected with this pro- ject are as follows: additional noise; additional air pollution and dust; interference with commercial and residential activity; and rerouting traffic including emergency services. ' Construction noise, air pollution and dust impacts along PCH will ' vary depending on the type of work being done. The equipment ranges from concrete mixers with noise level in the 80 dBA range at a distance of fifty feet, to jack hammers in the 90' s and pile drivers whose peaks extend over 100 dBA. ' IV-44 In order to reduce the impact of construction noise, the majority of the construction activities in developed areas will be confined ' to the daily period least disturbing to the adjacent residents, between 7 :00 A.M. and 7 :00 P.M. These impacts would also be , mitigated by having contractors follow standard Caltrans noise, dust and air pollution reduction procedures and all applicable local statutes. ' Noise impacts on the California Least Tern are discussed in Section D of this Chapter. During construction and its accompanying street closure , some ' residents may have to alter their routes to and from their residences. , During construction, businesses may suffer a loss of revenue due ' to a reduction of access to their establishments. r Emergency services may have to be rerouted during responses. ' However, the construction activity should not adversely affect response times. , Construction of the new bridge over the Santa Ana River complex will result in some motorist delay. The oceanside of the new ' bridge will be constructed first after the erection of a temporary wooden trestle from which the contractor will work. There will be , some stream bed modification during construction. Five 16 feet wide , 50 feet long cofferdams will be installed so that the new IV-45 ' bridge piers can be constructed. These installations should not reduce the capacity of the channels significantly. Work on the oceanside of the new bridge will be limited to the time frame August 1st to April 1st to substantially reduce the impact on the California Least Tern. At the completion of the oceanside half of the bridge, traffic from the extant bridge will be rerouted onto the new structure. The wooden trestle used as a construction platform would be removed and reinstalled on the inland side of the bridge to complete the inland half. The same methods will be utilized ' during the construction of this half. There will be no time frame ' limitation for the inland half of the bridge. The rubble from the old bridge will be disposed of by the contractor following Caltrans standard specifications which include obtaining all the necessary local and state permits. P. Scenic Resources Newport Beach Slightly over 14,100 square feet of land (0 .32 acres) on the ocean side of PCH between Orange Street and the Santa Ana River Complex ' in Newport Beach will be required. Figure IX-1 shows this area. This land is part of what is locally called the West Newport Park. In actuality, this park is merely an open space buffer between PCH and Seashore Drive. When Caltrans sold this land to Newport Beach ' in 1980 , the deed to the property was use restricted in that this property had to " . . . be used exclusively for open space purposes. . (See Directors Deed DD 018188-01-01 , Book 13661 , Page 581 , 1 IV-46 dated July 10, 1980, in the Orange County Hall of Records attached) . In a letter dated, January 26 , 1982, attached, the City Manaer of Newport Beach concurred with Caltrans that this open space was not subject to 4(f) regulations. Occasionally open space can qualify as park land, however, in this case, it does not. Therefore, the 4( f) procedure will not be applied for the Newport Beach open space parcel. I FHWA has determined that the taking of open space in this case does not constitute a use of 4( f ) property. r 1 r r r r r r r IV-47 ' 3661P 10775 58 � �r Recording Requested by oocUMEWAm TUNWER rAK S. gone TVA' RTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - ----•eoMrur;c �,� ..:�s���, , caMers� Wien Recorded Mail to ;•---- Qa SoM �! ts:s LIDO MW STATE OF CAI+IFOANIAr a M. Gad nerF en or W at DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ---- ---• ' Ag Box 2304 Terminal Aanez �'"`"M' ° �"'"'" "''"' "^"'"�'D OWL. ""' "Mae rs Angeles, California 90o51 E X F ?T - JXESS LAND G3 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE RWPE:ANDERSON 4-29-80 AP 45-121-2,3,5 j 'Written by:WBP Checked by:FBZ NEly of Seashore Drive Sally of Pacific Coast Hwy DISTRICT COUNTY ROUTE POST MILE NUMBER ' DIRECTOR'S DEED 07 Ora 1 20•2/ DD 0-8188-01-01 20.7 MAY 1980 R-'r/dri The STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its Director of Transportation, does bereby grant to CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a --- ---- -- - ---- - — -------------Municipal---Corporation---. - - —--------------•------- -- - - -- - ------ ---- ------- ---- • ----- - �.� •s all that real property in the._---_City. of ?.Nw or----Beach-__---__ County of__-_Orange----------------------------------State of California, described as: Those portions of Lots 3 thru 83 of Tract No. 41110), as shotm on reap recorded May 24, 1962 in Book 162 page 22 of i• iscellaneous Maps, in the office of the County Recor er or sa-1cl county, and that portion of Lot 1 of Section 19 in T 6 S, R 10 Wx SBM, as said section is shown on an official plat filed in the District Land Office on August 4, . 1890, described in Parcel 1 of Final Order of Condemnation, filed in Superior Court Case No. 897.48 (State Parcel A8188) in and for said county, a certified cony of said final order being recorded July 5, 1963 in Book 6620, page 419 of Official Records in said office, all . <, lying generally Southerly and Southwesterly of the following described ' line: v Beginning at a point in the Southeasterly line of Lot. 3 of said Tract No. 4400, distant thereon N 34° 26f 55" E, 77.29 feet from the most Southerly corner of said Lot 3; thence from a tangent which bears N 670 41' 37' . ir', Northwesterly along a curve concave Northeasterly and having a radius of 1074.00 feet through an angle of 13' 03' 33", an are distance of 244.79 feet;- thence tangent N 540 38' 04" lei, 1696. 34. feet; thence N 530 10' 53" i•J, 1227.19 feet; thence N 530 05' 28" Ws 302. 33 feet to a point in the Easterly line of the .land described in ' NIALL TAX STATEMENTS TO: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Beach Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92660 / Attn: Mr. Robert Wynn Iv-48 BK 13561P6 583 r' - deed recorded in Book D 377, page 65 of Deeds, records of said county, distant along said Easterly line and the Easterly line of the land described in deed recorded in Book D-377, page 68 of said Deeds, N 160 37' 25" E, 91.54 feet, from the intersection of last said I line with the Southwesterly line of the land described in the deed to the Los Angeles Inter-Urban Railway Co. , recorded November 7, 19062 in Book 139, page 9 of said Deeds. TOGETHER WITH the underlying interest, if any, in and to the public way, Orange Street, 50 feet wide, lying Southwesterly of the above described course having a distance of 1696.34 fees. ' EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion described in Director's Deed DD 018188-02-02 to the Orange County Flood Control District, a body ' corporate and politic, recorded January 26, 1978 in Book 125449 page 772 of said Official Records. SUBJECT TO THE EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION THEREFROM, all oil, ' minerals, natural gas, and other hydrocarbons by whatsoever name known that may be within or under the herein conveyed parcel of land, and the rights thereto, together with certain other conditions, as excepted and reserved in said Parcel 1 of Final Order of Condemnation, Superior Court Case No. 89748 recorded July 5, 1963, in Book 6620, page 419 of said Official Records. It is expressly made a condition herein that the conveyed. property be used exclusively for open spade purposes as defined in Ordinance Humber 1485, adopted on January 22, 1973 and Ordinance Number 1730, adopted on May 9, 1977 by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, a public purpose for a period of ten (10) j years from the date of this deed; that if said property ceases to be used exclusively for public purposes during this ten (10) year period, all title and interest to said property shall revert to the State of California, Department of Transportation, and that the interest held by the grantee(s) , named herein, or its/their assigns, shall cease and terminate at such time. It is understood and agreed by the grantee(3) , herein named, and its/their assigns, that the foregoing provision constitutes a divestiture and will cause all interest to revert to the State of California, Department of ' Transportation, if the conveyed property ceases to be used for public purposes. IV-49 = i BK 1366 1 Ps 584 ArSubject to special assessments if any,restrictions,reservations,and easements of record. This conveyance is executed pursuant to the authority vested in the Director of Transportation by law and, in particular,by the Streets and Highways Code. WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Department of Transportation of the State of California, this.&Q..�__ day of---Cl: STATE OF CALIFORNIA I ' DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OVM AS TO FORM AN OC URE ADRIANA GIANTURCO DmEcroa of Tit q DEPAR TRANSPORTAT{OM BY G. Russell a 1 De - Deputy DirectX..,in Fact STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,E COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO On this 1? in the ear 19 Q_ before me SHIRLE7 J M ------day of - - ----------- y a Notary Public in and for the ate of California, residing therein, duly commissioned and sworn, personally 1cno�y� Q p�� to h�e���hhgg erson whose name is a aced.-----.----.G._1. - - ,)3A1 A G1A1VTl ao subscribed to the within instrument as the Attorney.in Fact of----------------------------- Director of Transportation of the State of California, and lmown to me to he the person who executed the within instrument on behalf of the State of California, and he acknowledged to me that he subscribed the name of ------_------—----------------ADRIANA--U"T].A GO---------..............as Director of Transportation, and his own name as Attorney in Fact,and that the State of California executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OFFICIAL SEAL —I ,r SHIRLEY . MORTEN -oi NOTARYARY PUBLIC—CALIFORNIA Publ SACIIAMENTO CouNTi• MY Commission InOms Apr. 13, t94I t ++ �. 1120 N EtraN,SacreAanto,CA 95814 IS IS TO CERTIFY That the California Ui TRANSPORTAI � Commission has authorized the Director of Transportation to execute the foregoing deVO at its meeting regularly called and held on the. th___ i EF RDED 1N OFFICIAL RECORDS day of--------------May-----------.----------�.._-, 109-, in the i ANGE COUNTY CAti FORNtA City of-----------Riverside-------__..._-.!!/� a��3-Z P M. JUL 10 1NO Dated this.30t h _day of_--- _- BRANCH.County Retarder i r RICHARD A. DONALDSON IV -5 0 Assistant t Seeretary -- -- _� CaNewrtir, r..............s__ .-. .. . . - --- BK 1366 1 pG 582 This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the deed or grant dated May 30, 1980 from State of California, Department of Transportation to the City of Newport Beach, a municipal corporation, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council on the 12th day of May I 19 80 , and the -grantee consents to recordation thereof by its duly I authorized officer. Dated; June 11, 1980 By: City Clerk of the CQy of Ne:vport Beach 1 1 t 1 DIS7 COUNTY RTE. I P.M. 07 ORA Parce/Nos. 018188-01-01(4 8188) 0/8/88-00-01(48188) 1 .<` TOTAL AREA 2Z2,980 s3r.Ff. or //9 Ac. r O 9 77.?9 :. �ti� sh �po o,V qr STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 07 ' PLAT ACCOMPANYING SCALE: NO Seale ,01RECTORS DEED DD 0/8/8g-0/-0/ oaM►N: EM cHKD:wp ' DATE:/t-Af-77 REF. NAP.• f/7I0-4, F/ /o-5• F/7//-/ ti i'• dry q' y�., J mftftft Z3 y 1 e '6 u ,. IL \ _ r 0 V. PROBABLE UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS r The following is a sun ary of those adverse effects which cannot be avoided. 1 A. Geologic Hazards Despite construction of the new bridge to the highest possible seismic safety standards, there would still remain some risk of injury to people utilizing the bridge during a major seismic event. B. Pew Shadows The proposed bridge will create new shadows amounting. to approximately 0 .4 acres over the Santa Ana River complex . rC. Vegetation Impacts The proposed widening will remove approximately 3 acres of remnant coastal dune vegetation. Some loss of marsh vegetation may occur ' due to increased roadway runoff. r D. Parking Impacts The loss of approximately 540 on-street parking spaces will result from the highway widening. r E. Land Impacts Approximately 9 acres of additional land will be committed to highway use. Some of this acreage is between the highway and the now under construction additional parking spaces in Huntington r ' V-1 Beach State Park. F. Construction Impacts ' The construction impacts will be short term in nature and will include: additional noise, air, and dust pollution; interference ' , with commercial and residential activity; rerouting of emergency services; and traffic congestion. G. Biological Impacts The loss of 0 .81 acres of California Least Tern foraging habitat ' and 3 acres of remnant coastal dune habitat. r V_2 ' w � w w w w � w ■� � w � � w w w w w ■w r �' ! J�h,i 'rI:' `�•C �t j�; � � 1. �� f` �-'.'�'{'r.{'�.� O4.' ,�1 f V r. r�►' ' rvl 0,2 4 Z4 f VI. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAWS ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY. Implementation of this project will have short-term impacts on the area' s land use, population and natural environment. These impacts or uses of the environment should be considered in the ' context of the long-term impact that the improved transportation infrastructure will have on the area. The primary immediate short-term uses which are adversely impacted ' are the following : 1 . Construction activities would temporarily reduce business opportunities in the vicinity of construction sites . 2 . Construction would impede mobility and change circulation patterns in the vicinity of construction. There would also be noise, dust, unpleasant odors and other construction ' nuisances . 3 . Air quality will be temporarily degraded due to exhaust emissions and dust generated by construction equipment. 4 . Visual blighting will occur from the temporary storage of construction materials and equipment on site. Storage sites will be located as to not impact any environmentally sensitive or paleontological resources. The long-term effects resulting from the implementation of this project include the following aspects: ' VI-1 1 . Improved traffic handling comprising the following items: a. Reduction of accidents and congestion. , b. Improved auto/bus/bicycle/pedestrian circulation and safety. , 2 . Reduction of noise levels in certain areas. To accomplish these benefits, there will be the commitment of land , and money for highway purposes. In addition, a portion of the Santa Ana River complex will become less usable for some wildlife purposes. r VI-2 ' Ih ' I f r °hrr '•i �• '7 .l^fir 'y•i�,,�`�i�'���•�0. OF) � I i I �1 rl VII. IRRBVERSIBLB AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITM MT OF RBSOORCBA This chapter summarizes the primary and secondary impacts of non- reversible and irretrievable commitments of resources and discusses any irreversible damage that could result from the environmental impacts associated with the project. r A. Land A large portion of the land required for the proposed project is ' currently used for highway or highway related purposes. Approximately 7.6 acres of land currently owned by the . State Department of Parks and Recreation will be required. B. Construction Materials The proposed project would require the use of building materials such as concrete, lumber, and steel . The irretrievable use of these resources could have some very slight impact on supply for the time period required for construction. C. Environmental Accidents No accidents which would result in irreversable damage to the environment are likely as a result of implementation of this project. r VII-1 I` I - t( .; WZr �,�r. 'gitr'• womb r , 1 � ' VIII. IMPACTS ON PROPERTIES AND• SITES OF HISTORICAL AND ' CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND SECTION 106 PROPERTIES. ' There are two sites eligible for the National Register of Historical Places (NRHP) within the Area of Potential Environ- mental Impact (APEI) . Both are located where widening will ' consist only of the removal of parking and restriping. There will be no taking of land in this segment. The removal of parking will ' cause the loss of 2 parking spaces in front of the Gardiner House at 114 Pacific Coast Highway and the removal of 6 spaces along 2nd Street, Walnut Avenue and Lake Street, the streets adjacent to the Gardiner House. There are in excess of 50 spaces available on Main Street and Pacific Coast Highway, adjacent to the Golden Bear Cafe which would lose 3 parking spaces on PCH. In view of the large number of parking spaces available adjacent to both sites, ' FHWA in consultation with the State Historical Preservation Office , has determined that the project will have no effect on ' these NRHP sites. There are no archaeological resources known to exist within the APEI . The closest recorded sites are ORA-59 and ORA-60 which are both located within the State Route 55 Corridor. ' VIII-1 \ s a 9' 1` �` •li•,r ca 1,1,Y ti va + t .' � � 1 lifa S{i fir. }• f tL4J u O Ohl LQ �, •£r��l ��1 � I 1� l•jrlR{r',` Y,'11 .r •���� r } -0� 1' �1{ r It/(� y •'1 .l a��.11 1 ? •t. s a Nii ' I%. INVOLVERKHT OF LAND PROTECTED BY SECTION 4(f) This section gives the background information for determining the status of the Huntington Beach State land, to be used for the proposed Federal-aid highway project. If the recommended alterna- tive is selected, then the final evaluation will be included in the Final E.I .S. according to 49 U.S.C. 303. A. Project Description Widening of Pacific Coast Highway (ORA-1) is proposed between Newport Boulevard ( Rte 55) in Newport Beach and Golden West Street ' in Huntington Beach, a distance of approximately 6 miles. Between Newport Boulevard and the Santa Ana River Complex, widening will ' be completed primarily on the inland side. Between the Santa Ana River Complex and Beach Boulevard (Rte 39 ) widening will be done ' on both the inland and State Park side of the highway. From Beach ' Boulevard to Golden West Street , widening will be accomplished by the elimination of on-street parking and restriping the existing ' roadway. Between the Santa Ana River Complex and Beach Boulevard, the widening within the 4( f) property will consist of the following: ( 1) a new traveled lane , relocation of bike lane, sidewalk, bus turnouts, and new beach entrances at Brookhurst Street , Magnolia Street, and Newland Street . IX-1 B. Section 4(f) Involvement ' Huntington Beach ' Huntington Beach State Park is between the Santa Ana River and Beach Boulevard approximately 2-1/2 miles. There are 2500 parking ' spaces in the park for the 3 million annual visitors. Restrooms Are provided every four hundred feet and there are also snack concessions. The visitors recreational activities include swimming, sunbathing and surfing. There are bicycle and pedestrian paths located in the park area. The proposed project will require approximately a 30-foot wide strip of Huntington Beach State Park between the Santa Ana 'liver , Complex and Beach Boulevard (Rte 39 ) . Figure IX-1 depicts this area and Figure IX-2 depicts the cross-section. This strip, , between the existing highway pavement and the now under construction parking lot, is approximately 7 .5 acres out of the 78 acre State Beach or almost 10% of the total acreage. No , structures or trees will be removed from this 4( f ) property. r This strip of land is currently being used as a buffer between the highway and the State Beach parking lot . There is no recreational use presently nor any planned in the future. ' The strip of land originally belonged to Pacific Electric which ran 50 ' from the edge of pavement and was 50 ' wide. This strip ran beyond the highway project study limits. ' IX-2 ?Uet ome o __ ^i qa r J P"'Ara1'E,O ,oE07OPrAWAR 'AriPit�iYC I Af I'mawaw ' B J G�4if'EX / ,�- /�'G4/YE,!' J •• `Arm..- 6'D '�` E.f/1l/rY6' .�•41�E�1fEiYT AD 'r E.Y/.!'lIlVe oOWA2 W4FWT dP/9TEi W .tr!/O�YrY OiY .�.4/Y1' ® /.rrE.P,r��rioyr P.Aci�ic eO.eX7 COO• //i/C `l'��'�'P•P0.1V TEE' .!�1�f'1./ �iYi9 iP/f0Ei7 r0 Afifell ,o-Pej J C. Alternatives The no project or widen entirely on the inland side of the highway alternatives were rejected for the following reasons: 1 . The no project alternative would do nothing to relieve the ' present and projected traffic volumes along this stretch of the highway. Widening northerly of Beach Boulevard, constructing a new bridge and widening southerly of the Santa Ana River Complex, while not widening between the Santa Ana River Complex and Beach Boulevard would create a bottleneck effect between the Santa Ana River Complex and Beach Boulevard. 2. Widening entirely on the inland side of the highway could result in the loss of approximately 7 . 5 acres of degraded salt marsh. The use of wetlands for highway purposes when there are prudent and feasible alternatives to their use is clearly undesirable. Using any wetlands for highway purposes would preclude restoration of the wetlands . Executive Order 11990 , Protection of Wetlands, (May 24 , 1977 ) directs all Federal agencies to refrain from assisting in or giving financial support to projects which encroach upon public or private wetlands unless the agency determines that there are no practicable alternatives to such construction. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service , California Coastal Commission, California Coastal Conservancy and California State IX-5 1 1 Fish and Game Department have taken the position to preserve these wetlands. If the widening is built into the wetlands then there would be a significant adverse impact on natural and beneficial floodplain values. For further discussion see Chapter IV Section ' D. and Appendix A. D. Planning to !Minimize Harm The Huntington State Beach Redevelopment Plan has increased the available parking from 1 ,200 to 2,500 vehicles. The existing entrance to the State Beach is located on the Pacific Coast ' Highway at Beach Boulevard. The Huntington State Beach project will add three new access and egress points located on the Pacific Coast Highway at Newland , Magnolia and Brookhurst Streets. The three new entrances should decrease traffic congestion on the Pacific Coast Highway and increase visitor safety. The proposed widening project• within the 4( f ) property would also ' provide a new traveled lane , bike lane, sidewalk and bus turn- outs. All of these improvements would increase the safety of the facility. B. Coordination In 1980, contact was made with the Department of Parks and Recreation in an effort to coordinate their proposed parking lot expansion with Caltrans' highway widening . After several ' meetings, it was decided that their parking lot plans would be shifted 30 feet seaward to accommodate the 30 feet of parkland IX-6 ' needed for the proposed highway widening. In a letter (see next I page) dated May 7, 1981, James W. Burns, Assistant Secretary for Resources, determined that the 30 foot strip of land was in excess of the minimum needed for access to Huntington Beach State Park ' and that Caltrans' proposed use of this strip was acceptable to the State Department of Resources. ( See Figure IX-14) . Coordination has continued with the Department. Construction of the beach parking facilities between Beach Boulevard and the Santa Ana River was recently completed with set backs maintained and a ' retaining wall constructed as shown on Figure IX-2. The land- scaping is being done by the Department of Parks and Recreation and the bicycle pathway has been built behind the retaining wall. 1 IX-7 r' EL MUND G. BROWN JR. OFFICE.71`THF,�.ECRETARV GOVERNOR OF Air Resources Board ' Colorado River Board RESOL RCES BUILDING CALIFORNIA San Francisco Bay Conservation and 1416 NINTH STREET Development Commission Solid Waste Management Board 96814 s... o. State Lands Commission (916) 445-5656 stet:Reclamation Board J.� State Water Resources Control Board Department of Conservation - mom! i- Regional Water Quality Control Boards Department of fish and Gams ( 5;- to Energy Resources Conservation and Department of Navigation Commission end pi <n --MAY 1 ' i981 Ocean Development Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Water Resources THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA BRANCH B i Ica ' SACRAMENTO, CAUFORNIA FJµJ J wOw / ELT Mr. James G. Bell, Chief MAY 7 Project Development Branch 1981 + �� Department of Transportation Post Office Box 2304 ------- Los Angeles, CA 90051 Dear Mr. Bell: ' This is in response to your letter of February 3, 1981, regarding the Resources Agency's position on Caltrans' s proposed widening of Pacific Coast Highway between the Santa Ana. River and Beach Boulevard. The Department of Parks and Recreation has determined . that it will require 170 feet for its proposed development of public recreation ' access to the State beach at this location.. This would provide 30 feet of existing State beach property for Pacific Coast Highway development, including any sidewalks or curbs and gutters required. , Consequently, Caltrans should design its alignment and cross-section to accommodate this State beach facility minimum space requirement. The Department also suggests that Caltrans be required to provide ' drainage and to plant the area between State beach parking lots and the highway, provide retaining walls, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, etc. , if required. The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) comments that Caltrans should ' eliminate offstreet parking and revise the sidewalk and median strip design, thus accomplishing the proposed highway work within the 30- foot strip of Department of Parks and Recreation land mentioned above. Minor improvements along the existing inland shoulder (i.e. , curbs and - gutters) could be designed, in consultation with DFG, so that the wet- lands on the inland side of the highway are not adversely affected. Widening the highway 30 feet in both directions would affect wetlands, and would not be compatible with the Resources Agency' s Wetlands Policy. Widening 60 feet to either side of the highway should be avoided. Major negative impacts would occur from wetlands filling if the highway is widened 60 feet inland. Widening 60 feet coastward would cause severe impacts to the least tern colony by disrupting their nesting. Neither alternative is acceptable. IX-8 ' r L ' Page 2 J.G. Bell ' The Department of Parks and Recreation has also recommended that the Resources Agency obtain additional information from Caltrans regarding this project. The Department specifically asks the following questions: ' 1. Why is the project currently being proposed. The Department purchased the Pacific Electric right-of-way from Caltra.ns in 1976 after it was declared surplus to Caltrans ' s needs . 2. How does the proposed cross-section at Huntington State Beach com- pare to proposed cross-sections in other areas of the project? ' 3. Why is there only one alternative for the Santa Ana River crossing? We would, therefore, appreciate receiving additional information on these and similar concerns. Given the above, the Resources Agency believes that Caltrans should ' confine its proposed expansion of Pacific Coast Highway at this loca- tion to a 30-foot strip which the Department of Parks and Recreation has determined is in excess of the minimum needed for its beach access . Sincerely, AMES W. BURNS Assistant Secretary for Resources cc : DFG, Fred Worthley, Long Beach Department of Parks and Recreation 1 O 1 1 ' IX-9 r� f r� �r r ., ♦�7�, 'Wit;` .�`:,�':4� � s:.�,.,�h.,.�y�r:r1'1, l � r .rya•��,�f* .:� ., . _ r� J 1 ' X. GRDKlB INDUCING IMPACTS 1 The proposed project should have no growth inducing impacts for the following reasons: ' A. The land on the ocean side of PCH is developed as far as existing zoning allows. North of the Santa Ana River complex ' nearly all of the land is publicly owned beach and used for beach recreational activities. South of the Santa Ana River complex, ' nearly all of the land is privately owned and used for residential purposes. ' B. On the inland side of PCH south of the Santa- Ana River complex, the land is developed to its fullest potential. Between ' the Santa Ana River complex and Beach Boulevard, the State Lands Commission has determined that this land should be in the public ' trust which implies that any land currently held in the public trust cannot be transfered to the private sector. Northerly of ' Beach Boulevard, strip commercial activity is predominant and ' should continue to be so. ' Pressure to redevelop existing improved property or develop unimproved property for commercial or residential activity will ' continue with or without the proposed project. There are few if any vacant storefronts along this section of PCH at the present ' time. The vacant parcels between Beach Bouelvard and Golden West Street are expected to be developed into residential and X-1 commercial projects following the Draft Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report 82-2 of Huntington Beach , 1982. ' Between Lake Street and Golden West Street in Huntington Beach, there are 11 parcels on which there are operating oil extraction ' wells. These parcels have not been developed because the oil company( ies) that hold the mineral rights have access easements ' onto the parcels as long as the wells are producing, no matter what the level of production. Another oil company is buying the ' mineral leases from the current leasees and plan to consolidate its drilling operation at 2 centralized sites via slant drilling , , When this project comes to fruition in 5 to 7 years, the currently ' nondevelopable parcels will be developed as allowed by the then current zoning, Huntington Beach and Coastal regulations. , C. Visitor use of the beaches should not increase as a , result of this project. The results of a 1976 survey showed 12% of the beach users residing in Huntington Beach. This same survey ' revealed that Orange County residents only accounted for 34% of ' the beach visitors with the remaining 66% were out of the county. In addition, the average trip length of the beach users was in ' excess of 27 miles. This is the primary reason it is felt that this project should not increase the number of beach visitors. ' The removal of 540 on-street parking space should not lead to any reduced or changed business use as these spaces will be replaced , in the immediate vicinity of their removal. ' 1 X-2 ' I� ; � `, I II �� .. r r �.• �• :s . f �� �.•' � \ e �'. � .- '' � '� •;�sTi3� ��'r � -�,j�. � ,l ���,_;1r •� sty' �� 1�. � � •.,fit. y.'•��i7,'J�hl�t.' � y �! .;��} i '�F.:' • l,�r� � � ���r, iy �• :.. �I ' X1. ENERGY USE ' Energy consumption will increase slightly (less than 2%) over current consumption as a result of the proposed project. This ' increase in due primarily to construction of the highway and ' bridge, maintenance of a wider facility and the additional fuel consumed by vehicles operating at higher speeds. This slight increase, as shown in Figure XI-1 , when weighed ' against the benefits attributable to the project, is ' insignificant. FIGURE XI-1 ' ENERGY USAGE IN EQUIVALENT BARRELS OF OIL PER DAY No Project /// ' Roadway Widening 1 400 40 410 41 420 ' Equivalent barrels of oil per da 9 P Y 1 r XI-1 1 , D ' XII. COKKENTS AND COORDINATION ' The development of the proposed project has been ektensively coor- dinated with the two cities involved ( Huntington Beach and Newport Beach) and with the numerous Federal, State and County Agencies ' mentioned throughout the document. Through the various contacts made at the Environmental Scoping Meeting held in August, 1981 , the various concerns of individuals and organizations have been carefully considered. Where possible and feasible, design features have been modified to meet the expressed concerns. In addition to the assistance of the cities , the following ' coordination is noteworthy: Bridge design and location ( including approaches) - Corps of Engineers ' - U.S. Coast Guard County of Orange - State Parks and Recreation ' - State Fish and Game - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ' Noise issues - Various citizens and groups ' Bus facilities - Orange County Transit District ' - State Parks and Recreation Wetlands issues ' - State Fish and Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Corps of Engineers - Orange County EMA - California Coastal Commission XII-1 Required Permits The following will be necessary to implement the proposed Orange Route 1 Widening Project: , U. S. Army -Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit Coast Guard Permit ' Water Quality Control Board Statement County Flood Control Permit , Section 1601 Permit may be required from California Fish and Game . , This DEIS will be available for public review at the following locations: California Department of 120 South Spring Street , Transportation, District 7 Los Angeles, California District Office Balboa Library 100 E. Balboa ' Newport Beach Banning Annex Library 9281 Banning Avenue Huntington Beach Corona del Mar Library 420 Marigold Avenue , Newport Beach Graham Annex Library 15882 Graham Street , Huntington Beach Huntington Beach Library 7111 Talbert Avenue Huntington Beach , Main Annex Library 525 Main Street Huntington Beach Newport Center Library 856 San Clemente Newport Beach , West Newport Childrens ' Library 6000 W. Coast Highway Newport Beach The following is the list of agencies , organizations and individuals to which this Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report was distributed. ' XII-2 , DISTRIBUTION LIST Federal and State Officials Honorable Harriet Wieder Supervisor, 2nd District Honorable Alan Cranston County of Orange U.S. Senator 10 Civic Center Plaza Old Senate Office Building Santa Ana, CA 92702 ' Washington, DC 20510 Honorable John Cox Honorable Pete Wilson Councilman ' U.S. Senator City of Corona del Mar Senate Office Building 1306 Outrigger Drive Washington, DC 20510 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ' Honorable 011ie Speraw Honorable Paul Hammel State Senator, 37th District Councilman 2503 E. Bluff, Suite 203 City of Corona del Mar ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 416 Heliotrope Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Honorable Dan Lungren Congressman, 42nd -District Honorable Philip Maurer ' City of Long Beach Councilman 555 Ocean Boulevard, Suite 505 City of Balboa Island Long Beach, CA 90802 325 Diamond Avenue Balboa Island, CA 92626 Honorable Robert Badham Congressman, 40th District Honorable Ruthelyn Plummer ' 180 Newport Center Drive Councilwoman Newport Beach, CA 92260 City of Newport Beach 4827 River Avenue Honorable Marian Bergeson Newport Beach, CA 92663 Assemblywoman, 70th District 4500 Campus Drive, Suite 344 Honorable Donald Strauss Newport Beach, CA 92663 Councilman ' City of Newport Beach Honorable Nolan Frizzelle 101 Via Veneza Assemblyman, 69th District Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' 18600 Main Street, Suite 210 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Honorable Bob Mandic Councilman Local Officials City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Honorable Thomas F. Riley Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Supervisor, 5th District ' County of Orange Honorable Don MacAllister 10 Civic Center Plaza Councilman Santa Ana, CA 92701 City of Huntington Beach ' P.O. Box 190 Honorable Evelyn Hart Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Mayor of Newport Beach ' 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' XII-3 Honorable Ruth Bailey Director I Councilwoman Office of Environmental City of Huntington Beach Compliance I P.O. Box 190 Department of Energy, Rm 4G-064 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Honorable Ruth Finley Councilwoman Director City of Huntington Beach Office of Environmental Affairs P.O. Box 190 Department of Health and Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Human Services 200 Independence Ave. , SW Rm 537F Honorable Jack Kelly Washington, DC 20201 I Councilman City of Huntington Beach Environmental Clearance Officer P.O. Box 190 Department of Housing and ' Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Urban Development 450 Golden Gate Avenue Honorable Ron Pattinson P.O. Box 36003 ' Councilman San Francisco, CA 94102 City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 USDA, Soil Conservation Service Huntington Beach , CA 92648 12791 Newport Avenue, Suite J ' Tustin, CA 92680 Honorable John Thomas Councilman Regional Director ' City of Huntington Beach Federal Emergency P.O. Box 190 Management Agency Huntington Beach , CA 92648 211 Main Street San Francisco, CA 94105 , Federal Agencies Department of the Army Environmental Protection Agency Corps of Engineers ' Office of Environmental Review P.O. Box 2711 (A104) Los Angeles, CA 90053 401 "M" Street, SW ' Washington, DC 20460 National Marine Fisheries Service EIS Coordinator, Region 9 300 Ferry Street Environmental Protection Agency Terminal Island, CA 90731 ' 215 Fremont Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Commander (OAN) 11th Coast Guard District , Urban Mass Transportation 400 Ocean Gate Boulevard Administration, Region 9 Long Beach, CA 90822 Two Embarcadero Center ' Suite 620 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service San Francisco, CA 94111 24000 Avila Road Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Director ' Office of Environmental Review Mr. Thomas J . Charmley U.S. Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Washington, DC 20240 Kern National Wildlife Refuge Corcoran Road Delano, CA 93215 XII-4 ' _ 1 1 State Agencies State Clearinghouse Executive Officer Office of the Governor Solid Waste Management Board Office of Planning & Research 825 K Street, Suite 300 ' 1400 Tenth Street, Room 108 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 Executive Officer ' NOTE: State Clearinghouse will State Air Resources Board distribute the draft EIR/EIS 1102 Q Street to the following State Agencies Sacramento, CA 95814 for their comments. Director Director Department of Boating Department of Water Resources and Waterways 1416 Ninth Street 1416 9th Street , Room 1336 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 95814 I ' Executive Officer Director State Lands Commission Department of Parks 1807 13th Street, Room 101 and Recreation Sacramento, CA 95814 1416 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Director Department of Conservation Director ' 1416 Ninth Street Department of Fish and came Sacramento, CA 95814 P.O. Box 2390 Sacramento, CA 95814 Secretary Resources Agency Other State Agencies 13th Floor, 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Mr. Tom Miller Regional Director Executive Director Department of Parks Energy Resources Conservation and Recreation ' and Development Commission 18331 Enterprise Lane 1111 Howe Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Sacramento, CA 95825 ' Coastal Commission Director 245 W. Broadway #380 Department of Health Services Long Beach, CA 90801 744 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 SCAQMD 9150 Flair Drive Director El Monte, CA 91731 State Department of Housing and Community Development Constance Cameron 921 Tenth Street Anthropology Museum, CSUF Sacramento, CA 95814 800 North State College Blvd. Fullerton, CA 92634 Executive Officer State Water Resources Mr. Paul Kelly ' Control Board Department of Fish and Game 1416 Ninth Street P.O. Box 47 Sacramento, CA 95814 Yountville, CA 94599 XII-5 Other State Agencies-cont.d. Mr. Reed Holderman Mr. John Wolter California Coastal Conservancy Civil Engineer ' 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100 City of Newport Beach Oakland, CA 94612 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Ms. Margaret Renton c/o Government Publications Dept. UCI Library Mr. Don Whitley, Director P. O. Box 19557 Parks, Beaches and Recreation Irvine, CA 92713 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Dr. Charles Collins Newport Beach, CA 92663 California State University, Long Beach Ms. Alicia Wentworth 1250 Bellflower Boulevard City Clerk Long Beach, CA 90840 City of Huntington Beach ' P.O. Box 190 Local Agencies Huntington Beach, . CA 92648 City of Costa Mesa Mr. Vincent Moorhouse ' P.O. Box 1200 Director, Community Ser •ices Costa Mesa, CA 92626 City of Huntington Beach ' P.O. Box 190 Clerk of the Board Huntington Beach, CA 92648 of Supervisor P.O. Box 4048 Mr. James Palin ' Santa Ana, CA 92702 Director, Development Services City of Huntington Beach County of Orange P.O. Box 190 ' Environmental Management Agency Huntington Beach, CA 92648 P.O. Box 687 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Mr. Raymond Picard City of Huntington Beach ' Orange County Sanitation District P.O. Box 190 P.O. Box 8127 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 ' Mr. Charles Thompson Newport Mesa Unified City Administration School District City of Huntington Beach ' P.O. Box 1368 P.O. Box 190 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach Union High School Mr. Earle Robitaille ' 10251 York Town Avenue Police Chief Huntington Beach, CA 92648 City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 ' Fountain Valley School Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1 Lighthouse Lane Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Mr. Paul E. Cook ' Director of Public Works City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ' XII-6 - 1 Local A en ies-c nt 'g c o d. Ms. Jeannie Franks 1 Mr. Rich Edmonston, City of Huntington Beach Traffic Engineer P. O. Box 190 City of Newport Beach Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ' 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Organizations Mr. Don Webb Mr. Ralph Kaiser City Engineer Huntington Beach City of Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce 3300 Newport Boulevard 18582 Beach Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Suite #224 Huntington Beach, CA 92664 Bicycle Trail Citizens ' Advisory Committee American Cetacean Society City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 4416 3300 Newport Boulevard San Pedro, CA 90731 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Mr. Bob Terry Mr. Irwin Haydock Chairman Chairman Downtown Development Committee ' Huntington Beach 409 Walnut Environmental Board Huntington Beach, CA 92648 P.O. Box 190 ' Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Stop Polluting Our Newport P.O. Box 102 Mr. Harold Simkins Balboa Island, CA 92662 Long Range Planning City of Long Beach Environmental Coalition 333 West Ocean of Orange County Long Beach, CA 90802 206 West 4th Street ' Santa Ana, CA 92701 Huntington Beach Transportation Commission Natural History Foundation ' P.O. Box 190 P.O. Box 7038 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Orange County Ms. Cathy Anderson ' Transportation Commission President 1020 North Broadway West Newport Beach Santa Ana, CA 92701 IMP. Association 5403 Seashore Drive Mr. Mark Pisano Newport Beach, CA 92663 Executive Director Southern California Mr. Don Porter ' Association of Governments Executive 600 South Commonwealth Newport Harbor Area Suite 1000 Chamber of Commerce Los Angeles, CA 90005 1470 Jamboree Road Newport Beach, CA 92660 Mr. James Reichert ' General Manager Environmental Defense Orange County Transit District Funds, Inc. P.O. Box 3005 2606 Dwight Way Garden Grove, CA 92640 Berkeley, CA 94702 1 XII-7 Organizations , Southern California Edison Ms. Phyllis M. Faber ' Bill Compton League of Coastal Protection 19171 Magnolia 212 Del Casa Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Mill Valley, CA 94941 t Southern California Gas Company Mr. Gary Gorman P.O. Box 3334 Friends of Huntington Beach ' Anaheim, CA 92803 Wetlands 9122 Christine Drive Pacific Telephone Huntington Beach, CA 92648 3939 East Coronado ' 1st Floor Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Anaheim, CA 92807 Vic Byers P.O. Box 606 ' Center for Law in the La Habra, CA 90631 Public Interest 10203 Santa Monica Boulevard Mrs. Loren Greely ' Los Angeles, CA 90076 President Newport Crest Dr. D. W. Harvey Homeowner' s Association Newport Beach Committee 201 Intrepid Street ' on Bikeways Newport Beach, CA 92663 2039 Port Weybridge Place Newport Beach, CA 92660 Ms. Linda Melton ' Aminoil U.S.A. Mr. Ron Rogers 2120 Main Street, Suite #200 President Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Newport Beach Townhouse ' Owners Association Mr. Ray Quinn #9 Surfside Court President Newport Beach , CA 92663 Newport Shores ' Community Association Sierra Club 477 Prospect Street Orange County Group Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' P.O. Box 1033 Garden Grove, CA 92642 Mr. Chanciford Mounce President Sierra Club - Angeles Chapter Newport Terrance ' 2410 Beverly Boulevard Homeowner's Association Los Angeles, CA 90026 #7 Summerwalk Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' Environmental Impact Coordinator California Natural Plant Society Mr. Dave Krupp 2380 Ellsworth Street, Suite D President ' Berkeley, CA 94704 Sea Wind Community Association League of Woman Voters 2407 Post Whithy of the Orange Coast Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' 1701 Westcliff Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Orange County Transportation Coalition ' Amigos de Bolsa Chica 180 Newport Center Drive P. 0. Box 1563 Suite #180 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Attn: Adrian Morrison XII-8 Sea and Sage Audubon Society Helen McLaughlin ' P.O. Box 1779 544 Seaward Road Santa Ana, CA 92701 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Mr. Tom Orlando Hal Thomas ' President 309 Heliotrope Balboa Coves Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Community Association ' #15 Balboa Coves Joan Winburn Newport Beach, CA 92663 1612 Cornwall Lane Newport Beach, CA 92660 Mr. David A. Goff ' President Vincent Nobel Lido Sands Community Association 20031 Goldenwest Street P.O. Box 1373 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Spencer Sheldon Mr. Tom Pratte 2120 Main Street ' Western Surfing Association Suite #200 Environmental Branch Huntington Beach, CA 92647 P.O. Box 2704 #86 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Louise Greely 201 Intrepid Press Newport Beach, CA 92663 Daily Pilot Sue Ficker ' 330 West Bay Street 110 9th Street. Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Newport Beach, CA 92661 " I Huntington Beach Independent Merrill Skilling 17969 Beach Boulevard 6610 West Ocean Front Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Orange County Register Judy Cooper 625 North Grand Avenue 1220 Outrigger Drive ' Santa Ana, CA 92701 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Citizens Cam Wallis ' 2635 Alta Vista Debra Allen Newport Beach, CA 92660 1021 White Sail Way Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Janice De Bay ' 5107 Seashore Drive Paul L. Balalis Newport Beach, CA 92663 1129 E. Balboa Boulevard Balboa, CA 92662 John Dunzer 1958 Port Locksleigh Avenue Allan Beek Newport Beach, CA 92660 2007 Highland ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 Paula Godfrey 314 Grand Canal Jerry King Balboa Island, CA 92661 ' 979 Sandcastle Drive Corona del Mar, CA 92625 David Goff 5212 River Avenue ' Newport Beach, CA 92663 XII-9 1 I ' Citizens-cont1 d. Victor G. Rumbelow Brion Jeannette 29 Bodega Bay Drive 470 Old Newport Boulevard Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Robert Hopkins Ronald Kennedy ' 1501 West Cliff Drive #210 550 Hazel Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Alan M. Craig Paul Johnson . Department of Fish and Game 4140 Warren Avenue 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, CA 95822 I Sacramento, CA 95814 Ruth Galanter Barbara Massey P. O. Box 66494 ' 1825 Knoxville Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90066 Long Beach, CA 90815 Sterling Wolfe ' Bobby Lovell 6204 W. Oceanfront 1242 West Ocean Front Newport Beach, CA 92663 Newport Beach, CA 92661 Ms. Marcia Nesler ' Bernard Pegg 3946 Carmona Avenue 2633 Bamboo Street Los Angeles, CA 90008 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Kenneth Roth Richard Plastino 17172 Harbor Bluffs Creek 1307 Santanella Territory Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 ' Jean Watt Judith Shelton No. 4 Harbor Island 200 Via Koron Newport Beach, CA 92663 ' Newport Beach, CA 92625 Kenneth J. Sustachek Chriss Street 21922 Vacation Lane ' 619 Heliotrope Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Helen Matelson 2422 Standwood Drive ' Santa Barbara, CA XII-10 , 1 INN" I ZZ;LW +� r r t l i 1 ti�,,,U , L' s'•;r�� t O rf s J %III. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION PERSONNEL The following people were principally responsible for preparing ' this DEIS or significant background paper. RONALD KOSINSKI - Senior Environmental Planner ' B.A. Geography, CSU Long Beach; M.A. Urban Planning ; California Poly University; Pomona; 7 years experience in ' Environmental Evaluations. WILLIAM WELDELE - Transportation Engineer ' B.S. Civil Engineer; Gonzaga University, Spokane, Washington; 24 years experience in Transportation Engineering . ' CHUCK MORTON - Environmental Planner B.A. Biology/Marine Science, M.S. Environmental Planning , ' CSU Dominguez Hills; 3 years experience Environmental/ Transportation Evaluations. HAROLD HUNT - Environmental Planner ' B.S. Biology, University of Texas at E1 Paso• Y ' M.A. Biology, CSU Humboldt; 3 years experience in Environmental Evaluations. ' JOHN SULLY - Environmental Planner B.S. History and Political Science, Santa Clara University; ' M.S. Biology, CSULA; 12 years experience in Biological Environmental Evaluation. XIII-1 1 LOIS WEBB - Environmental Planner B.A. Mathematics, U..C. Berkeley; Environmental Planning ' Certificate, U.C. Irvine; 11 years experience in Environmental Planning . District 07 Heritage Preservation ' Coordinator for 8 years. ' GEORGE CASEN - Environmental Planner , B.A. Political Science, SUNY, Stony Brook; M.S. History/ Education, Long Island University; Post Graduate Studies, ' Urban Planning , NYU; 4 years experience in Environmental/ , Transportation Evaluation. JOHN ROMANI - Environmental Planner B.A. Anthropology, M.A. Archaeology, CSU Northridge; ' 10 years experience in Archaeology. ' IRWIN BOROW - Environmental Engineer ' B.S. Civil Engineering , USC; 25 years experience in Environmental/Transportation Engineering. ' HILLEL AMOS - Transportation Engineer ' B.S. Civil Engineering, University of Maryland; ' 20 years experience in Transportation Engineering. HARUTO MIYATAKI - Transportation Engineer ' B.S. Civil Engineering , University of Hawaii; 24 years experience in Transportation Engineering , XIII-2 t 1 HIRO KUSUMOTO - Transportation Engineer ' B.S. Civil Engineering , Tri-State College, Angola, Indiana; ' 25 years experience in Transportation Engineering. ' PAUL GONZALES - Environmental Planner B.A. History/Urban Studies , CSU Dominguez Hill ; ' Graduate Work in Environmental Studies, CSU Dominguez Hills; 4 years experience in ' Environmental/Transportation Planning. PATRICIA WILLIAMSON - Senior Delineator ' B.A. Art, Mount St. Mary' s College , Los Angeles 27 years experience in Drafting/Graphic Arts 1 XIII-3 i t ,� ;fYx�f��i�rYj�'4y•v 4 � Om Q �' CZ) coo CIO ' %IV. BIBLIOGRAPHY BARBOUR, MICHAEL G. and JACK MAJOR, EDS. 1977 . Terrestrial Vegetation of California. John Wiley & Sons. New York. r BARROWS, ALLAN G. 1974 , Special Report 114 , A Review of The Geology and Earthquake History of the Newport-Inglewood Structural Zone, Southern California. California Division of Mines and Geology. Sacramento, California. CALTRANS. 1983 . Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Route 55 Transportation Study, FHWA-CA-EIS-83-03-D. Environmental Planning, California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles. CALTRANS. 1983. Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Accidents in District 07 . Transportation Planning and Ridesharing Branch, California ' Department of Transportation; Los Angeles. CALTRANS. 1982 . Physical Environmental Report for the proposed widening of Pacific Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Golden West Street. Environmental Investigation Section, California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles. CALTRANS. 1982 . Travel Demand Forecast for Project Proposals on tRoute 1 . LARTS, California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles. ' 'CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME. 1980 . At the Crossroads . California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. XIV-1 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY. 1980 . An Assessment of the I Consequences and Preparation for a Catastrophic California 1 Earthquake. Findings and Actions takens. Federal' Emergency 1 Management Agency, Washington, D. C. FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION. 1981 . F. I. R. M. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Orange County, various. U. S. Department of ' Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D. C. HUNTINGTON BEACH. 1982 . Draft Downtown Specific Plan EIR b2-2 . City of Huntington Beach, California. MILLER, DANIEL J. & LEA R. N. 1972. Guide to the Coastal Marine Fishes of California, Fish Bulletin 157 . California Department of , Fish and Game, Sacramento. MORTON, PAUL K. 1974 . Geo-Environmental Maps of Orange County, ' California. Preliminary Report 15 . California Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento. MUNZ , PHILIP A. 1968 . A California Flora with Supplement. University of California Press, Berkeley. MUNZ , PHILIP A. 1974 . A Flora of Southern California. ' University of California Press, Berkeley. XIV-2 REISH, DONALD J. 1972. Marine Life of Southern California. Forty-Hiner Shops, Inc. California State University at Long Beach. REMSEN, J. V. 1978 . Bird Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. ' U. S. ARMY 1977 . Final Environmental Statement, Santa Ana River Main Stem. Office of the Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, ' Washington, D. C. ' U. S. CENSUS REPORT 1980. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 1978 . Soil Survey of Orange ' County and Western Part of Riverside County, California. Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. 1 1 XIV-3 GLOSSARY ADT - Average Daily Traffic APEI - Area of Potential Environmental Impact CLT - California Least Tern (Sterna antilarrun (=albifrons) browni) CO - Carbon Monoxide dBA - Decibel . A numerical expression of the relative loudness of a sound. iFHWA - Federal Highway Administration EBO - Equivalent Barrels of Oil . A numerical expression of the ' relative expenditure of energy in a system. EIR - Environmental Impact Report. Prepared under California ' law. EIS - Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared under Federal law. HOV - High Occupancy Vehicle. Autos used in Carpools, and Vanpools. Kiss and Ride - A term referring to transit patrons (or the facilities they use) who are dropped off at a transit station by someone driving an auto. LTNA - Least Tern nesting area in Huntington Beach State Park next ' to the SAR Complex . NO - Nitrogen Oxides OCEMA - Orange County Environmental Management Agency OCTD - Orange County Transit District rORA-1 Pacific Coast Highway in Orange County NRHP - National Register of Historic Places ' Park and Ride - A transit facility with a parking lot so transit patrons may store their vehicles while they utilize ' the transit system. PCH - Pacific Coast Highway (ORA-1 ) ' PDT - Project Development Team P.E. - Pacific Eletric Railway ' XIV-4 RHC - Reactive Hydrocarbons RTDP - Regional Transportation Development Program I R/W - Right of Way SHPO - State Historical Preservation Officer I TSM - Transportation System Management. Low cost techniques to improve the operation of a transportation system. I I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 XIV-5 1 INDEX Abstract, Title Page Land Use, III-3, V-1 Accidents, I-4, I-5,VI-2 Least Tern, III-48 , IV-14, Aesthetics, III-15 IV-18 , IV-20 Affected Environment , III-1 to III-52. List of Preparers, XIV-1 Air Quality, III-17, IV-26 to IV-28 Location Maps, S-2, XV Alternatives, II-1 to II-17 Mitigation Measures, IV Appendices, Volume II Archaeological Resources, III-52, Need for Project, I-1 IV 42 Noise, III-17, III-18, III-19 III-20, IV-29 to IV-35 Bicycles, I-6, I-7, VI-2 No-Project Alternative, II-15 Biological Environment , III-28 to III-51 , IV-13 to IV-22, V-2 Paleontological Resources, III-52, IV-44 Climate, III-15 to III-17 Parking, IV-38 to IV-42, V-1 Coastal Zone , IV-36 , IV-37 Permits, XII-1 Construction Impacts, IV-44 to IV-46 Public Services , IV-38 Coordination, XII Correspondence, Related Projects , IV-23 to Costs, II-3 II-4, II-7, II-10, II-13 IV-26 Detours, IV-45 Santa Ana River Bridge, II-7 , IV-8 , IV-23 7 Endangered Species, III-44 Scenic Resources, IV-46, IV-4 Energy, XI-1 Seismicity, III-24 , IV-5 Environmental Checklist, IV-2, IV-3, Shadows, IV-36 , V-1 IV-4 Socio-Economic Setting, III-3 Erosion, III-25, IV-8 , IV-9 Summary, S-1 Flood Control Channel, IV-23 Traffic/Circulation, I-2, Floodplain, IV-9 to IV-13 I-3, I-4, III-6 to III-15 , IV-2 , IV-37 , IV-38 Geology, III-21 , IV-5 to IV-8 Growth, III-3, X-1 Vegetation, III-36 Historic Resources, IV-42, VIII-1 Water Quality, III-28 , IV-8 ' Hydrology, III-26 Wetlands, III-44 , III-45, IV-8 r � sS;• I• j' t ,,� "h } r• 1. t' -)Ue�ame TC OF H°t i'-�1. � I'��10"N EACH '��d a �• C .._ t I (,, � I i:•Ik p��'%ku� a � I-,, I I I � I qG? I I ' �^,�, I II �I ��� . I N�,r tl l ,r„"__e .., *" ..,,�It r� �., ;�., Ymu�Pm I NµN�I�% NNlhud i NII:NN� NYwul"da, ! " ��Ill i:`4ri, wy,,,✓�,r; _Aa�r,...�.�1 I� ur �. �dNlYuum�xm%rdNdd�wP�uNIW�Idd�tld����I�tlV� �N II:r ��^rp �IddpNN�mlcmP I�ddWll�hbmnN��NY�Iflptltldllld �V���MiN��VIN«',,I,�M�I�%Jp,I ��dYuluw ��m���IgNm�g9ml�Nry��IRim wloIN; NWl xoxuNtlW�NN%� .*.. hF p:1f�1�61{I�a����Nl'h II R�III I I' I I - I•,�l II ! I � ! ! i N ' i "III'I 'Nt I ;N'! I. ,f rr. .�x Y�Yh I�1'•I!I>I"CN � P !, � I .III, �� III I I� I�I i i I I ��� N r%ItN" I aN P I I I I Imlr N,,w on •�. ��pp I p • N a I ��•� F[ � .:g� I m� ' � lVM � I I A I U� I I I p� �� ��� �uhs. -°� - �.� Y,r 4'k {„ I .I!':� dm ,I iIN: III III l II 14 G14% IIII 'I �I .6'h III:N aI "1111,r N „,,. him ,»w r pnx r NN ..,- Ih NI ru:p usul'YwIP4 :.: P�NI�iI4YIN pl P.a�m r.,:.y A I. , r,ir ..� - :JY' ` 'aN uWN 1"P x wW w a wlubr Ya CNN NNlxh li mW NNU x N w�+ " 6 .a " - .,.. ;. ua4NN uNwmrJN 1,WIYx II�IhMaVmWIW'I I� IN a �, Wr„ x':x h l x N, w Nu uNJI IIN NPI @"tl'I'lI4A "",mNW. IY%WWl:�mt W�'f' r 10 mNluummxNNuwxµl _ W x I%ml YM',Nm1z1112mNYi w pug � r ry I rvm I N i+vt✓ axwNW4p t°l,-I.4NW+Vµn '4 mNy :I r,,,aNNW Nd ..•m. U" MbNNdW;.IAtlp mI YYN Iq.4 1 B� I mm w.,,.,rw•,ww.... t� ac r�,qy� ,7 �� y��gpN�q y dWS7 Imnal.; ail. W ,. �71 Nu•:NIg4111 °°wxHxR �!mM, aw' NwMyN!._INNINNIN ,.. 60, 1p NII II III 0 N W N f:: ""*al4�d9 amxYllPIIBIII Ila INNy �Nmm,� I IIIuIN "gWUNNNIINuNNN .1wl Nnllurl yro^ apply u, � ..'w WPo...1'r..::::ae. r frV,Y�quNI�S I 1 II�:� xv N NP nN MI IN xI I,N,aIIN�P p pYNh ud� N�Np N��N ulpll'��MY a�yryNIIIMNN NyY p�� r r _' � mm ._. �� � INur SIB N )m%% qm ll% n IN II Y"'ry m��ld�gG�GVYItl �CtltlN N1yx �wlnw� , ' 'I tld um"pll �p I I . ,� ,i N. gplul�l"'�N „do I V�gI�4Rmp%PVnlmptlgNlNNmmin r N mlulwkaWPlN I : w ,, ,, a., ww+- tllm�mwl�nwoumcmu" mr�r%mrNNnxmNmrllu�Nl�l �"I'p� 1II pq � + xr: Pm":. �md II (N iGG9'll�plllpNldmlYq�II . ;ddd�NNG NYa � N � pd�tlNna �I�d���1 �� nhllll �ill 9d�l1��911"`" M�N ,u„m%Ir v ✓u N�Yi � %ty Y r d' I�YBN��, �I,NI��� I � I i mr V' s; � ptlW xImIY !N ' ~Im RR� dNNh'N II I Nlm al" %f iuh I I. ,. a.+. yW°N�„a uN" tlq."d�':, ou,l ul �� a gduulil�9aV G r�Cldl I! I N s N V yry.R Wm ' m4";mNNxN»'w::: �I �Nn NI%GB' ppII NI 'd�uw I.Iq�ll�µ�NJ���litlld��I�I I•� 4Npli.VY 7tl�l!�u�II�I Y s n. * i.u.l�,:. I' 'I,• � i� dlll m!I ��&h�B ill :�i�l'll '%N��'� ��. '� i�.I q Id I I N% 11.N I % a I I I I INrI G I� d ! I I mRRRtt I !brL.I%dh N h I I I I 1�9Yp " ' II• p.. I I I I � k, a" I I � II, ' 'I �I. 'I . I ' I SIN i ! •� - Nmµ m I ' 'I �,p• @ I� I •'� � III 'i. I I �I N .� �'m%I tl !�. � C N"W'h;"!u'i. Y '� NN y It- I I I I• :', y I '�' N �:'�'gg,^ .\-'�'ihamr,� "� � I i YI. NII•'U yq N IIryp rl .IIN I':, I N oN:h k;1 , q ,�.,d I ya! f xlN f I p• R I i � I � ry , �I���N:NIA � �s �e {{,, �+�Ihen �' - ' f' r °�,�:�,�ud�"a��ax` N� ..k, '"�,N ar x' "���,�R- ! 4t' INVI VIM w Ty .7 ,f �. 1 •r' i L LIST OF APPENDICIES APPENDIX TITLE A Biological Assessment B Historic Property C Floodplain Assessment D Consultation i I # W ,� Q � '��j r fr, i AY• •r,� ,,1�+ �4 �., CM � ' }•:ff m IL CL 1A man low 1 - Biological Report for the Orange 1 Widening Project ( 7-Ora-1-19 .8/25 .9 ) r r r r - r r r Harold Hunt darer Research and Testing Unit Transportation Laboratory 10 Jul v 1984 7-499850 r 1 List of Figures Figure I a . Pace i Regional Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 2 Designation of the APEI , and Habitats _. W-i th-i n the APE i . . . . 7-32 3 1875 topographic ,Map Snowing the • • - Approximate Location of the Study area 40 4 Results of • the Samplingof3aom _Sediments • • • . . • . • • • . • • • 47 5 Results of the Sampl ing of 3ottom ; Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 o wetlands as Oep i cted by the Oepartment Of Fish and Game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :4 _. 7 Pictures of the Marsh Habitat When Flooded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 8 taibert /alley Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L11 4 Proposed Changes in the talbert Channel . . LIZ i List of Tables Table No. _ Puce 1 Method of Channel Substrate Sampling . . 36, 37, 38 2 Characteristic Invertebrate Species , of the Beach Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3 General Southern California Sediment Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 4 Characteristic Fishes of the Nearshore Marine Habitat of the APEI . . . — . . . . . . . . . . 43 5 Characteristic Invertebrates of the Shallow Areas of the Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 6 Solsa Chica Sediment Trace Metal Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 7 Characteristic Species of the River and Channel Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 8 Characteristic Organisms of the Upland Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 9 Caltrans , Department of Fish and Game, , and Proposed Vegetation Divisions of the Huntington Beach Marsh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 10 Divisions of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex Located East of theSanta Ana River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 11 Vegetation of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex - Caltrans Vegetation Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-60 12 List of Wetland Species Within the Huntington Beach Wetland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 13 Soil Salinities of the Tested Sites . . . . . . . 64 14 Soil Salinities of the Coastal Oune- , Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex in Relation to- Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 ii ' 1 r List of Tables ( Cont' d) Table :Ia . _ _. Page is Statistical Analysis of the Sail Samples Related to Salinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57-72 L6 Invertebrates Which 3ecame c-stablisned in the Channels of the Parcel 3etween 3rookhurst Street and the :Mouth of the Santa Ana River Ouring the Brief Restoration of that Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 11 1.7 Fish 'Which 3ecame Established in the Channels of the Parcel 3et•meen 3rooknurst Street and the Mouth of the Santa Ana River Ouring the 3rief Restoration of that Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 I8 3irds of the Huntington 3each Wetlands . . . 76-80 19 The 4umber of California Least T=_rns Breeding in the APEI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 20 Breeding Pairs of BeTding' s Savannah Sparrows in Southern California .. .. ... . . . . 86 21 Results of the May 1983 3elding' s Savannah Sparrow Survey . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ... 87 i ! 1 _ List of Appendices 1 . Results of the Caltrans Vegetation Survey 2 . Correspondence Between Caltrans and the U .S . Fish and Wildlife Service 3 . Correspondence Between Caltrans and the State Lands Commission 4 . Regional Wetland Restoration Study Los Angeles and Orange Counties Final Draft Report . State Coastal Conservancy 5 . Department of Fish and Game Determination of the Status of the Huntington Beach Wetlands ' iv A. Purpose of the Report Caltrans is studying aiternative solutions to the traffic problems act Route I in Orange County between Golden West Street and Newport Boulevard ( Route 56 ) in Orange County ( 7-40ra-1-19. 3/2E. 9 ) (Figure 1 ) . This report defines the Area of Potential Environmental Impact ( APEI ) for aiologi - cal resources ,. and descri yes in detail the preproj ect biological resources of the APEI . The project alternatives _ are briefly described, while the potential impacts of the various alternatives of the APEI are detailed. The bialog- ical survey of the APEI conducted by Caltrans environmental -' personnel is described. The. consultation between Caltrans and the J .S. Fish and Wildlife Service is documented herein. Possible strategies for mitigating the impacts of the project are• discussed . This report also assesses the biological significance of the APEI and discusses how this significance affects Caltrans as a property owner in the APEI. The primary use of this document is as a background report for both the project EIVEIR and the project flood plain evaluation . Additionally, this report should be used to supplement the details of the 4eti and mapping done by the California Oepartment of Fish and Game, and it can be used by other governmental agencies and private individuals and -' organizations who have an interest in the pro,; ect area . This report should be used as a background report to assess future Caltrans projects or property transactions in the Huntington Beach marsh area. T n H.sMr+. tees love* Ids .n 13 Am* t G�rrla 4.rp r....► tr lM� i Mw�1.• Q.i�t Ana Sew son* 3 �°� R A _NNs 0 G E Qc G 0 U H T Y 'r� / W. Location J" Project 2 1 0 2 4 S 3C.��F IN �ItLl9 j i Figure 1 . REG ONAL LOCATION MAP 1 i 3 . Alternatives iThe current alternatives for :his o raj ect are briefly described below. Alternative A - Widen Route 1 to six lanes and replace the bridge over the Santa Ana River. Between Golden 'west Street and 3each Soul ev ard, the widening would be accom- plished within the existing curos . A series of streets in Huntington Beach would be dead ended at tneir junctions with Route 1. Between Beach 3ou 1 ev and and the Santa Ana ' River, one lane would be added to each side of the roadway. Bus turnouts would be constructed at unspecified locations . In Alternative A-1, the traffic lanes between Beach Bouievard and the Santa Ana River would be 3 .7 m ( I2 ft ) wide. In Alternative A-Z, the traffic lanes would be 3 .4 m ( LI ft) aide. The current prohibition of par:< ing irr the -� J area would remain in farce. The existing bridge across the Santa Ana River, which is 15.8 a wide, 5.2 a above mean sea = level , and 94.5 a from the California Least Tern nesting area, will be replaced by a new structure which will be 33 . 3 n wide, 7 .a above sea level , and 74. 7 .a from the California Least Tern nesting area. Between the Santa .Ana River and 50th Street in Newport 3each , one additional lane would be added to the inl and side of the road . Between 50th Street and the Santa Arta River, the two lanes would be added to Route I on the i rtl and s i de of the h i 9hw-ay. Alternative 3 - Transportation Systems Management (TSAM) . There does not appear to be any Alternative B . T SM activi - ties seem to be either already done, or those that have not been done are proposed as part of Alternative A. The Fol- lowing is the description- of .Alternative 3 in the araft IS suopl led to TransLab . 3 Alternative B TSM - (Transportation System Management ) As with the No Project Alternative, TSM is not by itself an effective alternative to highway widening . In an effort to I solve or at least relieve existing traffic problems in the project area, several TSM concepts ( new signal , signal interconnects, one-waying a downtown Huntington Beach Street , and eliminating some on-street parking ) have been recently implemented . Additional TSM measures, such as bus turnouts , which are only practical and feasible when com- bined with highway widening, are included in the preferred alternative. Alternative C - No project . i I 1 4 I ^l 1 C. Oesignation of the .APE! for Biological Resources The APEI for Biological resources is delineated in Figure 2. The extent of the APEI was determined by Caltrans biologists through a reconnaissance of the project area ' augmented by the study of maps and aerial photos . Areas Judged by the biologists to have any potential for biologi - cal impact from the project ( even if the impacts were not probable or not significant) 4ere included in the APEI . This method insured that all potential significant impacts v erer studied_ Wherever possible, natural or cultural t features were used as the boundaries of the APSI . in urban areas, the APEI extends one black on each side of Route 1. In the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex - west of the Santa Arta River, the APEI includes all Tand between the Talbert and Huntington Beach Channels and _ Route 1. Aa arm of Huntington Beach Channel ends slightly reast of Beach Boulevard (Route 39) within a portijn of the coastal marsh. All portions of the coastal marsh north to - ' the southern boundary of the Huntington Channel Extension Wetland Restoration Site are included in the APEI . All ' wetland north of the Huntington Beach Channel and west of Newland Street is included in the APEI . The entire Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex is included in the APEI because it is one discrete ecologically united habitat complex . The Huntington Channel Extension is also included r in the APE: because it is a potential s i.e for mi :i gati ng the impacts of projects in the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh - Habitat Complex. As of September 1982, 2. 7 acres of this site was under public ownership ( of this , 2 .4 acres was owned by Caltrans) ( Coastal Conservancey, 1982 ) . East of the Santa .Arta River, the lowlands between the northern 5 boundary of the Talbert Park Site and the Seminouk Channel I are included in the APEI ( see Coastal Conservancy, 1982 ) . This area is included because of the potential for cutting I off tidal flow in the western arm of the Seminouk Channel and because of the potential to change the amount of foraging by least terns at Victoria Pond . Figure 2 shows the boundary of the APEI in the marsh and lowland areas . I In upland nonurbanized areas east of the Santa Ana River, the boundary of the APEI is at the top of the bluffs . Seaward, the boundary of the APEI is 1000 m offshore . The size of the marine portion of the APEI is so large because of the possible presence of sulfide muds at the new bridge' s construction site . 1 1 i 6 _ 1 J �� � �� � �,� $ h; fit- �•, s v�,p, �-•-"-' a ^�a ,;" � v.� �„ 9„&. ✓`� �'� � „a;4- �� rx �yl�" y� x„ +Jr�ita t+�r � yF:p � �'=�,.✓.� a�. o � -s�s,a�,.z:�" r Y zN � s' N �� �uw � � ry ,r",,..+;: � ,.� z� lx,a v x$ � r a s s '� R�."3tN r a h ' �z �vs;s vy, �,.t ,r � ,�°•�>'��� y v r, .. N£A�fiSHJRE MAR7NE HABiTA7 Ct7PAPP_EX 5 �t Figure 2 A. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN J \ J 3 r d . u. a � r e31-AC d I fYF3ITA1 k � a 4 � I!A S 'x 'p •MW1NMfx4Mf 'l41M M ��ii1 .. �iity ti x y,. lf '.'' t � 3 U AS t � �t a J a All o e Figure 2-B DESIGNATION tJF THE APEI AND "HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. J J O N F A 17 i10RE MA P IN L F a b IT AT c 0MP1 EX no r EF, a � e f d J Will e yy� JacQxc C ° P fi B4 r E f Figure 2—C. DESIGNATION OF THE All AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. g e. p J rr rr rs rr rr rr r rr wrr rr rt rr r r r� rr �t r■E ri r NnrdL N4Ad Nr HABITAT C(tIPLEX. I J. " � r5 � _ w ��w w�w �w>�Lw7wwa.��"WirM��.ii�r��rwiMrw�e�:iewerww ww��ewrs�� r � � w•t„�ate,wit w it w��� I ,-a try t t_ACH HABIT,"C `. U MA 77 y w g w J1 sue.. `� tl! w �w � m �� iS6isw w nay ;r: e ' , Figure 2-Q. QESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHlN THE APEI. ;; �' . .�■� r r r w rr +r rr +� ri r r r r r r■r r J NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT COMPLEX r 3 # 5 F 4, URBAN HABITAT e COASTAL MARSH Figure 2-E. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. J a y e e e , I f3 fil HABITAT PRF 111 Figure 2-F, DESIGNATION OF THE A FHABITATSWITHIN t 1 � v �A A� ttAAF? N 8�lAI�`,&T- \ F Figure 2-G. DESIGNATION F THE APEIHABITATS I ,P �#, 00 r 6c- FC7 HLINTINuTOt,4 BEAGF± rr awe CNANNEE. r , w E3 A� uR N HaBs�rAT 7ASTAL MARSH y „ ` 4 E URBAN �� EC,RADE .ns� SAS"SAEA �! r iABITAT n, �< r 3 ape �i k 4 BEA M H BIF1E P 3; o Figure 2-H. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APE1. � 3 " v ,A i4laR IN ° C g iq mi b a v �lig P— w' vvcca v w �s $ do W W 90 W AM W dW � r 1 1 1 m� 4 �sx � x f d „a r x x A ALSAL7A 7T e d � x eh � "�� � �`w �:'��G✓x �� xF `x A s e x t � s „n. a� Figure -J. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN 1 � r w �f� fl �► GHANNEL e_ X #'rrrrwwr*rrr�`�t�rw�r� *su.w err�rrr 9 r COASTAL SALT MARSH ZONE C GASTA� SALT MARSH ZC7A3E a ZON �� 99 p a' IFtPUSARSHC�CE a � M A AL STRAh3f3tE7UNB ZOlS "" 41tASAt_ T 1L�ENE ZOkE i l�lf�l/�11A 1f Mil i ilU!!I�Il l/11* * e. BEACH AF P Figure 2-if. DESIGNATION OF THE APE[ AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEi. " —t —� e, PPo . n� OA MAR9v I } H CHANNEL ZONE JUN US MARSHjQH )t1 r ti�y � ASTF�� S`� � tUtC?L3 � r r��'� a-f f s sir w' ✓q � Figure L. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WIT 3 � r .. y9 a �. /' -f (e'J,1 1l / fi✓Y 6 �✓ ✓,� ,e��' P,g' .� �'d� y �k '" "3' ,� �o'%'✓�d�s��;�'r� v` y�, '� i P ay, Ht,4t*STb�3Nt3k�"ft�1 't`Q � AC�i }4Ai�1fi*b ,f*t e {COASTAL SALT MA�iSl4 £� y may, . A TAL SALE` MARSH ZOO pp��}} SYY�Ii� Sl ASTAL t � yn� ,,y C d� rFy.✓yy y BEACH HABITAT Igure 2 DESl AT ION THE APE °TH "T' E AP x Tf f e 1 3 TLSRT 9-t��, €UAL, OOAS `AL SALT MARSH ZOO AND HA N �' (aRACJC1_ AL �AA�iS�-1 m 9 tAPLC7F APt3 ZE COASTAL STSA�kt?l � I SLACK xwm �H Z F + ure C S,fG TIO OF THE APF AND H,ABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. a � 1 1 1 1 1 n. �, sa ���` � `°� �: tea," •is, 1 Mwlwww4pw w, :, w wa•Will,mow wiiMw" • r TALBERT t:RFiADlREi, i DEGRADED SALT,MAFiSd# A#VI7 t:;F# ,N;VELS i L STI:##ANDIDUNE HABITAT a a Figure �,''" « mESIGNATIt�N � THE �° p; ,� � lTHit� THE AF5'E1. �:.X<ra,wa�.?.m'�",s,a „�„ ,a., •�ft>,t"E,",d<.:,„��a ,,.,, .,. .„ ,.����+Sa n 1 1 g ..4p �8 , a t �r r g DEGRADED SALT" MARSH AND CHANNELS `s C3ASTAL S�'RAh1t71DtiNE ure DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE A J � J a, �r A , owl � 9 ® � � � Ak )tJMs tihtSil RY 11` ) AL i R-1AR5(i g 4 Figure 2--Q. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI, � J 1 1 1 1 •VICTURIA �'ONIJ t� COASTAL MARSH HABIT c9� �fj � w LIR., AN HARD CAi BEAC s s s u s w + n r rwiRof 4r 5 r NE:AFiSHORE MARINE HABITAT COMPLEX Fig DESIGNATION OF THE P I AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEL 2 � Z a�*� p�, �'�• � y y a �y, _. ,r a \ � z t 00 si LU s ,z ,O s g 4qy^. lii a�rn� r � r r r wr rr r r r a� � r +� r r r r�r i■r 1 1 1 i ✓ � �� �' `'`" 'ems (�ASTA� tvIARH <,, x; PC HABITAT ;s URBAN HABITAOki e S e.. e t r� �k SACH TAT AR } E MARINE HABITAT C�JP�Ir�LI Figure 2-T. DESIGNATION OF THE APE] AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEl. 1 1 1 1 J tee: COA8141. MARSH HABITAT ey .e € HA iTAT � . "ARINIM, BEACH HABI NtARSHORE MAFilN k#AR T'AT C MPLEX W. iry gt r 2 U. DESIGNATION N OF THE APEI AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI r r r r to IMBAN HABIJU n. a. „µme NFA�SHOR Figure 2-V. DESIGNATION OFT E APEI AND HABITATS a ITHIN THE APE1. Inn= 1 -w .s ✓`,f 1 MAN t t AMA5 1 s,. rF 4 a a wad : lopM m,, IMAReP!}` 1<A U I i A 1 , A p Figure 2-W. DESIGNATION OF THE APEI AND HABITAT' WITHIN THE APEI. i r� 9PiJNt, �I BI At C m'.d,X h rw ze 'Yx P ALI q Y t n+ r ,�^ r J lu Al, T tea' fw A? � . 4 44 Fi �rre 2~X. l�ESIGNATIC)A1 {7F THE APED AND HABITATS WITHIN n� THE APE A <� ev , $ &{ 54 „ K g 7Vy i7 g z N* '::� r'p{ f yP��A{� "•;� �'�'�',F"%,yr� ,�` ^fi ,�. " � J � ��'3 S h'l 4's%� s.i s.Po . f1A r4, ,�,Yl "v ".'P,ttot n . ;. P ,. iA,'TA' � 4k ale yy H'"$ ��� �JPoµ�. �r�F � '�^x t Nk✓¢a' s C � ,� � �Mq �w � �,�y £ \ I. Figure 2 Y. DESIGNATION OF THE APE[ AND HABITATS WITHIN THE APEI. s.,•�W. t. a J J iFW" J AVI JAV � � a= � ►mow A' � �� � � qIN � NA " �y � s ��'2-2. C�EiGNATlt3h! a fFfE APE! APt[3 NA8ITATS W[TN(N THE APEI J 0 . Description of the Biological Resources of the Project Area 1. Met_ The project area was initially divided into habitats by means of a survey of available maps , literature, and aerial photos . The APEI was surveyed by literature search, auto- mobile, and on foot during 1981 and 1982 to refine the accuracy of the originai habitat divisions, and to deter- mine the biota of various habitats . The Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh 4abitat Complex was surveyed ' more intensively because of its importance as wildlife habitat, and to assist in determining environmental im- pacts. Aerial photography and field observation were used to divide the complex into entities by means of floristic ' comparison (Mueller-Oombois and Ellenberg, 1974) . Part of the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex was sampled during July and August of 1982 to develop a base- line description of the vegetation between the Edison Plant and the Santa Ana River. Segments of the marsh between the Edison Plant and Beach Boulevard were not sampled . Oata on species composition , cover, and abundance were recorded along transects running perpendicular to the high- way. Tr ansects were selected to co.rrespand with elevation- al cross sections of the marsh from previous geometranic surveys . Species quantities were estimated using a meter square quadrat frame placed at regular intervals along each transect . For coastal salt marsh vegetation , samples were taken at 10 m ( 33 ft) intervals along transects which 1 • 33 I ranged from 62-123 m (200-400 ft ) apart . Dune vegetation I was sampled at 3 m ( 10 ft) intervals along transects which were 62 m (200 ft) apart . At each sample point, species were assigned to one of the ' following six cover classes as described by Daubenmire ( 1968 ) : 1 Range of Class Class Midpoint Cover Class ( in % cover) % 6 95-100. 97. 5% 5 75-95% 85 . 0% 4 50-75X 62. 5% 3 25-50% 37 . 5% 2 5-25% 15 . 0% 1. 0-5% 2. 5% Cover was estimated for each species regardless of whether it was rooted within the quadrat ; however , only species rooted inside the quadrat were included in subsequent ' frequency of occurrence calculations . The amount of bare ground in each quadrat was recorded . Initial attempts were ' also made to record the percentage of dead or moribound vegetation in -each quadrat . However, this was discontinued when it became apparent that an insignificant amount of the vegetation was involved . Importance Values were calculated for each species encoun- tered during field sampling. This value is a relative r statistic which provides a measure of each species ' contri - bution to the vegetation unit being sampled . In this study, the Importance Value was calculated as the sum of two variables : relative dominance (% relative cover) and relative frequency. Relative density, which is often used in calculating Importance Value, was not included in this 34 study since the predominance of vegetative reproduction in dune and .marsh area made it imoracticii to distinguish individual plants . ' Color and infrared aerial photos were taken to assist in vegetation mapping, and to provide part of the baseline ' data from which future changes can be determined . Soil samples were taken from the dune, 4aolooaoous zone, Sc�ira, u_s Marsh, Ju_ marsn ; channel , coastal salt marsn and ( coastal salt flat) vegetation units . Vine samples were taken from the Sci_rou, s unit and 10 samples mere taken ' from the other units . Additionaily, sail samples were _ collected every 10 ,4 along transact number 577 ( see- Appendix 1 ) . There were 31 samples taken . All sail samples were inspected for sail texture in the field and I sal i ni ty was measured by the saturated pas ie extract _. 1 method. Statistical analysis was performed in order to determine if any correlation exists between salinity and ' vegetation unit, and between salinity and elevation . Bottom sediments from the Santa Ana River, the Greenville— Banning Channel , and the raibert Channel were sampled to determine the presence of heavy .metals, pesticides, and _. ' herbicides . rive samples were taken and comoosited into twe composite samples, one composite from the Santa Ana River , and one composite from the flanking channels . ' Details of the testing procedure are shown in cable 1 . .animal saecies use of the APSI was determined through a literature survey and site surveys conducted between _ ' December 1981 and September 1982. 1 35 rstat*of California Business. Transportation and Housing Agency TABLE IA, ■ Memorandum Method of Channel ■ Substrate Sampling To MEMO TO FILE Ocam January 20, 1982 Oist. 07 ' mot+ DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION ' subisch Substrate Samp 1 i ng - Santa Ana River, .Jan. 12, 1982 On January 12, 1982 the bottom of the Santa Ana River at its crossing of ' the Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) was sampled to obtain data on pesticide, herbicide and heavy metal concentrations, if any. This data may be used in the water quality report portion of the environmental document for future ' replacement of the existing PCH structure across the Santa Ana River. Ery Borow, District 07 Environmental Investigator, requested our assistance in evaluating the potential water quality impacts of the future bridge opera- tion. No background data pertaining to water quality or sediment camaosition was found in the STORET system and/or local governments, sanitation districts or schools. ' The only real water quality impact expected is the resuspension and disposal of substrate materials disturbed during bridge pier construction and dewatering. ' The limited disposal , via settling/infiltration pond, necessitated chemical data to determine what would be the best disposal of materials. The limited disposal is caused by Least Tern breeding ground immediately adjacent to the ' bridge to the north and west and homes just south and west of the bridge. The river bottom and adjacent channels, one on the north side and the other on the south (see sketch attached) were sampled on or about low tide on January 12, 1982. Six samples sere taken (see sketch) using a 1-1/2 inch diameter PVC sampler fashioned from schedule 80 Pl1C pine. The sampler was driven into the bottom, original bottom as opposed to new unpacked sands deposited recently by higher tides and recent tractor work. A one to two foot core of substrate was sampled from each of six sites (see sketch) . The six samples were triple ' bagged in plastic and placed on ice within a couple of hours. The samples were delivered to Truesdail Laboratories, 4101 4. F'queroa , Los Angeles (213-225-1564) for analyses. Truesdail personnel--gill composite samples 1-3 and 4 and'5 into tNo samples using equal volume from each delivered sample and analyzed for chlorinated pesticides , herbicides and metals (Pb, Zn, Cu, Cd, Cr) . Samples 1-3 were relatively clean and it was felt they should ` be analyzed separately from samples 4 and 5 which appeared quite contaminated since both serve as local urban drainage conduits. Cost consideration precluded separating samples 4 and 5 which would have been more desirable. Separation ' of these areas from the Santa Ana River and its large drainage area was accomplished. • - TABLE 18 Method of Ciannei Substrate Samvlina Mono to F,ile - San a. Ana .11ver Sampling January 20, 1982 Page 2 It is anti ci patad Trvesdai 1 vi 11 take 2-3 weeks to finish the ana 1 ysas. 2eaui is and hi 11 i ng will he sent =. Mari Ma l kson (pnfI rtti ng Serpi ca Contra= 734929, 734930) and he will °flr+rard the data to :ae. I mill - i ntarmamet the results re 1 atad' = taxi ci Vj and watrr q ua l i t./ cr f•arf a and will report ,ay 'i ndi ngs to 3rl 3oraw as he mcues`,.a:. ' Gary Z. +ii ntars Assoc. 3nvl ronmmml Planner GRW:pv — A=G'anents TABLE 1C Method of Channel �t jubstrate Sampling � r x V;F 41, r 0 i . ' S Il I 2. Results and Oisc-ission The APEI contains six habitat types; Urban, Beach, Near- shore Marine Habitat Complex , Upland, giver and Channel , I and Coastal Oune and Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex . These habitats ire delineated in Figure 2. Each of these habi- tats is described beiow-. Special attention is given to the -t Coastal June-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex because of its importance as -wildlife habitat . a. Urban Habitat — The Urban Habitat is characterized by J intensive use of the land for human residential and busi - ness purposes . Urbanization usually results in the extirpa- tion of most of the native biota and replaces it with a , depauperate biota consisting of organisers that live in association with mart. This process has occurred in the APEI leaving the urban habitat without biological resources _ of significance. The vegetation consists primarily of cultivated orrraaental s and weeds . The fauna consists of !, urban adapted species such as the English Sparrow (Pa_ domesticus) , House =inch (Caroodacus mexicanus) and House ' mouse ( ,M- us mus ) . Pets contribute significantly to the . - fauna of the urban habitat. Sensitive species use of the ' urban habitat in the APEI is minimal . b . Beach Habitat — The Beach Habitat consists of the sandy -� beach non-urbanized areas between gout` I and mean lower low water. This habitat was originally a parrier bar which separated the Pacific Ocean from the low lying marshland across which the Santa Arta River meandered . Figure 3 shows the situation as it existed in 1375. Over time, the mouth of the ri -�er would shift and the configuration of the dunes would change. With the urbanization of Orange County and _ 1 39 � a 3� 1 • 1 � 0 • 1 1 '� y� O '"' CO) 0. W 0 { ' r • it Q. •� J 1 / 1 • , r •. .� ♦ 11 • 1 11 , 0 'an 1. 11 .•1 ,� , , 1 .1 , , ` V Q r 0 V •• o (L 0 • 1 / • •1 N W 1 1 1 • • •• 1 X • . 11 � � � ` nW. 0 • 1 • e� d m Q W N the development of beach recreation , this habitat 4as greatTy modified and simplified. Today the 3each Haaicat can be divided into two sagments , the public recreation beach, and the California Least Tern nesting area. Use of ' the public recreation beach is heavy. Facilities support- ing public recreation suctr as parking lots and equipment storage areas nave been constructed . The California Least Tarn nesting area is located on the rbeach just west of the mouth of the Santa Ana River . The nesting area is 2.06 ha ( 5 . 1 acres) in size and is .managed ' exclusively to provide nesting habitat far the California ^ Least Tern. The nesting area is isolated from the public recreation area of the beach by a chainlink fence. The - vegetation that grows inside the nesting area is removed approximately yearly and sunshelters have been placed in ' the nesting area to protect the young birds. ' Most of the original biota of the beach habitat has been — extirpated. No significant vegetation remains in this habitat area and Tittle remains of the fauna. the remain- ing species are those which either coexist with large amounts of human disturbance or for which human management is intense. The least tern nesting area is extremely important for the survival of the California Least Tern _ ( Sterna anti 1 1 arum bra i ) . The r-emai n i ng areas of the beach are characterized by open sandy stretches nearly devoid of life. The remaining plants are characterized by ' p i ants such as Sea -locket ( Ca_ ede l a) , and 3eacI Primrose ( Cammisonia cheiranthifolia) . A variety of gulls ' and wading birds forage on the beach . A considerable amount of ,material consumed by the birds is probably wasned _ ` nto the 3each ;iaoitat from the Vearshore Marine Habitat a1 . 1 . r Complex because the benthic fauna of the beach has rela- tively small populations . During the survey of the beach, few living invertebrates were seen . Characteristic species of beach invertebrates are listed in Table 2. ' Table Z. Characteristic Invertebrate Species of the Beach Habitat Pismo Clam (Tivela stultorum) r Bean Clam (Oonax sp.. ) Redworm (Euzonus mucronata) ' Beach hopper (Orchestoidea corniculata) c . Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex — This portion of the APEI is located in the Southern California Bight which is part of the California Fish Faunal Region ( SCCWRP 1973 ) and the California Molluscan Faunal Province ( Valentine, 1966 ) . The Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex has a rich and varied biota. . 1 The size of the sediments found in Southern California marshes , beaches, and underwater shelves is shown in Table ' 3 . These data are derived from a large number of samples taken from throughout Southern California ( SCCWRP 1973 ) . 1 The sediment of the APEI is geologically recent detrital sediment consisting mainly of sand and silt derived primarily from the Santa Ana River , and from the adjacent shoreline. The sediments nearest to shore are siltier and lower in organic matter than the sediments further , offshore. The Newport Submarine Carryon comes close to the shore within the APEI and acts as a conduit which funnels sediment offshore. Thus , the APEI is divided into two nearly independent beach units ( SCCWRP 1973 ) . 1 42 The fish fauna of the Southern California Sight is large ' and varied. 3etNeen August 1969 and Oecamber 1971, the area off the mouth of the Santa Ana River was trawled to provide environmental information for the Orange County Sanitation Oistrict. A total of 73 hauls -mere made yield- ing 38,289 individual fish of 90 different species. Table - 4 1 i sts Spec es wh i ch characterize the .Vearshore Marine Habitat Complex with the APEr . ' Table 3. General Southern California Sediment Charactaristics Environment Median Oiametar : CaCO3 : Organic Mat.er Marsh 32 1.2 18.0 Mainland 3eacn Sand 240 6.3 0.05 Mainiand Shelves 130 9.2 0.9 -' I Table 4. Characteristic Dishes of the learshare Marine Habitat of the APEI Jacksmelt Atherinoosis californiensis ' Topsmelt Athe_rinocs_ affinis California Grunion Lauresthes enunu_s Opaleye Gila nigracans vcrthern Anchovy En�_s now Shiner Surf Perch C Hnatocaster aagr� _ Dover Sole Microstomus oacificus Speckled Sanadab I Citharicnthvs St s ' of anond Turnot Hyos00setta lutt� it l ata Calif. Tonguefish Syn hur_ atr_ ' Calif. Halibut Paralicthvs californicus White Croaker Genv+s 1 ineatus Shovelnose guitar`isn Rhinobatos oriductus 43 1 The invertebrate fauna of the APEI is al so diverse. For invertebrates, the APEI may be divided into four units . The lowermost intertidal zone, which is covered by water ' except for a few times each year, escapes a significant amount of human pressure from recreational use. The sub- tidal zone, which ( for the purposes of this report) , extends from the elevation of the lowest tide to the edge of the APEI on the subt i d al shelf, the Newport Canyon Zone , and the Pelagic Zone. Table 5 lists characteristic inver- tebrates of the lowermost intertidal , subtidal , and pelagic , zones . This list was compiled from the literature and from a search for material washed up on the beach . Table 5. Characteristic Invertebrates of Shallow Areas of the Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex Occurrence Name Lower Intertidal Subtidal Pelagic Clam Hydroid Clytia ba_eri x x ' Purple Striped Jellyfish Pela is noctiluca occ. Purple Sailing Jellyfish r Velella velella occ. Sea Pansy Renilla kollikeri x t Pismo Clam Tivela stultorum x x Bean Clam Oonax so. x x Giant Pacific Cockle Trachycardium muricatum x x Olive Shell Olivella biol� icata x x Recluz' s Moon Snail Poli_ 'nicer reclusianus x x Pacific Squid Loligo ooalescens x Sand Oollar Oena_raster excentricus x 44 Two endangered species , the California 3rown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus) and the California Least Tern (St_ atillarum browni ) , forage in the Year- shore Aarine Habitat Comolex of the APEI . the resources of the APEI are significant for the survival of the California Least tern. - The U . S. -F ish 3rtd 14i1d1ife Servic3 wiTi soon s-�3rt a Study of the marine environment near the ,mouth of the Santa Ana River as part of the Santa Ana River flood control pro,; ect . More detailed information about this habitat complex wiTT _ ' be generated by this study. _ d. River and Channel Habitat — The River and Channel Habi- tat includes the Santa Ana River, the flood control chan- nels and Seminouk Slough. 'dater in this habitat is derived - from three sources, rainfall in the. drainage, urban runoff wastewater, and sea water from the Pacific Ocean . Rainfall is only important during the winter rainy season . Urban runoff wastewater is the only source of fresh water in this habitat during the summer. Except for brief periods of ' time during storms, sea water makes up most of the water in this habitat. Ouring the summer, the Greenville 3anning Channel can become blocked, creating stagnant low quality water . OissaTved oxygen is monitored during the summer by the Orange County =load Control Oistrict. If it becomes too low, the sandbar is bulldozed allowingl ocean exchange. Concern about the amounts of biocides and heavy metals in the urban wastewater runoff led to sampling of the bottom _• sediments in the Santa Ana River and the two flanking flood control channels . -Figures 4 and 5 show the results of the 45 i i samples . Samples 1, 2 and 3 are from the Santa Ana River , while samples 4 and 5 are from the flanking channels . Table 6 shows heavy metal in Balsa Chica. The amounts of I heavy metals and pesticides found in the bottom sediments pose no major threat to marine biota. The concentrations I of heavy metal in the samples are either equal to or lower than the metal concentrations found in Balsa Chica. Balsa Chica is a functional diverse wetland , thus the comparison I to Balsa Chica shows that the heavy metal content of the sediment engenders no threat to marsh restoration . I The vegetation of the River and Channel Habitat is rela- tively inconspicuous . Marine algae is the predominant vegetation , but the algae is not particularly conspicuous because it is grazed by the abundant marine fauna . Charac- teristic fauna of the River and Channel Habitat are shown in Table 7 . The Santa Ana River, Talbert Channel , Huntington Beach ' Channel , and Greenville Banning Channel have rock riprap or concrete sides. The bottom sediments in the river and channel habitat range from sandy to muddy. A small recreational fishery exists in the river and ' channel habitat of the APEI . Both fish and shellfish are taken . The shellfish taken are used for bait . The California Least Tern forages heavily in the River and Channel Habitat . This habitat is particularly important to fledglings who are learning to forage . It appears that the young birds need relatively quiet water to learn how to , forage. The Brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis californicus also forages in this habitat . 46 _ FI74RE 4 - Results or the SaMD7'nq or Sot-tam Sediments Rfir2a RT TRIlESDA1L LABQRATIIRIES. INC. , MIlJ► Gnat 213 *OCT Pe. 01MUCA0.4 Srmxz C34a.%41sT� 1�tICRO81OtBG1sT3 • =NGINE:Rs �a: ♦MQtLis. CA �Qodt acss.wC7+ 3tYeL3r%a �l9TIIVQ A • =33-19� T Dom_ a1i �nr�sr•i L8p O.�Tr � l -61fi 3. .saia SC�se= ? Lb, 1982 Los lea, 90013 1 M 1ID 3 Iam:az'l , 1982. S�►.L1PL:. BRA t NC. 4193� SZgdga saa»pias (sai: aid asrar) 01, :j2, gad �#3 ai haa4y =CaLJ, 943IM"c:d+as and 'ate RESULTS ==-m sa *1 cad #1, #2, and #3 asr ad ad is equaL aor-�aas sad aai1720d :at !:L-m hasvy za= Ls, �dsa aad t,.r,.bi=L •• as +ha basis as 3esv+ �stals Pares ?ar M111 a OAS ' Zia 3.06 G� _ Lead 1.77 _ Gam= 0.13 0.39 ?es�cidee . ' 'Ladx7.a 30 <0.002 Linda= M 0.04 .0 <I.D _ 203accibmas 3D t3e�des - 2, 4. 3D <1.0 12, !a, 5 - = 30 <0.1 The n===, ass aa&17=nd Sr :he did spar azgmic abaesr cjaa =-od as a h7,d.CZcd1a=jC acid - aims aid ddgaa=- _ '''to l=, lead, csco.= and zh=—v•;,-,• gars aa17=sd by araa3C aboarpcLaa - spec=06eapy as a a=zc: 44 :he asked sample. and hicidan aara aasL7:ad b ga y s ���=,..,g�h9 cauaiad e� vim as aLec---Za csacssa dacacar. 3aspee�L'7 sis�::xd, __ Samos Qatar C:tesaist lam Ma so«is our a the s na& at s MON& a+aomao sad Ls -we seta wv awcu ra ax :w ve AZO, at cmaisam 'd :.wwaasl n• a mCw � pwwa'+q A. aw �a ww d m eta Mforw. .ir Sadie now tar.(mwn ase w%a& 2na 'Pe is d FIGURE 5 - Results of tc Sampling of Bottom Sediments REPORT f TRUESDAIL LABORATORIES., INC. 4 R1 101 M. 0NtROA STRt3 CHEMISTS - MICR0810LOGIST3 - ENGINEERS � LOS, AMIMIKLZS. CA 90Ad R!>ti.►AC1� 0!Vl1.zP%4CNIr — T!lT1NQ. AwsA Can[ a12 . aa9-1e44 State of Cslifarnia C A S. d it : T R IJ 9 CLIENTDepar=ent of Transportation Lab DATE Feb 1616 S. Maple Street ru&=9 16, 1982 Los Angeles, Califaraia 90015 RECEIVED Jarmgl 13, 198� Attention: Mr. 'dery Malk-SCM SA60EZ LABORATORY NO. 41953 Sludge samples (soil and aster) , #4 and ��5 ' II VESTIGATION ' Dete=Lnation of heavy metals, pasticides and herbicides RESULTS ' Two samples -naked #4 and #5 were composired in equal proportions and anal7zed for heavy metals, pesticides and herbicides on tha basis of dz weight. , The results are as follows: Reavq Metals Parts Per Million Mes::as7 0.08 ' Zl= 11.2 Lead 5.7 Caam:L= 0.36 ' Ch=UCL a 2.04 Pesticides Endria RD <0.002 ' Linda a It <0.04 Methoa7chlor IM <1.0 Toaphum ND <0.05 ' Herbicides Z, 4 - D XD <1.0 Z, 4, 5 - TP HD <0.1 The merzur7 was anal7zed by the cold vapor atamd.c absorption method oa a hyd=cbloric acid - nitric acid digest. The zinc, lead, Cadmium and chrsmi= were analyzed by atomic absorption spent+-oscc" on a a t::iz acid ex�-sct of the asked sample. The pesticides aad herbicides were analyzed by- gas chromatograpay coupled with an eleztroa capture detector. Respee=`u117 submitted, Senior Water Chemist This :epos iavlim onir ro the samvit or ssmvks, in•eseigsad ,ad is Mx neaess nIT indic ure of the qualirr or cmwirioes of +voacradl ideaaa► or uaail, ;- 1—s As a mane' ummedm to divan. the ?abiie sad dear Laborsasrim dais Mews is submimed cad seseetted TA8LE 6. 30LSA C:iICA SEDIMENT TRACE ,ME,AL ANAL fS IS -153-32 ' Sample %lt20 Cs Cu Pb Vi A9 Cr Zn r+g A 32.9 <0.3 48. 120. 3.3 l.5 V. 150. 39300. 0.14 _ 8 25.8 <0.3 U. 50. 1.2 2.4 40. 96. 25600. 0.11 C 44.9 <0.8 20. 60. 2.5 1.6 80. 140. 41200. 0.08 0 47.5 <0.8 30. 60. 5.0 <0.8 60. 150. 45500. <0.05 C 71.1 2.4 /0. Z00. 160. 1.5 33. 370. 32500. 0.11 22.1 14.5 52. 240. 10. 1.5 47. 320. 33800. 0.08 G 34.2 <0.8 38. 200. 5.0 0.3 67. 220. 45100. 0.07 - ' M 15.9 <0.8 20. <20. 3.8 0.8 50. 96. 36600. 0.06 I 7.3 <0.3 L8. <20. 3.8 <0.8 53. 96. 27500. 0.07 1 34.4 <0.8 15. <20. 2.5 0.3 20. 77. 25700. <0.05 L 19.4 <0.8 12. <20. 3.8 0.3 27. 69. 19700. <0.05 M 37.0 1.5 60. 40. 16.2 0.8 170. 160. 35000. 0.08 Fran Vov i k, 1981 i n a17m J � sy Table 7 . Characteristic Species of the River and Channel Habitat Opal eye (Girella nigricans) I Grunion (Leuresthes tenuis ) California Killifish (Fundulus parvipinnis ) Yellow Shore Crab (Hemigrapsus oregonensis ) r Lined Shore Crab ( Pachygrapsus crassipes ) Rock Louse (Ligia occidentalis ) California Jack-knife Clam (Tagelus californianus) Limpets (Collisella spp . ) Bay mussel (M ty ilus edulis) e. Upland Habitat — The Upland Habitat of the APEI con- sists of the open nonurbani zed areas east of the Santa Ana River that do not contain wetland vegetation . Within the APEI , this habitat has been greatly modified by human ' activity. Hence, none of the usual vegetation type names is applied to the area. This habitat is utilized by a ' variety of small animals and birds . At the present time, the Upland Habitat is not of great significance in Southern California. Characteristic organisms of the Upland Habitat are listed in Table 8 . Table 8 . Characteristic Organisms of the Upland Habitat Encelia (Encelia californica) Telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora) Lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) I Beechy' s Ground Squirrel (Spermoohilus beecheyi ) Blacktailed Hare (Lepus californicus ) I Mocking Bird (Mimus polyglottos) Wrentit ( Chamaea fasciata) Bushtit ( Psaltriparus min_im_u_s) I 50 . i f. Coastal Oune and Coastal Marsh Habitat — The most striking feature of the APSI is the presence of the Coastal Oune-Coastal *arch Habitat Complex . The APSi contains - ' about 135.7 ha (384. 7 acres) of coastal marsh (OFG, 1982 , Coastal Conservancy, 1982) ; 16. 4 h a ( 114. 7 acres) are _ located west of the Santa Arta River. The remainder is located east of the Santa Ana River. Two smal i patches of marsh are located east of the main marsh ( see Figure 2 ) . ' One is located at the eastern end of Seminouk Slough , and the other is located near Superior Avenue. About 3 . 5 ha ( 3. 7 acres) of Coastal Oune Habitat exists in the APSI . This area is 351%. of the remaining Coastal Oune Habitat in _ northern Orange- County (7FG) . I,n this report , these hab i- ' tats are considered part of a single complex because of the ecological interactions between the dunes and the marsh . ' In addition to the above, there are 1. 2 ha* ( 2.9 acres) of R upland vegetation dominated by Haolooaoous ericaides and Phacelia lamosissima included as part of the complex . This ' area was historically coastal marsh but now contains upland vegetation. This area is located just northeast of the ' intersection of Route 1 and 3rookhurst Street ( see Figures ZY and ZZ) . The Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex is a remnant of a once extensive wetland and dune system that existed at _ ' the south of the Santa Ana Ri ,ier . Originally there were about 1194 ha ( 2950 acres) of wetland in this area. Both the wetiands and the dunes underwent signieicant, reduc- tions . The segment of coastal marsh west of the Santa Ana River has been formally classified as wetland by the State of California since at least 19711. 1 51 i i Table 9 shows the divisions of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex determined in the Caltrans vegetation I survey and how these divisions relate to the divisions determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (OFG, 1982 ) . In reviewing this material , it must be remembered that the Caltrans vegetation analysis was only ' done between the Edison Plant and the Santa Ana River , while the OFG survey included all wetlands west of the Santa Ana River. The divisions of the wetlands east of the Santa Ana River, shown in Table 10, are those of the State Coastal Conservancy ( 1982 ) . I Table 9. Caltrans, Department of Fish and Game, and Proposed Vegetation Divisions of the Huntington Beach Marsh I Caltrans Veq. Survey OFG Veg. Survey Proposed Veg. Divisions Degraded Salt Marsh Degraded Salt Marsh Degraded Salt Marsh Diked Salt Marsh Coastal Salt Marsh Coastal Salt Marsh I Coastal Salt Flat Coastal Salt Flat Fresh Water/Brackish Juncus Marsh Salt Marsh Border water Marsh Scir us Marsh ' Upland Haplopaopus Zone Coastal Strand/Dune Coastal Strand/Dune Dune Slack Coastal Dune Dune Slack --- --- Pond and Marsh Channel I I I 52 TABLE 10. Oivisions of the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex !.ocated immediately East of the Santa Ana River Total Wetlands 109.3 ha ( 270 acres) - ' Tidal Wetlands - 22. 2 ha ( » acres ) 4ontidal '4et7ands - 37 na ( 215 acres ) - Salt Marsh Vegetation - 79 . 7 na ( 197 acres ) Perennial I,mooundments - 5 . 3 ha ( 13 acres ) _ Fresh/3rackish Marsh - 2 ha ( 5 acres ) The U . S. Fish and 4i 1 d 1 i fe Service •wi 1 1 conduct an inten- sive survey of the marsh segment located east of the Santa Ana River as part of the Santa Ana River Flood Con- trol Project. wore detailed information about this area will be generated by the USFWS study. ' The findings of the Caltrans Vegetation Survey are summa- rized in cable 11. The full results of the survey are found in Appendix A. The findings of the California Oepartment of Fish and Game Vegetation Survey are shown in Table 12 and Figure 6 . small patch of wetland exists on the north side of Route 1 near Superior Avenue ( see Figure 2Z) . This area is a brackish water marsh probably caused by runoff from the ' Oluff and. a high eater table . Characteristic vegetation includes' Tyoha anoustifoiia, O ' stictilis sot_, Salicornia virainica, and Scirous so . The vegetation divisions proposed are a heuristic tool to ' assist in understanding the biological processes that occur in the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex . ; .ney ' S3 I 11 Iry- fell ffir �' -�.�' i �I%''" �!► � � it ►r , �1 r •,.1 �� '�' •�' t �i� I�r •�i`fit t �� ' �I�� i �'',-- .+ �:Gr •,. •�{ � ••�� it, , � n �'' 1 C- O %' II•i 'f� �I �•• ri •�• � cif +, t r"1Ti7 ^y� _J�' 1 1 r 1 were erected through the study of the resu l is of the Cal trans Vegetation Study and of the Oepartment of = i sh and Game Study. The pr000sed divisions represent an entitation into more discrete- units than either of the above studies . These units are based on the dominant vegetation . Figures 21-2Q show the locations of the proposed units . The area ' divided into the newly proposed units is the area between the Edison Plant ana the Santa Ana Aiver . - Vegetation in the Coastal Oune—Coastal Marsh habitat Com— plex responds to rather minute differences in topography substrate, salinity, and sail moisture creating a very patchy mosaic of species . however, between the Edison Plant and the Santa Ana River there is a general pattern . As one proceeds from the highway inland, one passes through the Coastal Strand/Oune Zone, the Oune Slack Zone, a brack— ish water transition ( either the Ju__ or the Scr_ zone) , and finally the Coastal Salt Marsh Zone. 1 y ZZ r _- r r TABLE 11 -A . Vegetation of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex - Cal-trans Vegetation Survey Coastal Strand/Dune Zone : % Relative % Relative Importance ' Species Dominance Frequency Value *Carpobrotus edulis 63 . 94 29 . 71 93 . 65 Oistichlis spicata 4. 30 13 . 41 17 . 71 ' *Gasoul crystallinum 5 .67 7 . 61 13 . 28 *Rac�hanu_s sativus 4. 90 6 . 16 11 .06 ' *Bromus diandrus 4. 16 6 . 88 11 .04 Cakile maritima 2 . 55 7. 61 10 . 16 *Cynodon dactyion 2. 11 5 . 43 7 . 54 Rhus integrifolia 2.82 1. 09 3 . 91 _ Haplopap2us venetus ' vernonioides 1. 12 2. 54 3 .66 Anemopsis californica 1 . 20 2 . 17 3 . 37 92 . 77% 82 . 61% 175 . 38 Total Vegetative Cover = 9, 130 cm2 ( 60%) Total Bare Ground = 6,095 cm2 ( 40%) Total Number of Occurrences = 276 N 157 ' Total Exotic Cover 80 . 78% ( in top 10 species ) (83 . 46% overall ) *Exotic Species 56 ' 7'A8Lz I1-8 . Vegetation or the Coastal Oune-Coastal 'harsh Habitat Complex - Caltrans 'legetation Survey Oune Slack Zone: - ' Relative Relative 1n0ortamce _ Soecies Oominance =reauencv Blue Sa__ lasioleois 32 . 59 13. 75 51. 34 3accharis dauglasii 8. 55 3. 33 15 . Be 3accharis alutinosa 8. 23 8. 33 I5 . 56 Anemoosis californica 4. 70 10 . 4Z 15 . I2 Phacelia ramosissima austro l i Cora i s Rosa so . 7. 80 4. i7' 11 . 97 - S= himdsiana 6. 94 4, 17 11 . 11 *Ca_ nark .96 8. 33 9.29 _ *Mvo�um la_ 6.09• Z.08 8. 17 *Centaurea melitensis 1.82 6.25 8.07 85. 56% 77.08: I60 .64 Total Vegetative Cover = 1-, 340 cm2 ( 78 . 3:) Total Bare Ground = 547 . 5 cmZ ( 21 . 7:) Total Number of Occurrences s 48 y 23 _. Total Exotic Cover 7 . 91: ( in top 10 species ) ( 10 . 88: overall ) *Exotic Species TABLE 11-C . Vegetation of the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh ' Habitat Complex - Caltrans Vegetation Survey Salt Marsh Transition Zone: % Rel ative Rel ative Importance Species Dominance Frequency Value Juncus acutus sphaero- carpus 32 . 90 21 . 61 54. 51 Salicornia spp . 25 . 76 20. 15 45 . 91 Anemopsis californica 5. 03 8. 79 13 . 82 Baccharis douglasii 5 . 53 6 . 23 11 . 76 Frankenia grandifolia 5. 05 6. 59 11 . 64 Oistichlis spicata 4. 00 7 . 33 11 . 33 Haplopappus venetus vernonioides 6. 02 4. 40 J 10. 42 Juncus balticus 3. 79 4. 03 7.82 Sc_us olneyi 3 . 33 2. 20 5.53 Baccharis glutinosa 2.24 1 . 47 3 . 71 93 . 65% 82 . 80% 175 . 45 r Total Vegetative Cover - 12 , 925 cm2 ( 95% ) Total Bare Ground a 675 cm2 ( 5%) Total Number of Occurrences - 273 N = 140 Total Exotic Cover = � ( in top 10 species ) ( 2 . 93% over al 1 ) 58 ' 1 7A8L3 11-0 . Vegetation o' the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh 4abitat Complex - Cal trans Vegetation Survey Oiked Salt Marsh : - : geIatiYe : Relative ;moortance _ Species Oominance Freauencv 11alue Sal icorni a spp . o . 31. lead) 78. 75 58.04 136 . 79 Frankenia crandifoIia 8 . 57 . 83 2.4. 40 1 Oistichlis saicata. 4. 10 3. 44 L2. 54 - ?hacelia r Imo sis; ima austral 1 .oralls 2. i1 2 . 38 4. 49 4aDlooaooQs ericoides aricoiaes 1. 47 2.54 4..11 *7araxacum officinale . 18 1.35 2.03 *9romus diandrus .62 1.32 1.94 ScT__ robes . 75 1.06 L.81 *Palyooaon monspeliensis .23 1.32 1. 55 _ *8ra_ssica nigr3 . 14 i. 32 1. 44 96 . 92,w 94.20E 191 . 12 7otal Vegetative Cover = 17, 250 vn2 ( 66 . 5%) Total 3are Ground = 8,605 cm2 ( 33 .a:) Total ^lumber, of Occurrences = 379 w X 259 Total Exotic Cover a 1 . 17E in top : O species ) overall ) *C-xotic Species 59 TABLE 11 -E . Vegetation of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh I Habitat Complex - Cal trans Vegetation Survey Degraded Salt Marsh : % Relative % Relative Importance Species Dominance Frequency Value Sal icornia spp . _ ead) 33 . 52 21 . 21 54. 73 Distichlis soicata 11 . 44 7. 27 18. 71 *Bassia hyssooifolia 8. 88 9. 09 17. 97 _ Suaeda cal ifornica 7. 73 9 . 70 17. 43 *Polypogon monspeliensis 7. 66 7 . 27 14. 93 *Bromus diandrus 6 . 02 4 . 85 10 . 87 ' *Gasoul crystallinum 3 . 71 4, 85 8. 56 Frankenia grandifolia 4. 20 4. 24 _ 8.44 Haplopappus venetus vernonioides 4.01 2. 42 6. 43 *Atriplex semibaccata 2. 62 3. 03 5 . 65 , 89. 79% 73 . 93% 163 . 72 Total Vegetative Cover = 4, 110 cm2 ( 45 . 7%) ' Total Bare Ground = 4, 877. 5 cm2 ( 54. 3%) Total Number of Occurrences = 165 N = 92 Total Exotic Cover = 29 . 89% ( in top 10 species ) ( 35 . 93% overall ) *Exotic Species 60 r rr rr rr rr rr rr ar rr rr rr r rr rr rr r r r ri I TAnLE 12. List of Wetland Plant Species Within lbe iiuntingloo neach Wetland ' Wetl n S ies Landowner ocatiOil Present lISertegend Lewd State of California 1. Santa Ana River to Rrookhurst St. 1 0 to 1 S4licor'1114 virginica 2. nrookhurst St. to Magnolia St. 1 3 4 6 A 11 2 Sallcurnia subterminalis 3. East of Roach Nlvd. 1 2 0 9 l2 13 3 Frankenla grandifolia City of Huntington Reach 1. West of beach Blvd. 1 3 5 6 7 0 9 4 3uncus acutus Southern California Edison 1. West of Magnolia St. l 0 5 Scripus oloeyi Thorpe 1. East of Magnolia St, 1 3 0 6 Scripus cal i torn ices 2. West of Magnolia St. 1 3 4 12 1 Cyperus sp. Ul � 'J Mills Land & WAter Cowpany 1. North And east of the flood control channel 1 3 * 0 DistICII is spicala 2. West of the flood control channel 1 3 9 Typha sp. lU It UPI)ia mar itiInd 11 3auwea carnosa 12 Scripus robustus 13 Cutula coronipifulia This list is not Intended to he exhaustive but rather represents the wait cou►won wetland indicator species Iresent on August 23, 1902. ,Mostly dead vegetation as a result of discing. ! from Ilf G, 19112 i It appears that Route 1 and the other streets in the area may have a definite impact on the vegetation pattern of the coastal marsh . Highway and road runoff is a major supplier of fresh water flowing into the marsh . The vegetation tends to form bands which parallel the roads and other features such as the dike to the flood control channel and the boundary zone of the Edison Plant . These parallel bands of vegetation may, in part, be reflective of fresh water flows . Soil salinities in this habitat and the vegetation mosaic may, in part, also be related to the elevation . Salt marsh vegetation is commonly zoned by elevation ( Zedler 1977 ) , however, the areas studied are usually exposed to tidal ' action . This is not the case over the vast majority of the area between Beach Boulevard and the Santa Ana River . The information gathered in the Caltrans survey was not fine enough in detail to allow statistical analysis of soil as it correlates to elevation . The soils of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex are those typically found in these types of environments . The soil in the dunes is composed of sand . The lowland soils are primarily silty and appear to contain significant amounts of organic material . In August , when the soils ' were checked, the lowland soils , except for those in the Haplopappus zone , were wet . In the lowlands outside of the Haplopapous zone, the soils are often anerobic a few centi- meters from the surface , and the so i 1 s are often black indicating the probable presence of iron sulfide . The soil salinities of the sites tested are shown in Table 13 . The dominant vegetation in Coastal Dune-Coastal Harsh Habitat Complex is , in part , related to the salinity of the \ 62 r soil . Table 14 Snows the aiSLributi0n Or soi ' Sd': ihiti?S rin r-el atiort to the vegetation enti ties . in general , the dune and 4aplopappus vegetation units axist on soils or r relatively low salinity. The Juncus ana S c r i o u s vegetation units exist in soils of moderate salinities . T'he Coastal r Salt ,Marsh, Salt Flat, and Marsh Channel units exist an _ soils or relatively nigh salinities . The Statistical anal Isis it this data is shown in rab a -J r - � 03 TABLE 13A Soil Salinities of the Tested Sites TEST PROCZEDURE AND RESULTS-E'STIMATED TOTAL SALTS JCEDURE I. Individual samples dried at 50'C (121°F) and ground to pass a Standard U.S. #10 sieve. 2. 200-400 grams of sample mixed with distilled water to saturation ' 3. Saturated sail paste allowed to stand one hour. 4. Saturation extract vacuumed from the saturated soil paste S. Extract electrical conductivity was determined using a Mark- son Electra Mario Analyzer 6. Sail salinity calculated for each soil electrical conductivity. ' asults. Total salts in parts per thousand (o/oo) mple No. Total Salts(o/oo) Sample No. Total Salts (o/oo) Sample No. Total Salts(o/oo, lA .8 13A 71 .0 25A 100.0 2A -60.8 14A 63.4 26A 86.4 3A 88.9 15A 55.0 27A SO.6 4A 85.8 16A 62.7 28A 96.0 5A 98.6 17A 73.6 29A 78.7 6A 76.8 18A 90.2 30A 69.8 7A 79.4 19A 63.4 31A 92.2 8A 95.4 20A 47.4 9A 100.5 Zl A 71 .7 10A 121 .0 ZZA 57.0 11A 80.0 23A 64.6 12A 95.4 24A 60.Z 1 i 1 1 WLZ 138 Sail Salinities of :he Tasted Sites Sample 3o. Farm Sal ts(o/oo) Sample ,No. Total Sal ts(0/0o) Sample 40. 710tal Shc ts(a/oa) 18 .9 273 1 .3 523 8.3 Z3 5Z.5 288 1 .3 548 11 .5 38 ZT .1 MIS 1 .9 533 9.6 48 o"4.5 306 1 .T 503 9.5 _) M 36.3 31 t3 .3 578 15. + 63 42.2 322 18.5 588 i 7.3 � 7B 49.3 338 3.3 598 10.5 38 37.1 348 $4.3 6a6 12.Z 98 74Z.3 353 9.0 SIB 9.0 Ica 35.2 363 7.7 00-23 SZ.3 113 106.Z 373 10.Z 6313 1 .5 _ 1Z3 90.9 388 12.8 548 1 .Z 138 90.2 398 Z9.4 653 4.4 T48 44.7 408 7.7 608 10.Z 13 60.3 416 10.2 678 1 ZO.3 163 79.4 4Z9 5.8 688 76.Z -i 173 73.1 423 4.1 696 99.3 1fl8 43.3 448 0.3 703 1084 1 a8 0.6 49 Z9.4 208 1 .5 468 17.3 213 0.8 473 46.7 T� 223 1 .4 488 82.0 Z 0.3 498 81 .3 24.0 1.1 508 0.8 Z53 me same 1 e 518 0.3 253 2.1 523 14.1 ■r rir rr rr rr rir ■r rri rr rr rya rr rr rr r ■r r� i it TABLE 14. Soil Salinities of Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex in Relation to Vegetation liaplopappus Juncus Scirpus Dune Channel Bare Ground Salicornia Zone Marsh Zone Marsh Zone (Coast I Salt Marsh Zone) 18 0.9 26 52.5 9B 72.3 158 60.8 20B 1.5 320 18.5 52B 14.1 19B 0.6 3B 21. 1 118 106.2 166 79.4 21B 0.0 33B 3.3 538 8.3 31B 0.3 4B 64.6 13B 90.2 178 78.1 226 1.4 36B 7.8 54H 11.5 44B 0.3 5B 36.5 348 84.5 188 43.5 23H 0.8 37B 10.2 558 9.6 508 0.8 66 42.2 478 46.1 358 9.0 248 1.1 38B 12.8 568 9.6 51B 0.5 7B 49.3 488 82.0 458 29.4 268 2.1 390 29.4 518 15.4 0 63B 1.5 8B 37.1 498 81.3 46B 17.3 27B 1.3 408 7.7 58B 11.3 64B 1.2 10B 35.2 61B 9.0 628 52.5 28B 1.8 418 10.2 59B 16.6 65B 4.4 128 90.9 678 120.3 688 76.2 29D 1.9 42B 5.8 60B 12.2 666 10.2 14B 46. 7 696 99.8 70B 108.2 308 1. 1 436 4.1 IAUI.E 15A. Statistical Analysis of the Soil Samples Related to Salinity Lou Transformation of Salinity Data PI'M I.oy PPM to,J PPM Log ep" Log PP" 1.09 1'PN Log I'PM Log llaplopappus Juncus Scirpus "line C11aoneI dare Ground SaIicornla lone H'Irsh lone Marsh lone �- Coastal Salt Marsh lone) 900 2.9542 62.500 4. 1202 12.360 4.6691 60.000 4.1039 1,600 3.1161 10,5UO 4.2612 14.100 4.1492 1►00 2.1102 21.100 4.3243 106,20u 5.0261 19*400 4.11990 0U0 2.9031 3.300 3.51u5 ti.300 J.9191 J00 2.4111 64.600 4.0102 900200 4.9662 10.100 4.11926 1,400 3.1461 1.000 3.0921 11,5UO 4.0601 300 2.4111 36.600 4.6623 04,600 4.9260 43,500 4.6305 OU0 �.9031 10,200 4.01016 901100 3.9021 v 000 2.9031 42,20U 4.625J 4641U11 4.6611 9,000 3.9542 1,100 3.0414 12.000 4.1012 9.600 3.9023 500 2.699U 4 9.300 4.6920 112,000 4.91311 29.40U 4.4603 2,100 3.3222 29,400 4.4603 16.400 4. 1U/5 1.Soo 3.1161 J/.100 4.5694 U1,300 4.9101 11,300 4.2300 1.300 3.11J9 1.100 3.0066 11.30o 4.2300 1,100 3.0192 J5.200 4.5465 9.000 3.9642 52.600 4.1202 1.I1110 3.2663 10.200 4.0006 16.60(1 4.2201 4,400 3.6434 W.900 4.9506 120.31111 6.OUO3 760200 4.0020 1.'h10 1.211111 5.000 3.1634 12,201) 4.08b4 10.200 4.1JIM 46.100 4.6b93 99,000 4.9991 100020U 5.0342 1.100 4.0414 4.100 3.6120 r r r r rr m i� r� r � � ass �r rt l� r■i rr rt r TABLE 158. Statistical Analysis of the Soil Samples Related to Salinity Scripus Juncus Dune liaplopappus Marsh Zone Marsh Zone Channel Salicornia Bare Ground oasta j Salt Marsh) Swn 20.1 13.8 114.6 109.8 476.1 554.4 791. 7 Y12 + Y22 129.33 20.86 1545.12 1760 25977.35 39507.44 71754.05 z 2.07 1.38 12.133 10.98 47.61 55.44 79.17 Sinn of Squares 06.418 1.816 85.880 554.396 3310.229 071.6040 9075. 161 Var. 9.609 0.2017 10.7350 61 .5996 367.8032 974.6116 1008.3512 Std. 3.0998 0.4491 3.2764 7.8485 19.1182 31.2188 31.7645 Coef. of Var. 149.1506 32.5504 25.7311 11.4803 40.2819 56.3109 40.1093 ' o CO I Loy Transformation Scirpus Juncus Dune liaplopep us Marsh Zone Marsh Zone Channel Salicornia Bare Ground (Coastal Salt Marsh) Sum 30.1960 31.181 36.8256 39.5332 46.4784 46.5111 4d.2882 Y12 + Y22 93.3426 91.4202 150.7856 157.0302 216.2031 217.3663 234.1386 x 3.0196 3. 1181 4.0917 3.9533 4.6478 4.6511 4.d288 Sm of Squares 2.1628 0.1947 0.1050 0.1428 0.2695 1.0325 0.9636 Var. 0.2403 .0216 0.0131 0.0825 0.0288 0.1141 0.1070 Std. 0.4902 0.1411 0.1146 0.2872 0.1698 0.3387 0.3212 Coef. of Var. 16.2344 4.1176 2.8011 7.2610 3.6540 7.2823 6.1763 TABL 15L. Statistical Analysis or :.Ie Sail Samples Related to -' Salinity. ANOVA of Log Transformea Oata and Apriori T Testing of Lag Transformed Oata. Anov a ' df ss pis .among Groups 5 32.5oIT 5.4436 01.7006 Significant 'O tnin Groups Z-Z 5.161 0.088Z Total 58 38.1317 Apriori T Tasting June, Haplopappus, Scirpus, Juncus vs Channel , Salicarnia, and 3are Ground . T 3.5317 4.7093 a Var. 0.3194 0.0852 �J n. 39 30 T = 10.38 Significant T.05[571 1.996 Oune, Haplopaupus vs Scirpus and Juncus T 3.06,388 lar. 0.1-256 0.05Z1 n. 20 i9 1 T s 9.86 Significant ' 7,05CV] = Z.OZS - 69 TABLE 150. Statistical .analysis of the Soil Samples Related to Salinity. Dune vs Phacelia ' z 3.0196 3.1181 Var. 0.2403 0.0216 n. 10 10 T = 0.61 Not Significant ' T.05[18] = 2.101 Scirpus vs Juncus x 4.0917 3.9533 ' Var. 0.131 0.0825 n. 9 10 T = 0.93 Not Significant T.05C17] - 2.110 Channel vs Salicornia and Bare Ground ' x 4.6473 4.740005 Var. 0.0288 0.11337 ' n. 10 20 T= 0.81 Not Significant iT.05[28] - 2.048 Salicornia vs Bare Ground ' x 4.6511 4.8288 Var. 0.1147 0.1070 n. 10 10 ' 7.05[18] = 2.101 Not Significant r ;o i 7A3Ld 15E. Statistical analysis or the Soil Samples Ralatea to Saiinity. Computer Programs Jsed in Statistical ;analysis or Salinity Oata 3asic Statistical Program 10: 3 0 ' 20: E 0 30 : PRIM' "8AS:C STA`lTSTICAL PROGRAM" 40 : PRrVT "EYT R 'lARiA8Lc5" 30 : 71 P'U T A 60: IF/A _ -1 GOTO 130 ' 7 0: C = A } 3 SO : 3 C 90: 0 = A * A T 100: F 0. E 110: - F , 1ZO: ,0 TO 30 130: PRINT "SUM Y1 T YZ. . . " —' 1I0: PR I,vT 3 130 : PRINT " SUM Y1 2 t YZ 2. . . 4 _ 155 USING 160 . ,"-R :VT E 170: PRINT "ENTER ,4 130: INPUT 3 190 : : = 3/1 - 200 : PR I NT "ME.Ajl , 210: PRNT Z 220: Y = E - ( 3^2/4 ) ' 23U: PRINT "SUM Of SQUARES" 240: PR1N7 Y 250: X = Y '" (Y-1 ) 250 PRINT "'VAR . " - 71 270: PRINT X 2SO: W ✓X ' 290 : PRINT " STAND . OEV . " 300: PRINT W 310: V = (W*100 ) /Z 320: PRINT "COEF. OF VARIATION" ' 330: PRINT V 340: END T Test Program 10: PRINT "T TEST" ' 20: INPUT " HOW MANY " ; A 3 0: 3 = 3 + 1 40 : INPUT "MEAN 1 = C SO: INPUT "MEAN 2 0 60 : INPUT "VAR 1 E ' 70: INPUT "VAR 2 F 80 : INPUT " N1 = "; G ' 90: INPUT "N2 = H 100: I = C - 0 ' 110: J = (G + H ) /G * H 120: K = ( (G-1 ) * E ) + ( ( H-1 ) * F) 130: L = G + H - 2 140: M = (K /L ) * J 15 0: N = 1 /v"711- 160 : PRINT N 170 : IF 3 < A GOTO 30 ' 180: END r 72 In the Pond and Marsh Channel Zone of the Coastal Dune- Coastal .harsh Habitat Comolex, there are considerable -_- quantities Jf algae in the permanently wet -areas . Rum grows in the channels bet-,seen 3roaknurst Street and the ' Santa Ana River. A number of animal species either use t:le Coastai Dune- ' Coastai Marsh Habitat Complex , or have used it in the recent oast when part of the marsn was zriofiy restored to i tidal flow. Currently, this particular ;nacitat comol :x is of particular importance for birds . the f al laving invertebrates are characteristic of the t Coastal Oune-Coastai .Marsh ,Habitat Complex of :he . PSI : +later 3oatman (Trichocorixa reticuiata) Damsel fl y ( I sh_nur_a sp . ) - Seed Shrimp ( Subclass Ostracoda) Amphipods (Order Amphipada) _ Back Swimmers (Family Notonectidae) Mosquitas ( Family Culi•cidae) Salt Flies ( Family Ephydridae) Near the leaking pipe that is on the blind end of the -' Huntington 3each Channel near 3each Boulevard, there are -, small populations of the Lined Snare Crab Pachyaraosus crassices and the Salt .Marsh Snail Melamous of ivaceus . In the marsh area adjacent to Seminauk Slough exists a 000ulation of the Cali 'ornia Horn Snail ( Ceri _hidea californica) . Along the chanel within the parcel of V' degraded coastal marsh between 3raokhurst and the Santa Ana River there is a pooulation of the Fiddler Crab (Uca cremul ate) . ' ,3 r In 1979, as part of the mitigation for a project by the Orange County Flood Control Agency, the parcel between ' Brookhurst Street and the mouth of the Santa Ana River was restored to tidal flow for a brief period of time. Within six months , the invertebrates listed in Table 16 became establish-ed in the channels . ' TABLE 16 . Invertebrates 'Which Became Established in the Channels of the Parcel Between Brookhurst Street and the Mouth of the Santa Ana River During the Brief Restoration of That Area ( OFG, 1982 ) 1 California Jackknife Clam (Tagelus californianus) rLittle Egg Cockle (Laevicardium substriatum) Bay Mussel (Mytilus edulis ) Bent Nosed Macoma ( Macoma nasuta) Common Littleneck Clam ( Protothaca staminea) Ghost Shrimp ( Callianassa californiensis ) Striped Shore Crab (Pachygrapsus crassipes) Crab (Cancer sp . ) From the literature , it appears that the fish of the Power ' Plant Pond are primarily mosquito fish ( Gambusia affinis) placed there to control mosquitos . No specific information about the fish fauna of Victoria Pond was found . However , since the California Least Tern forages there , a fish ' population exists in the pond . Table 17 shows a 1 ist of fish that resided in the channel s of the area between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River during the period of restoration . 74 7A6L T%. Fish Whtch 3ecame _staoiisned in the channels of the Parcel 3et•ween 3rookhurst Street and the Mouth of the Santa Ana River Ouring the 3ri _f Restoration of Tnat area (OFG, 1982 ) Mospuitafish (Gambusia 3ffinis ) ' Topsmel t (A tner i noos iff ii rt s ) _ California :< iTTifish (=un® oarvioinnis ) ' Stighorn Sculpin (Leotacottus armdtus ) Longjan Mudsuc:ker (Gillichtnvs miraoilis ) !-Tlowfin Goay (Acanthaaobius slavimanus ) ' Arrow Goby (Cleveiandia ios ) - 3arred Sandbass (? sraT3brax neautifer) ' California Halibut ( P3ralichthvs californicus ) Op a" (Giro niariCans ) Shiner surfperch (Cymatocaster aggredata) ' 3ird use of the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex ' area located west of the Santa Ana River is shown in Figure o . male 18 contains a list of bird species known to uti- r� line this habitat west of the Santa .Ana River . Table 19 shows data from the winter 1983-84 bird censuses . Va reasonably 1 y comprehensive i ve survey of am ph i i n r� i 1 -a '5 � p _ y p b ins rep ..5 or mammals has ever been undertaken in the Coastal Oune- -� Coastal Marsh Complex of the APEI . Generally, these animals are mars secretive in their habits than ire .aany o i rds . Oo i ng a survey of the area would require the , estaal ishment of a trapping network and night observations , things which were precluded by cost and time constraints . r� However, it is known that at least one coyote (Canis latrins) and oapulations of Audodons Cattant35l Rabbit -� ( 3 ,11 •141- iaus audabonni ) , 3eechy' s Gr7und Sauirre? 75 TABLE 18A. BIRDS OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH WETLANDS *Denotes Sensitive Species ' These bird species are known to occur in the subject wetland area. The following list is not intended to be exhaustive. The list is based on actual field observation by the Department of Fish and Game ' and other reliable sources (OFG, 1982) . Wading birds: Great blue heron Ardea heroaias Great egret Casmerodius albus Snowy egret E rg etta thula Cattle egret Subulcus ibis Black-crowned night heron Nycticorax nycticorax Surface ducks: Mallard- Anas platyrhynchos* Northern Pintail Anas acuta* Green-winged teal Anas crecca* ' Blue-winged teal Anas discors* Cinnamon teal Anas cyanoptera* American wigeon Anas americans* ' Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata* Diving ducks: Lesser sc aup Aythya aff i n i s* Surf scoter Melanitta oerspicillata* Bufflehead Bucephala albeola* Stiff-tailed ducks: Ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis* Kites, hawks, falcons (observed foraging in wetland areas) Black-shouldered kite Elanus caeruleus* Red-tailed hawk Buteo ,dam aicensis Worthern harrier Circus cyaneus American kestel Falco soarverius 76 ,A8LE 18A (Continued) I Shorebirds- Semioalmatad plover Char_drius semicalmatus ' ,Killdeer Char_s voc_ 31ack-bellied plover P1uvi lis saua aro1a Long billed curlew um_enius_ timer canus 'Nhimor%l Vum__ ana_cocus ,fillet C3tootra0 norus senioalmatus Greater yellowlegs Tri n` lna i ana 1 euca ' Least sandpiper Cai�s minutilla Ounl in Cals_s alp Western sandpiper Calidris mauri =� Marbled godwit Mesa fecoa American avocat Recurvirnstra amer_cana 31 ack-necked sti 1 t h imantoaus mex i s anus Red-necked onalaraoe Phai_s loeatus Oowitcher sap. Limnadramus Sao. Wilson's phalarope Phal� tricolor - Sanderl ing CalCal.=_ a- ba Lesser yellowlegs Trin a fl av_s Lesser golden plover Pluv�s dom_ Spatter! sandpiper Act_is macularia ' Gulls and terns: _ Western gull La_ occi dent aIis Herring gull Lares araei ntatvs California gull Lomas californicus Ring-ailled gull Larus deiawaransis Bonaparte' s gull Larus pniladelonia heerman's gull Larus hesr~nanni orszer' s tarn S for, California least tern S,'arna ant am 'zrowni* Casai an tart 7,erna case i a Miscellaneous Netlana-rotated saecies: American coat =:ll ica americana* ' 3eiding's savannah saarraw ?3sserculus sanawichensis betbel�no4* Red-winged Z)lxkbirS Aae_laius oncenicaus -- :area Grebe Podicaos niaricoi ; is Oouaie-crestaa cor-norant Phalac-ocorax aur` 3elted kingfisher Cale ai�n - Marsh wren Cistotnorus ]alustris , 77 TABLE 18A (Continued) Miscellaneous species not directly related to wetland habitat: ' Mourning dove Zenaida macroura* American crow Corvus brachyrbynchos* Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottus European starling Sturnus vulgaris English sparrow Passer domesticus Western meadowlarks Sturnella neglects House finch Carpodacus mexicanus American goldfinch Carduelis tristis Lesser goldfinch Carduelis psaltria Song sparrow Melospiza melodia Cliff swallow Hirundo pyrrhonota Barn swallow Hirundo rustica Violet-green swallow Tachycineta thalassina Northern Rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryx s nnis Bank swallow Riparia ripagia Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus Northern flicker Colaptes auratus Anna's hummingbird Carte anna Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans Rock dove Columtra livia Raven Corvus corax ' White-crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys 'dater pipit Anthus soinoletta Yellow rumped warbler Oendroica coronata Brewer' s blackbird Euphagus cyanoceohalus Brown towhee Pi ilo fuscus 78 6.611..I•.. ♦r.l •6...1..1••.111..Ip.l•1 I.M...•JI." I.wdw / •y.+1 1 M 11111.►.=4 r11 1661•I g.r.good. 11.N ./1...1/l.d. � w k.-N+u 11• M Il.w• .�1• w.p�lj. {uw. dl b.IW 1�.•.I .W•t 11 1 I,is /a110 a. 6646 la a to ix uAl 1 1• J 11 J g1 lJ J(J IS It 1�/ &A, air a..•a/.r• I • 1 J Al pl J q /!J /11 1 /11 J! /1 M I..M II..beg" 1 1 / 4..1 +yu 1 1 • 1 1 W •.I I..N 1 1 J t 1 ►1.U11• 1 1 • 1/ 1 1 / / 1 • / d1 ..«kr.11w• 1 u 1 ug1 M N M N III •r1w.11".61.1• ISO 41/1w.1• 1 1 11 a .JI• e.•.ur.wl• 1 1 1 • I 1 N eY• /,1. /I..Y 1 w 11 tl 1 1 •• W N 111 . allla..r 1 1 / I 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 • W i tr«kr ..«.1 / 1• 1 11 1• 11 I1 a • All 1 10114 1..41 W • 1 / I041/.11..y1w 1 1 1 1 1 1 �Ir.J�«11y 1.111ri1 ili:• mill.l I w,d►III.1 Ir61141 14116.1466 1 161w p116.1y1 1 1.11 60. 11 1 11 • 1 1• Y it as II u a NI /1 / to wooly r11 1 1 1 • / 11 c.ulw. /.0 •• 1 u wow.•.11 I ; /.d...►N M.luyd I �1r.oC I . r..0 ww 1 1 1.11.+11.•14w 1 1 Igp....1 iin./.J II.I►bd 1 J 11....1y d..• 6 1 1 I 11 1 H..11 1 1 1 t.r..r�.11..beak 1 1 1 1 1 I..•'.I...I.d•4a 1 / 11 I••1 Wt.r 1411•tr..r•.y...r / I b1+1.1'1 1YwM q«.•d 1 1 1• 11 • •1 t..Y.r .•«•+. IwwU11 Ia q IN I91 w dJ IN N Iw 1•• 111 III N a" 301 w its 1" u• • 1/ 0 1 wll 11 u 111 1.1 1/1 all g tw11t1111l1 Wd1114 "am-1.Y.l.Id/I.d.eels II II 41, NI of 1/a IJI IN 1 11/1, at 11m11 list 1 11 Il: � 1 � i u• /11 � + t TABLE 18C. From Wilcox (pers. com. ) Huntington Wetlands 1-19-84 Magnolia to Power Plant Bird Count 13:00 Black-necked stilt 19 Pintail 161 Shoveler* 68 Wigeon* 70 Godw i t 15 Wi1let 6 Sanderling 6 Black-billed plover 4 Avocet 14 ' Gulls sp. 60 Coot* 10 Bonaparte's gull 958 Caspian tern 11 ' 80 (Soermoohilus bee_eyi ) and mice ( species unknown ) inhabit this habitat complex of the APEI . The coastal dunes are _ important to these animals because they provide forage and refugia when the marsh is filled with storm water runoff , as happens periodically during the winter ( see Figure 7 ) . The California Legless Lizard (Ann�iel1_a oui�chra) which is undergoing a reduction in range in Orange County may live in the dune area. Several sensitive species utilize the Coastal Oune—Coastal .Marsh Habitat Complex . Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow I ( Passerculus sandwichensis bel�dingi ) , which is a state listed endangered bird, nests and forages in the Coastal Salt ,Marsh Zone of the coastal marsh . This subspecies also I takes insects in the coastal dunes and the salt flat . 3elding ' s Savannah Sparrow is an obligate salt aarsn bird , that is, it requires the Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat in order to survive. - Census data for Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow is located in Section 02f of this report. The California Least Tern ( Sterna antillarum br_; forages heavily in the Power Plant Pond and in Victoria Pond . When ' the area between 3rookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River w.as restored to tidal flow for a brief period in 1979, the California Least Tern foraged heavily in the channel area of that parcel . ' The wandering skipper (Panooguin_a er`_) is a small butter- fly that is restricted to the Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat . f This 5utterfly is always fauna in close association with Salt Grass (Oistichlis so+ ) . Larva of the 'slandering Skipper seem to live only on Salt Grass that is at least Periodically wetted, and high humidity seems to be required ' for larval development . The population of the 'slandering Skipper has declined primarily aue to the filling and FIGURE 7 Pictures of the Coastal Marsh Habitat When Flooded r ' i 1 i I ► � dredging of coastal wetlands . This butterfly is of scien- tific interest because, unlike many other insects, it can tolerate large amounts of salt in its diet . It also has been used as an indicator species for viable Coastal Salt Marsh Habitat (Nagano pers . com. ) . One was captured in the APEI during the Caltrans vegetation survey. I The California Legless Lizard (Anrt_la ulp chra) is a lizard which inhabits loose friable soil . Its population in , Orange County is declining primarily due to loss of habi- tat . The coastal dune division contains good habitat for the California Legless Lizard . None of these lizards were found during the biological survey of the APEI , but no ' systematic search for this species occurred . Sensitive bird species are indicated in Table 18. These sensitive species are those listed as endangered , threatened , or rare by the state or federal governments, plus those species fully protected by state law, plus harvested species , plus ' those species considered sensitive by the Bureau of Land Management or the U .S. Forest Service . g. Endangered and Threatened Species — This section ' describes the occurrence of endangered and threatened species in the APEI . The list of species presented here is derived from field observation after a literature search and contact with the U .S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. All species listed ' or proposed as endangered or threatened by the federal government , and all species listed as endangered or rare by the State government are listed herein . Other species which are of special concern because of limited or declin- ing populations, or because of scientific interest, are discussed in the discussion of the particular habitat in which they live. , 83 ' rCalifornia Brown Pelican (Pelecanus accidentalis caTifornicus) — Federal -:ndangered, State-Endangered . The Cal ifornia Brown Pelican forages in the Nearshore .Marine Habitat Complex and in the River and Channel Habitat of the APSI . Use of the APSI by the California Brown Pelican is periodic, and by relatively small numbers of these birds . The APSI does mat make up a significant portion of the foraging area of the Cal ifornai Brown Pelican . California Least Tarn (Sterna antillarum hrownil _ Federal -Endangered, State-Endangered. The California Least _ tern nests and forages in the APSI . Recent use of the APE! by this bird is shown in Table L9. The APE : is of critical importance to the existence and recovery of this species . Correspondence between Cal trans and the U . S. Fish and Wildlife service concerning the California Least Tern is attached to this report as Appendix 2. The U . S. Fish and _. Wi 1 dl i fe Sery ice wi 1 1 soon beg in an in-depth- study of the ' Huntington Beach Least Tern Colony as part of the Santa Ana River Flood Control Project. Wandering Skipper (Panoquina errans) — The Federal Register -' Pol . 49, Na. 100, Tuesday, May 22, 16984) proposed this species for the endangered and threatened list. The common _ name given in the Federal Register is Salt Marsh Skipper Butterfly, and the scientific name is given as Panoauina oanoauinoides errans. However, it is now considered a separate species . Currently, the wandering skipper is a candidate species only and is not legally protected by the ;ndangered Species _. act. However, it is possible that in the future, this species could be listed ana impact the project . 34 - i Table 19. The Number of California Least Terns Breeding in the APEI Year Number of Pairs Number of Fledglings 1969 15 -* 1970 12 -* 1971 8 I 1972 13 Several 1973 16 16 1974 5 -* 1975 8 3 1976 11 -* 1977 45 60 1978 75-90 100 I 1979 80-95 90 1980 70-85 85 1981 105-115 I 1982 85-111 50 1983 85-91 60 *No data I I 1 85 The importance of the APEi to the survival of the wandering skipper is unknown. However, a small Population of to i t butterfly is known to exist between the Edison Plant and . the Santa Ana River. Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow ( Passerculus sandwichensis hel�dings_) — State-Endangered . Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow, nests in the S3licornia of the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Comolex. Recent 3se of the APE: by Belding ' s - Savannah Sparrow is shown in Tables 20 and 21. The APEI is important to the maintenance and recovery of this species . Table 20. 3reeding Pairs of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrows in Southern California. =ram Zealer 1982. Number of Pairs Location - 1973 1977 -• Tijuana Estuary 100 95 South Bay Marine Reserve 25 South Bay salt ponds 100 i Street- Marsh I8 S+ieetwater Marsh 40 Paradise Creels Marsh Lo Beacon island ( in Mission Say) 4 - San Diego River :Marsh 70 Mission Bay Marsh 45 Los Penasquitos Lagoon 160 52 _ San Oieguito Lagoon 0 9 San E1 iJo Lagoon 17 30 Satiquitas Lagoon 0 20 Aqua Hed i onda Lagoon 37 15 - Buena Vista Lagoon 0 5 Santa Margarita River 125 L06 Upper ,Newport Say 130 33 Huntington Beach 31 301 sa Chica 10 136 Huntington Harhor & Sunset Aquatic Park 6 Anaheim Bay 125 106 ' Los Cerritos Wetland Channel 5 Playa del Rey 25 37 Mugu Lagoon 175 250 _ Ormond Beaty 17 McGrath 3each State Part 12 Carpinteria :Marsh 100 34 Goleta Slough 50 23 36 - 1 . . TABLE 21 . Results of the May 1983 Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow Survey ( Carl Wilcox Pers . Com . ) Santa Ana River to Brookhurst Street 0 0 buds p airs Brookhurst Street to Magnolia Street 71 birds 35-36 pairs Magnolia Street to the Edison Plant ' 55 birds 27-28 pairs Area Just East of Beach Boulevard 56 birds 28 pairs Total 182 birds 90-92 pairs 87 .I 1 Oetermination of the Significance of the 3iological Resources of the APEI Y There are no extraordinarily significant biolo ical e 9 g resources in the Urban or Upland Habitats . The wildlife value of the Upland .Habitat is of local significance. I i kew i se, the 3each Habitat ( except For the least tern _ nesting area) contains no significant biological resources . On the other hand, the least tern nesting area, the Yearshore .Marine Habitat Complex , the River and Channel ,Habitat, and the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex contain bioTogicaT resources of statewide significance . T � The California ,.eas-es Tern ( Sterna antillarim browni ) is a ' federally listed endangered species . ! east terns nest in _ the Beactt Habitat and forage in the vearshors Marine and River and Channel Habitats within the APEI . The least tern is protected by the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1971 -J as amended. This act prohibits federal expenditures far projects which would Jeopardize the existence of a - federally listed endangered species . Construction of _. Alternative I (without mitigation) would adversely impact _ the least tern ( see Section F) , and would require federal funding. if this alternative is constructed, Cal trans :.must perform mitigation acceptable to the USFWS or apply for an exemption to the endangered species act . Sections 1-3 .3 - ' and 2 -4. 5 of the "Environmental Handbook briefly treat the Federal Endangered Species Act . Section a of this report details the mitigation proposals offered by the USFWS. _ 1 88 l Beldings Savannah Sparrow ( Passerculus sandwichensis �( beldingi ) is a subspecies listed as endangered under California State Law. This listing means that significant populations of this species must be considered as biologi- cal resources of statewide significance. As detailed in Section 02F of this report concerning important species, a significant population of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow lives in the Salicornia stands of the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex. Construction of Alternative A would cause a decline in the population of this bird by reducing the size of its habitat . This reduction should be mitigated by creation of more habitat . The APEI contains about 153 . 7 ha of diked in coastal or degraded marsh. The current biological resources of this marsh and its potential restored value are detailed in Section A2e of this report. The sand dunes, although supporting upland vegetation , are an integral part of the marsh complex because they supply refugia for marsh animals when the marsh is flooded . The Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex, as it currently exists, is of statewide biological significance because of its value as wildlife habitat for unusual and endangered species in addition to its significance as a wetland . The Cal trans-owned coastal dune and coastal marsh parcels between Beach Boulevard and the Santa Ana River appear to be subject to the provisions of Section 118. 6 of the Streets and Highways Code because of their biological significance. If they are, these parcels must be offered to other agencies which would manage these parcels as wildlife habitat ( see Section 2-3 .20 of the Environmental Handbook) . According to the Environmental Handbook, because of the significance of the Coastal Dune-Coastal 89 ' ' Marsh Habitat Complex, an "cI 5 or "cIR muss be or_par_d for any Caitrans project or discretionary land sale which -osouTd cause significant impacts to the Coastal Oune-Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex. Additionally, according to the anviron- mental handbook, the coastal marsh is subject to Federal CIxecutive Order. LI990 ( sae Section 2-4. 3 of the Environmen- tal Handbook) and the California Coastal Act of 1975 . During the course of the biological study, old surveys of the general project area Nere consulted in order to deter- mine, in part, the history of the biological resources of the APEI . It is possible that the State of California holds certain rights to the land which :nay reduce Cal trans ' oations in disposing of t:le property. Appendig 3 contains a copy of a letter from the State Lands Commission concern- ing this . This issue should be resolved in the near future because it may,, in part, influence the decision an how to mitigate for the, biological impacts of Alternative A. Alternative A could reduce the size of the Caast al 0 une and Coastal .Marsh Habitat CampT ex . Losses to thi-s hab i tat complex should be mitigated for by creation or restoration _ of additional habitat . Section G of this report deals ,pith mitigation in detail . Any Caltrans project or discretion- ary excess Tand sate which would reduce the size of the Coastal Oune-Coastal ,Marsh Habitat should be mitigated by the creation or restoration of the same habitat types . Li <ewise, any local agency project Nhich causes the loss of this habitat should be 'litigated . This determination of statewide significance for resources ,orithin the APE! is in accordance *41th Section 1S12 . 4 of the Caitrans Environmental Regulations ( Environmental Handbook Apoenaix A-5, Pages 56 and :'' ) . 90 Because of the complexity of the situation, Caltrans Legal Staff should be contacted to provide guidance in exactly what Caltrans is required to do in relation to the regulations and issues raised herein and with other issues that the Legal Staff may know about regarding the Coastal Dune-Coastal Marsh parcels . r 91 ' F. Impacts of Project Alternatives ' In this section, the biological impacts of the project' s various alternatives are discussed. The discussion in this section assumes no mitigation. Mitigation of these impacts is discussed in the following section on mitigation. Alternative A _ The following significant impacts would occur if Alternative A was built, unless mitigation also occurred . 1. Permanent loss of about 0 .32 ha ( 0 .8 acre) of California Least Tern foraging habitat. This loss would occur because the new bridge would be larger and higher ( see section B) . The new bridge would cover a larger area and have a larger "dead zone" on each side where the California Least Tern will not forage. During the biological survey of the APEI, California Least Tern foraging activity in the vicinity of the bridge was monitored. It was noted that birds of this species do not forage under the bridge, nor do they forage within 15 . 24 m ( 50 ft) of the bridge. Rather, as these birds approach the bridge, they will either increase their altitude and cross over the bridge, or they will bank and turn before reaching the bridge . It is estimated that the increase in the altitude of the bridge will increase the California Least Tern foraging dead zone to 21.34 m ( 70 ft) on each side of the bridge. The increased size of the bridge and the increase in the size of the dead zone will cause the permanent loss . 92 2. Possible temporary loss of significant amounts of California Least Tern foraging habitat. This could occur under either one of two scenarios. First , using some construction techniques , significant amounts of the Santa Ana River or its flanking channel could be dewatered , thus reducing foraging habitat. CALTRANS will not use any construction techniques that would lead to this occurence. Second, there is the possibility that sulfide bearing mud, which may be beneath the top sediment strata under the river and flanking channels , could be disturbed and discharged into the River and Channel Habitat or into the Nearshore Marine Habitat Complex. The discharge could create toxic conditions in the local area and cause declines in marine organisms which the California Least Tern eats . CALTRANS would construct a temporary trestle and cofferdams to be used for construction of the permanent structure, to prevent any discharge into the river and channel habitats . 3 . Increased noise, dust , and fumes in the California Least Tern nesting area due to construction of the facility. This could possibly disrupt the nesting activities of this species . 4 . Loss of Coastal Marsh Habitat . Less than 0 .4 ha ( 1 acre) of the coastal marsh fragment near Superior Avenue ( Figure 2Z ) would be removed due to the construction of Alternative A. 5. Changes in the vegetation pattern of the coastal salt marsh west of the Santa Ana River due to increased fresh water influx. In this area, the highway would be widened and increased runoff would enter the marsh. ' 93 1 Coastal marsh vegetaton structure is detrmined by subtle changes. The soil salinity, the runoff salinity and the fluctuation of the depth of the water are important in- etermining the nature of the vegetation of the area. In Southern California, small pockets of fresh water marsh are known to have developed near storm drains and other sources of fresh water input. Vegetation at the mouth of the San Diego River shifted from dominance by Salicornia to Typha dominguensis when the natural floods of 1980 were followed by the release of water from the E1 Capitan Reservoir. Leaching reduced the soil salinities to 0 ppt in much of the marsh and the shift in vegetation occurred rapidly ( Zedler, 1982) . In the coastal marsh in the APEI , there is no general continuous input of fresh water. The water in the marsh comes from storm runoff and from a high water table . The ground water in the APEI is brackish. Salinity measurements taken in the isolated channels between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River indicate that in the summer, the water there is about the same salinity as seawater. The literature indicates that the Talbert Aquifer is brackish ( Conservancy,Coastal , 1982) . Storm water and street runoff are fresh water. The fresh water runoff enters the marsh primarily from the roadway' s dikes and bluffs . II East of the Santa Ana River, Victoria Pond ( Figure 2R) and its surrounding brackish water marsh is fed by storm and street runoff . In the area open to tidal flow via Seminouk Slough, the fresh water runoff enters the slough. 94 West of the Santa Ana River, the marsh is divided into segments by i roads and cultural features , and cut off from tidal flow by the dike along the flood control channels . The vegetation pattern . along Route 1 is likely to be caused by interactions between the water flow from Route 1, the nature of the soil , and minute differences in elevation in the area. The existing brackish water _ vegetation zones ( the Scirpus marsh zone and the Juncus marsh _ zone ) reflect this interaction. If the road is widened and more runoff water enters the marsh, soil salinities in the lowlands closest to Route 1 may decline. This would increase the size of the brackish marsh zones . The increased fresh water flow would bring additional salts from the leached area into the low spots of the diked-in parcels. The salinities in these areas would increase. There would also be greater fluctuations in the water levels in the low areas due to I the increased water flow. This is likely to result in the increase in the size of the salt flats . The net result would be the decrease in the size of the coastal salt marsh zone which is dominated by Salicornia , this would mean the net loss of nesting and foraging habitat for the Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow. Because of the complexity of the above interaction, the impact cannot be quantified. If Alternative A is constructed , the vegetation changes would be of immense scientific interest . The discussion on page IV-17 of the draft EIS supplied to the TransLab concerns the fresh water impact on the marsh. It states : 95 ' 1 "The proposed highway widening will increase the freshwater runoff into the salt marshes northerly of the highway between the SAR complex and the Southern California Edison Plant by approximately 25% . Because the marshes have a larger surface area, approximately 300 acres , than the proposed widened highway, approximately 16.5 acres , the rain falling on the marshes is a greater factor than that falling on the highway." ' This statement shows a lack of understanding of the nature of this impact and of vegetation ecology. The underlying assumption of the statement is that the entire marsh reacts as a whole in one way to fresh water entering any part of the marsh. This assumption ( as the above discussion shows) is not correct, and this statement should be removed from the EIS. A good background reference for the effect of micro-environmental conditions on vegetation structure is Kenneth Kershaw' s Quantitative and Dynamic Plant Ecology ( 1973) . Even seemingly minor changes in environmental parameters can modify the structure of the vegetation. 6 . Possible loss of wetland due to erosion into and subsequent filling of the wetland. Because the coastal marsh is lower in altitude than the roadway, it is possible that , in some locations at least, wind and waterborne sediment could enter the marsh. 7 . Loss of Coastal Dune Habitat. About 1. 2 ha ( 3 acres) of Coastal Dune Habitat would be removed to make way for the highway. This is about 12% of the remaining coastal dune habitat in northern Orange County. 96 S . Permanent loss of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow nesting and foraging habitat. See Number 5. ' 9 . Possible temporary loss of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow habitat. The noise, fumes, dust, etc. , of construction could lead to some temporary loss of usable nesting and foraging habitat of this bird. This impact is not quantifiable because no research has ever been done on the impact of construction on Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow. Alternative B _ Because there is no construction involved in Alternative B, the biological impacts are the same as those for Alternative C. Alternative C _ There is no short-range biological impact of Alternative C. 97 t . I 1 G.. Mitigation This section of the report explores options for mitigating the impacts of the various alternatives of the project. It is Caltrans policy to mitigate negative impacts when practical . Alternative A 1 . Permanent loss of about 0 .32 ha 0 .8 acre) of California Least Tern foraging habitat. Caltrans consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which developed a variety of scenarios which would mitigate for the loss of California Least Tern foraging habitat. At the time of the writing of this report , it is unknown whether or not other agencies ( such as the FHWA) will require Caltrans to carry out one of these scenarios. i However, it is Caltrans policy to mitigate impacts when feasible.. The scenarios presented by the USFWS are as follows : a. Restore the degraded salt marsh zone between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River to tidal flow ( Figure 2Q) . There are already channels on this parcel. The channels were created for the temporary restoration of tidal flow in the parcel in 1979 which mitigated the impacts of a project by the Orange County Flood Control Agency. 1 The restoration of tidal flow could be accomplished in the same way that it was in 1979 ; that is by connecting the marsh channels to Talbert Channel via pipes through the dike. Restoring this area to tidal flow would restore . 37 ha ( .9 acre) , slightly more California Least Tern Habitat than ' would be lost by the construction of the new bridge. 98 There would be no need to supply food fish in the restored channels because the marsh channels would quickly be colonized by fish from the Talbert Channel . Table 17 shows fish species that colonized the marsh channels in 1979. The natural colonization of ' the area by fish would also preclude any public health problems due to the •buildup of mosquito populations. ' In addition to restoring foraging habitat for the California Least Tern, return of tidal flow to this area would restore the Degraded Salt Marsh Zone and provide habitat for a variety of salt marsh organisms. Additional Coastal Salt Marsh Zone would be created which would provide additional habitat for Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow. It is very unlikely the Cordgrass ( Spartina foliosa) would naturally become established in the area because there is no ■ local seed source_ A significant increase in water associated bird and marsh invertebrate habitat would occur. The precise increases cannot be quantified, but they would undoubtedly be greater than the loss of habitat caused by constructed by Alternative A. Permanent restoration would require periodic maintenance of the pipes connecting the marsh channels to make sure that sediment does not clog the pipes. If restoration of the parcel takes place , Caltrans would convey the parcel to another agency which would manage the parcel . No flood hazard would be created by the permanent restoration of the parcel . The cost of installating two 48"x90 ' R.C.P. would be approximately ' $25 , 000 . 99 b. Restore 0 .32 ha ( 0 .8 acres ) of Least Tern foraging habitat on the parcel between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River. This could be accomplished by digging out a pond with 0.32 ha of water surface at mean tide and by providing an intended ' margin which would provide nutrients for the pond' s fish. The area would have to be diked to prevent the flooding of the rest of the parcel. Water could be brought into the pond by connecting the pond to Talbert Channel via a pipe. This approach will provide high quality foraging habitat for the California Least Tern. The pond would be colonized by fish from the Talbert Channel . Bird usage of the entire parcel between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River would increase because a variety of bird species in addition to the California Least Tern would utilize the pond. The birds that forage in the pond would loaf ' and might nest on the parcel. There would, however, be a net conversion of degraded wetland into upland because the dike would take up space in the degraded marsh. The size of this impact would depend on the size and design of the dike. The dike could be designed so that a relatively large intertidal area would be created . The intertidal area would support salt marsh vegetation. This would reduce Ithe loss of E marsh habitat . No nesting habitat for Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow 1 could be created because the tidal Salicornia marsh created on the dike would be small and relatively linear unless a partial marsh restoration is also included. The pond would be conveyed to another agency to manage. 100 If this option for mitigation is chosen, the pond and the dike should be designed by a team of Caltrans biologists and entineers. There would be an increase in bird usage of the parcel due to the permanent installation and management of the pond. The urbanization of the parcel would have an even greater wildlife ' impact after the pond was built than urbanization would have now. 1 The cost of installing a 48"x90 ' pipe and the construction of the berm would be approximately $45 ,000 . c. Restore 0. 32 ha ( 0 .8 acre) of California Least Tern Habitat foraging habitat at Victoria Pond ( Figure IV-2) . This could be accomplished by enlarging the pond and providing more water to it. Winter runoff water could be channeled to the pond by removing the drains that currently drain the property into the Greenville Banning Channel. This may not be enough water to create the proper foraging habitat for the California Least Tern. The tern breeds and forages in the APEI during the summer, consequently, the enlarged pond must be of the proper size and have the proper r water quality during the summer. An accurate hydrological study of the area would have to be performed to determine if additional water would be needed. Additional water could be supplied to the pond from the Greenville ' Banning Channel , the Santa Ana River, the Talbert Aquifer , or by tidal flow from marshland restored by the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- neers if the Santa Ana River Project is ever built. During the summer, water in the Greenville Banning Channel is often of poor , quality with a low oxygen content. This could produce toxic con- ditions in the pond . If Santa Ana River water is used , it must be 101 1 ' transported across the Greenville Banning Channel and on to the pond. Talbert Aquifer water is good quality brackish water, but it would require pumping . Tidal water from the Corps of Engineers project may be difficult to obtain even if the project is built. This is because oil extraction operations in the Beeco Oil Field will probably continue for a number of years, and construction of tidal channels may not be possible until oil operations cease. Unless tidal flow from the south is used to fill the pond, there will not be a usable migration route for fish to move in and out of the pond. Consequently, the fish population in the pond must be managed by the design of the pond and/or by periodic introductions of fish in order to assure good least tern forage and mosquito control . The site is owned by Orange County so Caltrans would have to enter into some type of agreement with the county if the pond is to be restored. The cities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa have expressed interest in constructing a marina in this area. Expansion and use of the pond would preclude the use of part of the area as a marina. UP to 8. 1 ha ( 20 acres) of brackish water wetland could be created in the area. This would more than mitigate for the loss of the isolated wetland patch near Superior Avenue , but it would not mitigate for the loss of Belding' s Savannah Sparrow habitat because the enlarged wetland would not be dominated by Salicornia. If the pond does not have an outlet , it is possible that high salinities may occur over time which would degrade the foraging _ habitat . This would be particularly true if saltwater or brackish water is used to maintain the level 102 of the pond . The pond could be designed so that it had an outlet , but this would require additional water to maintain the required water level . The cost of the 8"x7800 ' of pipe and construction of the dike and pumping plant would be approximately $210400 . I d. Expansion of the Edison Power Plant Pond ( Figure 2J) by about 0 . 32 ha (0 .8 acre) . This could be accomplished by enlarging the pond , and by either pumping groundwater into the enlarged pond, or by pumping in water from the Talbert Channel . Because the pond is on private property, Caltrans would have to reach an agreement with the property owner in order to expand and manage the pond. The fish population in the pond would have to be managed by the design of the pond and/or by the periodic introduction of fish. The fish population would have to be kept high in order to provide good California Least Tern forage and limit the mosquito population. Because the pond would have no outlet, hypersalinity could occur in the future, rendering the pond useless as foraging habitat. Providing an outlet for this pond would be difficult and expensive. The expansion of the pond could result in the reduction of the Coastal Salt Marsh Zone and thereby reduce the amount of nesting habitat for Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow. The cost of a 48"x1600 ' pipe and 10 ' drain easement would be approximately $225 , 000 . 2 . Possible temporary loss of significant amounts of California Least Tern habitat. Without mitigation of the short-term loss of habitat, constructing Alternative A could impact the Huntington Beach California Least Tern Colony. The mitigation listed for this point is detailed in the correspondence between the USFWS and Caltrans . Inclusion of these measures in the project assisted in removing the initial jeopardy opinion. 103 a. Rather than dewatering the entire Santa Ana River, five temporary 4.88 m x 15 . 24 m ( 161x501 ) cofferdams would be built to exclude water from around the areas where bridge pilings would be built. By doing this, the flow regime of the Santa Ana River will not be significantly changed during construction. b. If sulfide bearing mud is discovered at the bridge site , bridge construction should proceed without discharging sulfide bearing mud into the Santa Ana River or its flanking channels, or constricting the flow of water. 3 . Increased noise , dust, and fumes in the California Least rTern nesting area due to construction. Inclusion of the following measures in the project assisted in removing the initial jeopardy opinion.. The impact may be mitigated by moving the seaward boundary of the nesting area 19 . 8 m ( 651 ) toward the ocean, prior to construciton. Also, the segment of the bridge closest to the California Least Tern Colony can be constucted between August 1 and April 1 when the terns are not in the area. ' The segment of the bridge which is furthest away from the California Least Tern Colony could be constructed during the nesting season. The assumption here is that this construction disturbance would be far enough away from the expanded nesting area that California Least Tern nesting success would not be ' reduced . 104 s of Coastal Marsh Habitat.. Mitigation act ation for this impact 4 . Los g P could be accomplished by the restoration of Coastal Marsh Habitat on the parcel between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River, on the Huntington Channel Restoration site, or in the vicinity of Victoria Pond. This mitigation could most easily be accomplished in the area between Brookhurst Street because of the ease of bringing reasonable quality water into the area, and because Caltrans already owns the parcel. 5 . Changes in the vegetation pattern of the coastal salt marsh west of the Santa Ana River. This unquantifiable impact if found to be significant could best be mitigated by restoration of the parcel between Brookhurst and the Santa Ana River. This could be done either immediately as part of the project (along with mitigation for Nos. 1 and 4 above) or it could be done if monitoring indicates a significant vegetational shift . Monitoring by itself is not mitigation since monitoring merely observes and catalogs changes. In order for monitoring to be part of an effective mitigation package, specific action must be taken if specified parameters are exceeded . The proper monitoring of vegetation in this projct would be a major undertaking. First, what and how to monitor has to be established . The best way to monitor for this impact is probably to resurvey the vegetation in the marsh between the Edison Plant ' and Santa Ana River yearly for about 15 years using the same methods as in the original survey and checking for changes in the vegetational pattern. At least one set of aerial photographs a that no should be taken after a number of years to insure vegetation change has occurred that has not been detected by vegetation surveying . Meaningful monitoring of the Belding ' s Savannah 105 ' Sparrow population would be extremely difficult and expensive. However, the size of the population of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow ( like that of any animal) is directly tied to the quantity and quality of its habitat. Therefore, if the quantity and quality of the impacted area of the marsh is monitored , then the population ' of Belding,'s Savannah Sparrow will also be indirectly monitored. Second , the parameters which if exceeded require action must be determined. A five percent reduction in Salicornia would seem to ' be a conservative parameter. Third , the action required must be determined. In this case, the action would be the restoration of Salicornia dominated marsh. This could be accomplished most easily by restoring tidal flow to all or part of the degraded salt marsh between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River. If more of the degraded salt marsh between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River is restored to tidal flow than would possibly be lost due to this impact, no monitoring would have to be done. It is doubtful that more than about 2.8 ha ( 7 acres) of Coastal Salt .Marsh Zone would be lost. Therefore, if this amount (or more) of the degraded wetland were restored to tidal flow, no monitoring would be required. This approach could easily be tied to use of the parcel between iBrookhurstStreet and the Santa Ana River as mitigation for the loss of California Least Tern Habitat ,g b , ' and for the loss of part of the isolated patch of marsh. Either the entire parcel could be restored , or part of the parcel could be restored. Restoring the entire parcel would require a minimal amount of work , however, it would restore more Coastal Salt Marsh Zone than would be lost due to possible vegetation changes . This 106 r is regarded to be overmitigation, but partial restoration of the ' the parcel would require diking. Also, any reasonable design for the restoration would probably result in the rest of the parcel ' being unsuitable for sale due to the increased wildlife use on the unrestored part of the parcel . r 6 . Possible loss of wetland due to erosion into and filling of the wetland. The erosion plan should be written in consultation with Caltrans biologists. All construction should be monitored and measures taken to prevent windblown and waterborne sediments from entering the marsh. Any dust palliatives used must be nontoxic in order to prevent toxic materials from entering the marsh. If water can be used as a dust palliative, it should be used. r 7 . Loss of Coastal Dune Habitat. This impact can be mitigated ' by building Alternative A-2 (with lanes that are 3 .4 m wide) rather than Alternative A-1 (with lanes that are 3.7 m wide) and ' keeping the highway as close to the coast as possible. This would reduce the area of the dunes that would be taken. Also, exotic ' vegetation could be removed from the dunes and native species ' could be transplanted, thereby providing higher quality habitat. Care would have to be taken in this restoration to prevent the ' destabilization of the dunes which would cause the loss of wetlands due to erosion. ' 107 8 . Permanent loss of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow nesting and foraging habitat. See Number 5 above. 9 . Possible temporary loss of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow habitat. This could be reduced by constructing the half of the ' highway nearest the marsh between August 1 and December 1. Noise and air pollution reduction techniques should be used to minimize the impact. Alternative B _ See Alternative C below. Alternative C _ The only way the slow continued degradation of the marsh can be alleviated is by opening the coastal marsh to tidal flushing to carry away sedimentary input. Caltrans could ask the appropriate Trustee Agency to develop a management plan for the ' Caltrans owned segments of the Coastal Dune and Coastal Marsh Habitat Complex which addresses short and long term goals for the ' property. � I 108 United States Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior Uo' "' Building, Suite 169Z ,1 c; 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portiand, Oregon 97232 1n Rcp1v RefcrTo: AFA-SE Your Reference: August 18, 1983 1-1-82-F-112 Mr. Bruce E. Cannon Division Administrator ' Federal Highway Administration Region Nine, California Division P.O. Box 1915 Sacramento, California 95809 ' Dear Mr. Cannon: Subject: Continuation of Formal Endangered Species Consultation on the Route 1 Transportation improvement Project, Orange County, California This replies to your request of June 17, 1983 , for reconsideration of our June 6, 1982 Biological Opinion ( 1-1-82-F-112) , which suggested a reasonable and prudent alternative to offset project impacts that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the California least tern (CLT) (Sterna antillarum (= albifrons) browni ) . Attached to your June 17, 1983 letter was a modified project proposal submitted by CalTrans (in a letter dated June 13, 1983) that was designed to eliminate those aspects of the original project that jeopardize the ' CLT. Specifically, rather than dewatering the entire Santa Ana River Channel in the vicinity of the project during construction, CalTrans now proposes to construct five temporary 16-foot x 50-foot cofferdams to ' exclude water from around the areas where bridge pilings would be built in the channel . Thus , with the new design, the flow regime of the Santa Ana River complex would not be significantly altered during construction. ' Also, construction of the new bridge closest to the Huntington Beach CLT nesting colony would be scheduled from August 1 to April 1, avoiding the ' CLT nesting season. Second phase bridge construction, furthest away from the tern colony, would occur during the CLT nesting season, under the assumption that construction disturbance would be far enough removed ' 'rom the tern colony so that it would not affect tern nesting success. Including a "dead zone" of 70 feet on either side of the new bridge, in which least terns would probably not feed, the new bridge would eliminate about 0.81 acres of CLT foraging habitat in excess of what the existing bridge currently covers. The proposed bridge would also 'be about 65 feet closer to the CLT nesting colony than the existing bridge ' (245 feet, rather than 310 feet) . 1 Mr, Bruce E. Cannon, Federal Highway Administration - 1-1-82-F-112 in examining the modified construction proposal , we find that those features of the original project which jeopardize the continued existence of the CLT have been eliminated--dewaterina the entire river channel and construction close to the CLT colony during the nesting season. Thus , the construction proposal described in the CalTrans letter of June 13, 1983 constitutes a reasonable and prudent alternative that is in conformance ,iith our Biological Opinion on this project. There would remain, however, a permanent loss of 0.31 acres of tern foraging habitat from the modified project. -Because this loss would adversely affect the CLT (although not sufficiently to result in a jeopardy situation) , it should be compensated for. Thus, in furtherance of the purposes of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended ' (Sections 2(c) and 7(a) (1) ) , which mandates Federal agencies to use their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation and recovery of listed species , we recommend that FHWA require CalTrans to compensate for the loss of CLT foraging habitat by accomplishing recommendations 1 and 3 below as our first preferen:e, which would increase the potential for recovery. ,Ho,:jever, if accomplishment of 1 and 3 are unacceptable, then 2 and 3 will provide for the conservation of the species. ' 1) Restore the 17 acres as recommended in our original reasonable and prudent alternative. 2) Restore about 0.81 acres in either or each of the following areas : a) the 17 acre site; b) Victoria Street Pond; c) the Power Plant Pond at (near) the Southern California Edison facility. 3) Enlarge the Huntington Beach CLT colony by moving the fence on the seaward side of the enclosure 65 feet closer to the ocean to compensate for the bridge being moved 65 feet closer to the CLT colony. ' This concludes formal consultation on this project. If the proposal is significantly modified in a manner not discussed above or if new information becomes available on listed species or impacts to listed species, reinitiation of formal consultation with this Service should be ' considered. We would appreciate notification of your final decision on this project. If you have any questions, please contact either Gail Kobetich, ProjectiLeader, or Peter Sorensen at FTS 448-2791 (916/440-2791 ) . ' Sincerely/yours , ' Acting fo/William F. Shake Assistant Regional Director Federal Assistance _ H. Related Projects Santa Ana River Project _ At this point in time, it is unknown whether or not the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Santa Ana River flood control project will ever be built. If it is built, it ' could greatly change the nature of the area. For instance, the mouth of the Talbert Channel could be moved westward dividing the degraded marsh into two segments . Also, some of the marsh east of the Santa Ana River would be restored to tidal flow. From the restoration, tidewater eventually could be brought into the t vicinity of Victoria Pond easing the problems inherent in attempting to enlarge the pond. The EIS for the Santa Ana River protection proposals states that the Corps intends to seek the restoration of tidal flow culverts in the Talbert Channel Levee. Brookhurst Street widening Project — Huntington Beach has plans to widen Brookhurst Street . This project would have significant ' wetland impacts . They could, however, be mitigated on the parcel ' between Brookhurst Street and the Santa Ana River along with the impacts of the Orange 1 widening project. The Orange County Environmental Management Agency has plans to enlarge and relocate segments of the Huntington Beach and Talbert Channels located within the APEI . Figures 8 and 9 show proposals for this project. Enlarging and relocating these channels would have significant biological impacts. Briefly, some of these are : 111 1. A significant short-term decrease in the amount of California ' Least Tern foraging habitat. Construction of the project would probably require the dewatering of the channels reducing the foraging area. ' 2. A possible long-term reduction in California Least Tern foraging habitat. I.f the mouth of Talbert Cahnnel is shifted to rjust west of Brookhurst, shortening the channel there could be a loss of foraging habitat or a possible long-term increase in California Least Tern foraging habitat . If the mouth of the Talbert Channel is shifted slightly ' west, the increase in the width of the channel will create additional foraging habitat for the bird. 3 . Possible relocation of the California Least Tern nesting ' area. If the mouth of the Talbert Channnel is relocated. one proposed location shown on Figure 9 passes through the middle of ' the current nesting area. 4 . Net loss of Coastal Dune and Coastal Marsh Habitat. 5 . Net loss of Belding ' s Savannah Sparrow Habitat. These impacts would be in addition to the impacts of the highway ' widening . If the flood control project is built, the highway project will have to be modified to accommodate the change in the + ' location of the mouth of the channels. Construction of this flood control project would probably prevent tidal exchange with the parcel between the Santa Ana River and Brookhurst Street for at least a period of time. During the reconstruction of the channels , the channels would probably be ' dewatered . 1 112 i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i r i s h h S _� --- o 10 2 N Arl06 , 00� pU � AWN A t -Y P lobe- " I REM .� -_ . � .. _, • \ �• /; ALP � T ��' p � co" Q ``y2 •1; `'f ~ ' - OK � low—Ilk i If the mouth of the Talbert Channel is moved west of Brookhurst , special provision would have to be made to allow tidal exchange ' with the degraded salt marsh parcel . It would be relatively easy ' to provide tidal exchange for this parcel underneath Brookhurst Street by means of an arched culvert. if tidal exchange would rtake place under Brookhurst Street, the channels in the degraded marsh may have to be regraded to provide efficient tidal exchange. It would also be possible to maintain at least part of the current ' Talbert Channel so that efficient tidal exchange could take place via the existing channels . If the mouth of the Talbert Channel is moved slightly west of its rcurrent location, the size of the degraded salt marsh would be significantly reduced. The channels in this area would have to be redesigned. From the information supplied to TransLab by District 7, it is ' impossible to determine the precise relationship between the Orange County Environmental management Agency and the U.S. Army ' Corps of Engineers Santa Ana River Project . r 115 LITERATURE CITED r California Coastal Conservancy, 1982. Regional wetland Restoration Study: Los Angeles and Orange Counties , Final Draft ' Report. 76 p. California Department of Fish and Game 1982. Department of Fish ' P , P and Game Determination of the Status of the Huntington Beach 1 Wetlands . 35 p. Dauben ire, R. , 1968 Plant Communities : A Textbook of Plant Synecology. Harper and Row, New York. 300 p. ' Kershaw, Kenneth A. , 1973 . Quantitative and Dynamic Plant ' Ecology. American Elsevier Publishing Company, New York. 308 p. Mueller-Dombeis, Dieter, and Heinz Ellenberg, 1974. Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. John Wiley and Sons , New York. ' 547 p. r Novik, Kit , 1981 . Results of Trace Element Analysis for Samples Collected in Bolsa Chica on 8/11/80. California Department of ' Fish and Game memo. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, 1973 . The Ecology of the Southern California Bight: Implications for Water , Quality Management. 531 p. Valentine , James W. , 1966 . Numerical Analysis of Marine Molluscan Ranges on the Extratropical Northeastern Pacific Shelf . Limnology A and Oceanography 198-212. 116 Zedler, Joy B. , 1977 . Salt Marsh Community Structure in the Tijuana Estuary, California. Estaurine and Coastal Marine Science 5 :39-53. Zedler, Joy B.. , 1982. The Ecology of Southern California Salt ' Marshes: A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS - 81/54. ' 110 P. r i i 1 117 1 Z� i'• �f 1l' QC 0 Now r Q �• .r�i �t • AAIICNA CALIIOt NIA U.S. DEPARTNIE,1T OF TF.AtiSPoRTATION zWA ' O{IAr .1 FEDER:�i HIGHWAY AUM1N1ST:tnTION ArttICAN tAt10A =' REGION NINE ' CAILIFORNIA DIVISIOiv P.U. Box 1915 January 7, 1983 Sacramento, California 5809 ' IN NuLr MKFCR To HB-CA Dr. Knox Mellon, Jr. M-5001(14) State Historic Preservation Officer 07-Ora-1 19.8/25.9 Department of Parks S Recreation Newport Beach & P.O. Box 2390 HuntinZzaa_ Rear Sacramento, CA 95811 (FHWA-820804-A) Dear Dr. Mellon: 1 unclosed for your review is a Request for netern4ration of Effect for a ;)roposrd :project to widun thu Pacific Coast Highway in the cities of t4ownort Beach and Huntington Beach. Tao properties within the area of Potential environmental impact have been determined to be eligible for inclusion in ttie National Register of Historic Places for their significance in .architeccur(2 and local history , the Gardner House and the Golden near Cafe. The proposed project will create a six-lane -oadwav `-om the existir:g your-lane roadway and parking lanes by restripino and converting the parking lane to a traffic lane in front of these properties. toe request your concurrence that this project would have no effect on the t:ao eligible properties. Sincerely yours, Tor ' - Bruce E. Cannon Division Administrator ���:cicsure ' T concur. 1 ' Dr. iC:—z Mellon -- State .,istcric P..�es;„vati on O? � - ► I r� t 1 1 � ii+ 1.��'Y• �' 'r•t f• .J,oe 1 l� 1` I �ff ' II �1 ti ' STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY CALTRANS HYDROLOGY REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED WIDENING _ a OF THE PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY FROM ROUTE 55 HIGHWAY y" TO SANTA ANA RItTER 07-ORA-01 PX, 19.8/21.55 APPROXI'4AgM LENGTH 1.75 MAWS ' HYDRAULICS ENGINEERS. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . H. KAYANO, M. ZOLFAGHARI HYDRAULICS PROJECT ENGINEE'R. .. . . . . . S. ISHIGO ' DISTRICT HYDRAULICS ENGINEER.. . . . . . R. SASSAMAN JULY 123 1982 1 " FILE: 082-7005 r ;> T.'LBLE OF CONTENTS Page Number I. LOCATION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. 1 Grp. IMAL R&Ii1FALL. CHARACT=STICS . . . . . . '1... III. M=OD OF EVALUATING RUNOFF. , . , , , . . . . .,. . . . . . . . 1-3 A. F4rdrolog3r Method . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . 1 B. Soil Types .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . 1 ' C. Land Usage .. ...... . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 D. Bulking .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . 1 E. Time of Concentration 2 F. Split and Combined Flows .. . . . ... . . . . . . . . 2 A, G. High Stage Conditions ... ... .. . . . .. . . . .,. 2 H. Existing Facilities 3 I. Facilities Proposed By Others .. . . . . . .. . 3 IVGROUNDWATER .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ' v. UNUSUAL OR SPECIAL CONDITIONS 3 ' TI. GZNMUL NOTES ON HYDROLOGIC DATA SHEETS . . . . . . 3. ATTACHMENTS Location Map Hydrologic Data Sheets (2) Map "showing complete drainage area Average Intensity Duration Curves Runoff Coefficient Curve--Soil Class D r HYDROLOGY REz4RT �7 r LCCATION I. The project is located in Orange County and runs in a south- east to northwest direction for 1.75 miles from Route 55 Highway to Santa Ana River in the City of Newport Beach. IGMrZR L RAINFALL CHARACTErRSSTICS - - - 1 The average annual rainfall for this project area is 12-inches. The maximum annual rainfall was approximately 27-inches in 1977-1978. For the following return frequency storms, the 1-hour and 24-hour rainfalls are tabulated (Sta. 2060-1 Costa Mesa) : STORMS 1-HOUR 24-HOUR TZSRS INCHES INCHES 10 .82 3.17 25 1.01 3.91 50 1.15 4.46 100 1.29 4.99 III. ==O D OF F.VAIZATI.NG RUNOFF A. Hydrology method Runoff quantities have been determined by the Rational Method using Orange County Flood Control District Manual. B. Soil Types For the purpose of runoff evaluation, the soil type of this area fall into the soil conservation Iservice hydrologic Group D. C. hand Usage Multi-family units, detached was assumed througuout except for existing commercial areas. . D. Bulking Most of the area is already developed or will' be developed in the near future; therefore, bulking was not considered in arriving at the design flows. E. Time of Concentration 1. The time of concentration was determined from street ' flow velocities, and storm drain systems upstream from the point of concentration. These values. were compared with the plans and the hydrology and hydraulics calculations submitted by developers. 2. The maximum intensity used in this study was 5 in/hr, _ - corresponding to a 5-minutes time of concentration- for a 25_-year return .frequency storm. _ F. Split and Combined Flows The area shown in the attached map was subject to- some further subdivision for more effective evaluation of the_ Tine of Concentration. This was necessary to analyze Storm Drain Interceptions. The design flows shown on the b7drologic data sheet are the best estimate of flows; however, upstream developments may change flows. Final design of project may require need for flow estimates at additional points. In either case, hydrologic review should be requested if these changes occur. G. High Stage Conditions The outlets of tr: following existing culverts are subject to the tidal action of the Pacific Ocean: STA SIZE TYPE 718+75 3611 RCP 681+45 30" RCP The outlets of the following existing culverts join the 45" RCP which outlets into Banning Channel and are subject to the tidal action and the high stage conditions of the Banning Channel and the Santa Ana River: STA SIZE TYPE 674+50 DBL 12" RCP 670+65 DBL 12" RCP 655+50 15" RCP 651+50 15" RCP �.i i -2- - .: . 1 H. Existing Facilities The south half of the roadway and the area south of the roadway have existing drainage facilities. An existing earth trap channel runs parallel on the north- side of the roadway to carry the flow from areas 7, 7a, 8, and 9 as shown on the attached Hydrologic Maps_ The outlet of Seminouk Slough of your proposed RCB culvert to replace the earth channel should be designed for 9,25• I. Facilities Proposed By Others There are no known proposals for new facilities in this area in the immediate future. IV. GROUND14ATER The groundwater elevations in the area is relatively close to the roadway surface because of the high bluffs with areas of ` perched water during the rainy season. The ocean tidal action also has a significant influence on tho groundwater elevations. V. UNUSUAL OR SPECIAL CONDITIONS The outlets of the existing cross culverts ere influenced by tidal action, flap gate , drainage facilities not controlled by Caltrans, and othar factors. The adequacy of the existing cross culverts was analyzed on the basis of Q25 with the HGL at the soffit of the pipe at the outlet and the available head at the entrance. VI. GENERAL NOTES ON HYDROLOGIC DATA SHEETS 1. Due to differences in the times of concentration and flow splits , the flows indicated for some areas will not add arithmetically. For this reason, combined flows should be requested from Hydraulics Section where required. 2. Upstream development including any storm drain construction 1 should be subject to review as the project progresses to ensure that assumed development matches that which occurs. i I 1 , 11VIS10N OF UWAYS - DISTRICT 7 NGINEERINO SERVICES - DRAINAGE SPECIAL SIUDUES i HYDROLOGIC DATA SIIEET Co. ORA Hit, 1 p,M� 19.8/21.55 DATE JUNE�15, 1982 b� H. K. AND R.I. SNtiv No. 1 ITEM AREA APPROX. POINT OF FLOW R E M A R K S NO. No. INILREST OR S1A. ACRES CIS. 0 GENERAL (he given Q's represent surface flow to be expected from a 10-year return store. Ilia areas shown on Ilia drainage arap are those which contribute to ilia peak flow. pus to "erences in the times of concentration the flows may not necessarily be combined by direct.addition. I INLET OF 2411 304 PIPES (S/B 140 24' and 304 pipe cross under Route 55 and join into B'X4' RCB which cross under Route 1 IOUT`_ 55 TO W/B ROUTE 1 __ and to the bay. This sytem is adequate of handling this Q. OIINECTOR) _ 1• 2 )VERLAND FLOW TO EXIST EARTH 11 17 TC • 17.5 minutes. The elope of the earth channel is very flat. HA NNEL ALONG NORTHSIDE OF ROUT,:- I 3 VIA CONC. IV' DITCH TO EXIST EARTH CHANNEL 14 31 TC • 15 minutes 213 45 Confluence TC with areas 2 and 3 - 17.5 minutes. 4 VERLAND FLOW TO EXIST EARTH IIANMEL 6 12 TC • 10 minutes i,3,4 AST OF 36' RCP (OUTLET SYSTEM IRON THE CHANNEL) 55 Confluence TC with Areas 2, 3, and 4 - 22 minutes. § (VERLAND FLOW TO EXIST EARTH CHANNEL 6 12 TC - 10 minutes 6 VIA SIOE QITCH ANO EARTH CHANNEL f0 368 RCP 7 10 TC - 20 minutes , 5,6 i. dEST OF 364 RCP 20 Confluence TC with areas 5 and 6 • 20 ■inittas r * . .M Ts � iwh 7r IM! Ilksr I•. tt1It111• �. Rtr Mi It• ... miii _ r� � r■ Nw rr � r �r rill rr � r ru r � r� Irr rr i�I IVISION Of �`,:i�i�5 - DISIRICI 7 NQIN[[AINQ SIAVIC[] -•IIAAINAG[ SP[CIAI. SMOI[i . r IIYOROLOGIC OAIA SJIEEI Cu. Ora Rig. 1 P.M, 19.8/21.55 0A19 JULY 12, 1902 1A Ilk 0-b-7- SNic[ No. 2 du ITEM AREA AP"i X. f OINI OF fLON NO. No. INILREST OR SIA. ACRES CfS. R E M A R K S 1, 3, 4, AT 36' RCP OUTLET SYSTEM FROM 75 Confluence TC with Areas 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 - 22 minutes combined flow 5 and 6 *92 *0P5, capacity of existing 360 RCP - 60 cfs 7a i[G. CONC. 'TRAP* CHANNEL 55 TC - 13.4 minutes. From City's IlyJraulic Map 7 , 750' MEST OF SUPERIOR AVENUE (INT. WITH CONC. *TRAP' CHANNEL AND EARTU CHANNEL) 13 27 TC - 10 minutes 7a and 7 77 Confluence TC with area 7 and 7a • 14.3 minutes. Combined flow 8 1150' WEST OF SUPERIOR AVENUE 19 30 TC - li minutes (AT EARTH CHANNEL) 7a, 7 1 8 105 Confluence TC with area 7a, 7 and 8 - 16 minutes 9 17001 WEST OF SUPERIOR AVENUE 15 25 TC - 12 minutes (AT EARTH CHANNEL) 7a, ?, 8 125 Confluence TC with Area U. 7, 8 and 9 - 19 minutes. Into Seminoucl Slough. 39 *154 *Q25 for outlet to slough 0 SOUTHSIDE OF PCH AND ACROSS 10 10 TC -*29.5 minutes, All underground system. System ia•adequate. FROM E. END OF SEMINOUCK SLOUGH *13 *Q25 for existing 30* RCP (BEG. OF 304 RCP) 1 STA. 644#00 tc 686.5f ' 12 26 TC - 10 minutes. This calculated 101 represent the surface flow (per proposed typical section) from Santa Ana River to appeo;iNitely 57th Streat. *31 *025 the four existing cross culverts are adequate. ORANGE COUNTY LOCATION MAP PACIFIC COAST HWY. _ BETWEEN RTE. 551 ` �— GOLDEN WEST ST. - �o s1 n �`f r r • , r o <' Fwv \ 07—ORA—Y ' �.� Placenno� - �' FILE NOS 082-7005 1 y cards" °row• = \ �. Carpee QGw• IIo �^ - w.le/O1nlwer.r y3santo o 0 Soot .o A►. C +� O p AJLLQ �v! •JV l:1 l`� O O ♦� ' C� Oia4o Ae 7 \ ,.� •� Huntington oo-' M•ro{' .*, • Huntington ' �� Qu� slyl � fo 1 loquw• � teach + � i ppyLO u Saw Juan Capistrano ,J PROJECT LOCATION Come,.. 69V.4's R.:.?f�e•�G�l�+.$/21 .55 DISTRICT 7 _ o 'HIGHWAY SYSTEM FEB. 1982 2 1 0 2 t 6 t[cisur►r[ Gee i ✓ NrenurF pour[ SCALE IN MILES 116M lour[ Alum us SIGN rouf! as C ,1 STAf[ SIGN GOUT! `,� I � COkrtlTlD .NOfG :Or.ST RUC TION feEEflt3' =�= SUOGFt10 Gout! AOOrTlD - lwo.00. 10VTE uN0ff STUOT I E...r l.t.n.w a000000 eC-If[ Nor .OorrtDj tettEtTltttl llttetlt rr.w+.N�+.w.rr.M...ar:�.�r.��.•/.Hww.w. •r�.���.��.�+.w�r�wMw�r ' ! 1 DATA FOR I 10 YEAR l(ECUMU-MC1: INTL WAL .77 PI lTj I 2 --r - -- -- - - - 71 H - - - g � —,� � � rlutnr•rn 1 11 :U O - - - - -- =- -- 0 ld < � r rn 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 00 129 150 D1 DURATION IN tlltiUli�S , . � i.2 . • r r • � � � r I � I I I ��I I Ir i I � � 1 i 'I �♦..r . � } . `�•✓J I � I • r 1 6 -- -- - - - - -- .. - - - -- - ` - - (- IIAIIIIrAl.l, [1I'ITHSITY DATA FOR 25 YEAH k1iCUItItENCE Il�rl'ERVAL Ul ` 4 f --�--- - -- -- - - IN t IT I LU rn 0 • 10 20 30 40 50 60 90 130 150 ,v . U JR AT ION III M l tltrl,LS , ' 0 ! Z 3 4 S 6 .• 0.7 0.5 _- 4�4- -_T : ♦_ .:• E QUA t l ".. .: C a J.vi 1 t -'T S`.:L O= •_ SO-1. C '.-:.. -..=�.L i.:.J SCA?�.�V 02 a :^ .3 _ _:L:. _:I:._ a .60 SCHOOL az 0.2 � _ _ SULUJ 0 ! 2 4 5 6 • RAZI;TALL IN ar-►iS!-.Y PER HOUR) I. CC:•D_CL-kL 4. SIN;.LE FAMILY . 2. *'.L'LTI?'.,: FAMILY 3. SC::OOL ,•- t�.r � 3. TRAILER PARk 6. PAM C4`FFICIc,ti i OF RUN(-",'-F F, C=?PvES• SA,T*of California Business and Transportation Agency Memorandum iTO MR. R. J . KOS I NSK I Date- February 2, 1.984 Environmental Planning Branch RIe : 7-ORA-1 19.8/25. 9 PCH from Rte 55 _ . to Golden West St. MR. P. C . HSU - Hydraulics � _ 07210 - 499850 =_ - Engineering _S_trvices Branch From DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION subbed: FLOOOPLAIN ASSESSMENT - RESPONSE TO FHWA COMMENTS I . COMMENT: Is the encroachment a "Significant Encroachment?" ( i .e. , flooding causes risk to life or property, flooding isolates a community, flooding has adverse impacts on "natural and beneficial floodplain value, " or the project supports incompatible F. P . development) . ANSWER: No, this action is not a "Significant Encroachment. " The transverse encroachment is an existing condition and will be continued in the proposed action, as combined with the existing highway. The proposed action calls for widening that will be to the line and grade of the existing highway, except for the raise in grade of the Santa Ana River Bridge. i ' 2 . COMMENT: The technical report (Caltrans 07 Floodplain Assessment, File #381 -2010 ) mentions 3 ft of flow over the roadway with the 100 year storm. The EIS mentions possible adverse effects on a rare and endangered species (a natural and beneficial F. P. value) . These impacts would tend to make me think the encroachment was significant, in which case a "Finding of No Practicable Alternative" must be made. ANSWER: The EIS mentions possible adverse effects on rare and endangered species ; specifically, the California Least Tern, Belding 's Savannah Sparrow, and the Brown Pelican . The Draft EIS, Section IV, Sub-Section D, details the mitigative measures to minimize any impacts to the above-mentioned species described in Section III , Sub-Section E. Any projected flooding or overtopping of the highway is an existing condition and not a result of the proposed action . 3 . COMMENT: Need to know more about what the Cities of Newport Beach (NFIP entry date: Sept. 1 , 1978 ) and Huntington Beach (NFIP entry date: Feb. 16, 1983 ) do to enforce • 1 1 Mr. R. J . Kosinski -2- February 2, 1984 1 1 floodplain management practices"? ( i .e. specifically for those cities, not general suggestions ) . If the cities are doing their required j obs , then our project should not "support incompatible F. P.. Development". ANSWER: The Cities of Huntington Beach and Newport Beach both require that the lowest floor for new residential construction,. including basement, be elevated to or . ' above base flood elevation or depth number specified . on the NFI P Maps . For new non-residential construction, the requirements are the same as new residential j construction, but with a few more specifics (see attached City Codes ) . 4. COMMENT: The existing risk is not identified. Means of reducing existing risk are not identified. Practicable alternatives are not identified. ANSWER: The existing risk is identified as a Moderate Risk; that is, there is a potential for min interruption of traffic services or ;other moderate flood-related costs . There are no proposed means of minimizing the existing risks other than rock slope protection around the abutments of the proposed widening of the Santa Ana River Bridge. The costs associated with minimizing the existing risks would outweigh the benefits within the proposed project limits . The "natural and beneficial flood 5 . COMMENT: T lain values"p (23 CFR 650. 105 ( i ) ) in the project area need to be described. References to other EIS discussions can ' be utilized to reduce repetition . ANSWER: The "natural and beneficial floodplain values " are described in Section lip Sub-Section E, of the Draft EIS . " discussion needs to indicate whether t 6. COMMENT: The i �GO�+N �a i i� u i SCL:S S � .+�� ........ or not the floodplain encroachment is a significant encroachment by addressing the criteria outlined at 23 CFR 650. 105(g) . ANSWER: Covered under Comment No. 1 . The Location Hydraulic Studies can be summarized as follows (comments keyed to FHPM 6-7-3-2, Paragraph 7 ) : Mr. R. J. Kos i nsk i -3- February 2, 1984 7a. This action is a transverse encroachment and there is no longitudinal encroachment on the "areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity (wave action) . " 7b. There is no longitudinal encroachment. 7c(1 ) . The risks associated with the proposed widening is 1 moderate. (2) . There will be some impacts on the natural and beneficial _: floodplain values . (3) . This action will not support incompatible floodplain development. (4) . There are no measures proposed to minimize floodplain impacts associated with this action . (5) . There are mitiggative measures proposed to minimize the "natural and floodplain values" impacts. 7d. There is neither a significant encroachment nor will this action support incompatible floodplain develbpmen t. 7e. Location Hydraulic Studies required by Paragraphs 7c and 7d will be summarized in Draft EIS . 7f. Local , State, and Federal Water Resources and Floodplain Management Agencies have been consulted. C / P. C. HSU, P .E. District Hydraulic Engineer Engineering Services Branch RMS:gw Attachments Ci/T'/ Of, rr- u Zvi (A e-f v!y ,v clrt-� PLANNING MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S.969.6.0 . ' ARTICLE 969.6 �I FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT (2488-6/81 , 2604-1/17/83) S. 969.6.0 PURPOSE AND INTENT. Floodalain district regulations are intended to be applied to any area of the city which under present conditions is sub- ject to periodic flooding and accompanying hazards. The objectives of such regulations are as follows: (a) To prevent loss of life and property and to reduce to a minimum economic loss caused by flood flows. (b) To establish criteria for land management and use in flood-prone areas that are consistent with those promulgated by the Federal Insurance Administration in order to provide flood insurance eligibility for property owners. (c) To prohibit encroachments , new construction, substantial or other improvements or development that would obstruct the flow of floodwaters within a floodway. (d) To regulate and control uses below the elevation of the design flood flow within the remainder of the floodpla;n. (e) To comply with the Cobey-Alquist Floodplain Management Act requirements for f1-.od- plain management regulations. moo, S. 969.6. 1 BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING THE AREASzOF SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD. The areas o; special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled, "The Flood Insurance Study for the City of Huntington Beach," dated August 16 , 1982, with an accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Map is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this article. The Flood Insurance Study is on file in the office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California- 92648. OS. 969.6.2 ESTABLISHMENT OF ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. A deve opment permit shall be obtained before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazard established in this article. Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the Director of Develsa- ment Services and may include, but are not limited to, plans in- duplicate scale showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevation of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill , storage of materials, drainage facilities ; and the location of the foregoing., S. 969.6.3 GENERAL PROVISIONS. (a) Compliance. No structure or land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted, or altered ' without full compliance with the terms of this article and other applicable regulations . (b) Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. This article is not intended to repeal , abrogate, or impair any existing easements , covenants , or deed restrictions. However, where 'this article or another article, easement, covenant, or deed restriction, conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevai ; . The Flood Insurance Rate Map shall take precedence over the zoning district :naps. J •(c) Interpretation. In the interpretation and application of this article , all ,,rovisions small be: r ( 1 ) Considered as iminimum requirements ; 1,. ' S.969. 6. 3(c) (2) MISCELLANEOUS OIS?RICTS PLANNI4 (2) Liberally construed in favor o` the governing body; and (3) Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under state scat` utes. ' (d) Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood protection required_b.y this article is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes. This articl does not imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages . This article shall not create liability on the part of the City of Huntington 3each, any officer or employee ' thereof, or the Federal insurance.Administration, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this article or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. ' S. 969.6.4 DEFINITIONS. Except where the context otherwise requires , the define tions given in this section shall govern the construction of this article. 0 (a) Appeal means a request for a review of the Director of Development Services interpretation of any provision of this article. " (b) Area of shallow flooding means a designated AO or VO zone on the Flood Insurance Rate Map FIRM) . The base flood depths range from one to three feet, a clearly- defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterzinati and velocity flow may be evident. (c) Area of special flood hazard means the land in the floodplain within a community subject to a 1 percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. This area is designated as Zone A, AO, AH, Al-30, VO, and V1-:0 on the FIRM. (d) Base flood shall mean a flood having a 1 percent chance of being equalled or exceeded in any given year. © (e) Breakaway wall means any type of wall , whether solid or lattice, and ..jhether i constructed of concrete, masonry, wood, metal , plastic or any other suitable building material which is not part of the structural support of the building and whit, is so designed as to break away under abnormally high tides or wave action without damage to the structural integrity of the building on which it is used or any building to which it might be carried by flood waters. (f) Coastal high hazard area means the area subject to high velocity waters inciudina l but not limited to, hurricane wave wash or tsunamis. The area is designated on a FIRM as Zone V and V1-In. ' (9) Design flood means a flood against which protection is provided by means of land use regulation , flood protective or flood control works. When a federal flood protective or flood control works. When a federal flood control project has been authorized, the design flood will be that defined by the cognizant agency. In all other cases , the design flood shall be either at the one-hundred-year-recurrence interval (base flood) the standard project flood. (h) Development means any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures , mining , dredging , filling , grading , paving excavating or drilling operations located within the area of special flood hazard. 1/83 -- -- PLANNIING MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 969.6.4( i ) ( i ) Existin mobilehome park or mobilehome subdivision means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided into two or more mobilehome lots for rent or sale for XO which the construction of facilities for servicing the lot on which the mobilehome ` is to be affixed ( including the installation of utilities, either final site grading or pouring of concrete pads , or the construction of streets) are complete before the effective date of this article. Expansion of existing mobilehome park or mobilehome subdivision means the prep- aration of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing-*fie - ' lots on which the mobilehomes are to be affixed ( including the installation of utilities , either final site grading or pouring of concrete pads, or the construction of streets) . (k) Flood means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of land areas from the overflow of inland and tidal waters , and the rapid accumu- lation, of runoff of surface waters from any source and mudslides ( i .e. , mudflows) which are proximately caused or precipitated by accumulation of water on or under the ground. � (1 ) Flood hazard area means an area having flood, mudslide ( i .e. , mudflow) and flood- related erosion hazards, or as shown on a zoning district map, flood insurance rate map (FIRM) or flood bgµndary and floodway map. t (m) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and Flood Boundary and Floodway Map means the official maps on which the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated the . areas of special flood hazard, the risk premium zones and the floodways applicable to the community. .4 (n) Flood Insurance Study means the "Flood Insurance Study for the City of Huntington Beach," prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration, providing flood profiles as well as the boundaries and the water surface elevations of the base flood, including the Flood Insurance Rate Maps and the Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps. 1 (o) Floodplain shall mean the land area adjacent to a watercourse and other land areas susceptible to being inundated by a design flood. (p) Floodproofino means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions , changes or adjustments to nonresidential structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved property. (q) Flood-related erosion means a condition that exists in conjunction with flooding that alters the composition of the shoreline or bank of a watercourse, and in- creases the possibility of loss due to the erosion of the land area adjacent to the shoreline or watercourse. i (r) Floodway means the channel of a river or other watercourse and that part of the floodplain reasonably required to discharge the design flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one ( 1) foo,, or endangering life. The floodway also may be that land area necessary for that construction of physical works, including the lands necessary for construction of project levees , for the - conveyance of the design flood discharge for an authorized federal flood control project. J (s) Habitable floor means any floor usuable for living purposes, including working , sleeping, eating , cooking , recreation , or a combination therof. A floor used Only for storage purposes is not a "habitable floor. " I � 1/83 S. 969.6. 4(t) MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANNING (t) New construction means structures for which concrete slab has not been poured on I or before the effective sate of this article. (u) New mobilehome park or mobilehome subdivision means a parcel (or contiguous parcels; of land divided into two or more mobilehome lots• for rent or sale for which the construction of facilities or servicing the lots (including, at a minimum, the install - ation of utilities, either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads , and the construction of streets) is completed on or after the effective date of this article. (v) Start of construction means the first placement of permanent construction of a structure other than a mobilehome) on a site such as-- the-pouring of slabs -or footings or any work beyond the stage of excavation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation such as clearing , grading, and filling , nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways , nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers or foundations or the erection of temporary forms , nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings such as garages--or sheds not part of the main structure. For a structure (other than a mobilehome) with- out a basement or poured footing, the "start of construction" includes the first 0 permanent framing or assembly of the structure or any part thereof on its piling or foundation. For mobilehomes not within a mobilehome park or mobilehome subdivision, "start of construction" means the affixing of the mobilehome to its permanent site. For mobilehomes within mobilehome parks or mobilehome subdivisions , "start of construc- tion" means the date on which the construction of facilities for servicing the site on which the mobilehome is to be affixed ( including , at a minimum, the construction of streets, either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads , and installation of utilities) is completed. (w) Structure means anything constructed or eracted requiring a fixed location on the ground or attached to something having a fixed location on the ground except business signs and other improvements of a minor character. For floodplain Tanage-. ment purposes , "structure" means a walled and roofed building, including a gas or liquid storage tank that is principally aboveground, and includes a mobilehome. (x) Substantial improvement means any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure either: ( 1) Before the improvement or repair is started; or (2) Before restoration of a structure to which damage has occurred. For the purpose of this definition, "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall , ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences whether that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure or not. ' This term does not, however, include: . ( 1) Any Project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely _ necessary to assure safe living conditions; or (2) Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic 1 Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. "Market Value," as used herein , shall be the value determined by the Oirec=ori of Development Services by reference to the latest Orange County Ass2ssrr2nt Rolls , by a real estate appraiser secured at the applicant' s cost, or by reference to any other source deemed reliable by the Director of Development Services . PLANNING MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 969.6. 4. r (y) Variance means a grant of relief from the requirements of this article which permit. construction in a manner which would be otherwise prohibited under its provisions . S. 969.6. 5 APPLICATION. (a) In any base district _where. the district symbol is followed by the suffix -FP, the additional requirements, limitations , and standards contained in this article shall apply. The district symbol shall constitute the "base district" and the -FP suffix shall constitute the "combining district." In the event of conflicting provisions between those established for the base district and those contained in this article, the requirements of the FP combining district shall take precedence. (b) The -FP combining district shall be applied to all floodway, floodplain, flood hazard areas , and coastal high hazard areas identified, mapped and designated ' based upon: ( 1) The Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) and Flood Boundary and Floodway •laps in and part of the Federal Insurance Administration' s "Flood Insurance Study O for the City of Huntington Beach" on file in the office of the City Clerk; or ' (2) The design flood, as determined from engineering studies approved by the City Council . (c) If the Federal Insurance Administration has not provided base flood elevations , ' the City of Huntington Beach shall use base flood elevation data from other- available sources. (d) Where the floodplain area has been mapped by both the Federal Insurance Adminis- )M/ tration, and the City of Huntington Beach, the regulatory requirements shall apply to that area having the outermost boundaries. ' S. 969.6.6 ADMINISTRATION. The Director of Development Services is hereby appointee to administer and implement this article by granting or denying develop- ment permit applications in accordance with its provisions. 0S. 969.6. 7 PERMIT REVIEIA. The Director of Development Services shall review all development permits to determine that the requirements of this article have been satisfied, that the site is reasonably safe from flooding, and to determine whether the proposed development will adversely affect the flood-carrying capacity of the area of 'special flood hazard. For purposes of this article, "adversely affects" means that the cumulative effect of the proposed development when combined with all other existing and anticipated development will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one ( 1) foot at any point. When base flood elevation data has not been provided as required by this article, the director shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation data from a federal , state or other available source in order to administer and implement this article. S. 969.6.8 CERTIFICATION INFORMATION. The Director of Development Services shall obtain and maintain for public inspection and flood insurance policies information concerning the following types of certification: ' �(a) The certified elevation required for residential developments ; (b) The certification required for developments located in areas where shallow flood- ing is likely to occur; (c) The certification required for fl000proofing of non-residential develo=ents ; !S. 969..6.8(d) _ MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANK'I NG (d) The certified elevation required for. subdivisions ; ' (e) The certification required for coastal high hazard areas; and ( f) The certification required for anchoring mobilehomes. S. 969.6.9 WATERCOURSES. The Director of Development Services shall notify adjacent communities and the California Department of ;ogler Resources prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and evidence of such nctiffca- tion shall be submitted to the Federal Insurance Administration. ' The Director shall further insure that the flood-carrying capacity i.s maintained for any watercourse, or portion thereof, which has been altered or relocated. S. 969.6. 10 -FPI , -FP2 AND -FP3 AREAS DESIGNATED. (a) -FP1 Area. -FP1 shall: app y to that area designated as a lood.vay or right of-wa"y necessary for implementation of the Santa Ana River Channel Plan , as identified in the United ' States Army Corps of Engineers ' Phase 1 General Design Memorandum, and shown as -FPI on any zoning district map adopted by the City Council . (b) -FP2 Area. -FP2 shall apply to areas shown. as A, *'Al through A30, AO and had on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, adopted by this article, and shown as -Fr2 cn any zoning district map adopted by the City Council . (c) -FP3 Area. -FP3 shall apply to areas shown as V or V1 through V30 on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, adopted by this article, and shown as -FP3 on any zoning dis- trict map adopted by the City Council . S. 969.6. 11 -FPI USES PERMITTED. The following uses are permitted in the -FP1 combining district. , (a) Flood and Road Projects. Flood control channels, levL-es , spreading grounds and basins, roads , bridges and storm drains. ' 0 (b) Agriculture. All permitted general agricultural uses including farming , pastures or forestry which require no permanent structures , landfill , storage of materiais t or equipment, or stream alteration that would result in any increase in flood levels within the regulatory floodway. S. 969.6. 12 -FPI USES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. The following uses shall be permitted in an -FP1 combining district subject to approval of a conditional use permit: (a) Public utility facilities ; (b) Temporary structures which can be readily removed in the time available after `lo� warning; and (c) Recreation areas , parks , campgrounds , playgrounds , riding and hiking trails , park - ing lots, wildlife and natural preserves, and similar open space uses without permanent structures or improvements. S. 969.6. 13 -FP1 USES PROHIBITED. The following uses are specifically prohibited in an -FP1 combining district: (a) Landfills , excavations, improvements , developments , or encroachments that .vill obstruct or create debris-catching obstacles to passage of the aesign 'Flood , ,;r I ' . S. 969.6. 18 MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANNING.. . ' S. 969.6. 18 STANDARDS OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE -FP1 AREA. All encroachments ,. incluo ing fill , new construction, substantial improvements , and other defel ment is hereby prohibited unless certification by a registered engineer or architect i �ft provided demonstrating that such encroachments , including fill , new construction, substantial improvements , and other development will not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of a base flood discharge. S. 969.6. 19 STANDARDS OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE -FP2_ AREA. (a) Anchoring. ( 1) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of- the structure. (2) All mobilehomes shall meet the anchoring standards required for mcbilehQies , mobilehome parks and subdivisions contained in this article. r (b) Construction Materials and Methods : Q ( 1) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with ' materials and utility equipment resistant to *flood damage. (2) All new construction and substantial improvements shall use methods and ' practices that minimize flood damage. (3) All elements that function as a part of the structure such as furnaces , hot water heaters , air conditioners , etc. ;shall be elevated to or above the base flood elevation or depth number specified on the FIRM. (c) Elevation and Floodproofing: ' ( 1) New construction and substantial improvement of any structure shall have the lowest habitable floor, including basement; elevated to or above the base ' flood elevation. Non-residential structures shall meet the specific require- O ments for such structures contained in this article. Upon completion of the structure, the elevation of the lowest habitable floor, including basement, shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor, or verified by the local building inspector that elevation requirements have been ret. N otifi - cation of compliance shall be recorded by the Director of Development Services . (2) New construction and substantial improvement of any structure in Zone AO shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to or above the depth number soeci f i ed on the F I Rif. If there is no depth number on the FIRM, the lowest floor, including basement, shall be elevated to a depth of one ( 1) foot above the highest adjacent grade. "lonresidential structures shall meet the standards for such structures contained in this article. Upon completion of the structure, compliance with the elevation requirements shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor, or verified by the local building inspector. Notification of compliance shall be recorded by the Director of Development Services. ( 3) Nonresidential construction shall either be elevated to comply with sur- section ( c) ( 1 ) or ( c, ( 2) of this section. or together with al-tennanr utility and sanitary facilities Shall be floodproofed so that below the base flood level the strum.,r= is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage c` water; 11 /o1 PLANNIN,G MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 969.6. 131 that cause a cumulative increase in the elevation of the design flood water profile at f any point, or that will tend to broaden or direct flood flvas out of the flocuwav , Or impair the design flood conveyance capability of the floodway, or otherwise create a potential hazard to life or property resulting from flood flows in ttie floodalain distri� (b) Permanent structures. (c) Buildings used for habitiation by human beings. (d) Storage of substances or materials capable of floating which could add to the ' debris load of a s trearr. or watercourse. (e) Storage of chemicals, explosives , flammable liquids , toxic materials , or anything ' of a nature which could create a potential danger to .the public heaith and- wel - fare. S. 969.6. 14 -FP2 USES PERMITTED. The following uses are permitted in an_ -FP2 ' combining district subject to approval of a development pewit as O provided by this article. (a) Excavation and removal of rock, sand, gravel and other materials , providing that ' the integrity of the watercourse is preserved so that the permitted excavation area shall continue to receive and release floodwaters in a manner equal to the ' established norm prior to any excavation. Further, such excavations shall not create a potential hazard to adjacent properties resulting from flood or erosion conditions . (b) Landfills that do not encroach upon an area subject to -FP1 District reculaticc:- , ' that do not ,cause floodwaters to be diverted onto adjacent properties , that are protected against erosion from floodwaters , and that do not increase the elevation of the design flood by more than one ( 1) foot at any point, or that can fully provide for the design flood by means of watercourse improvements. (c) New structures and improvements permitted by the base zoning district ,"hich co►::rly ; © with the standards of construction for an -FP2 area. (d) Mobilehome when permitted by the base district and which comply with the standards ' of construction for such mobilehomes located in an -FP2 area. S. 969.6. 15 -FP2 USES PROHIBITED. The following uses are specifically prohibited to an - combining district: (a) Landfills , excavations , improvements ,. developments , or encroachments that will obstruct or create debris-catching obstacles to passage of the design flood or that cause a cumulative increase in the elevation of the design floodwater ,rofiie more than one ( 1) foot at any point or that will tend to broaden or direct flood flows out of the natural floodplain, or otherwise cause a potential hazard to life or propert- resulting from flood flows wi ,hin an -FP2 combining district. (b) All uses not permitted by section 969.6. 14. S. 969.6. 16 -FP3 USES PERMITTED. All uses permitted in the base zoning district regulations which comply with the standards of construction for -FP3 ,,.,,,,areas are permitted in an -FP3 combining district subject to approval of a ceveloprent ' permit, as provided by this article. S. 969.6. 17 -FP3 USES PROHIBITED. All Uses not permitted by section 969.6. i6 are prohibited in an -FP3 ccmbining district. PLANNING MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 969.6. 19(3) (ii ). i ii Shall have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and no, iii ) Shall be certified by a registered engineer or-architect that the standard, ' of this subsection are satisfied. Such certifications shall be furnished the Director of Development Services as required by this article. (4) Mobilehomes shall meet the above standards as well as those prescribed for mobilehomes, mobilehome parks and -zubdivisions contained in this article. (5) Structures in coastal high hazard areas shall meet the standards established by this article for such structures. (d) Standards for Utilities: ( 1) All new and replacement water supply and sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system and discharge from systems into flood waters. (2) On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. (e) Standards for Subdivisions : ' ( 1) All preliminary subdivision proposals shall identify the flood hazard area and the elevation of the base flood. ' (2) All final subdivision plans shall provide the elevation of proposed structures and pads . If the site is filled above the base flood, the final pad Elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and fur-nisFed to the ' Director of Development Services as required by this article. (3) All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with. the need_ to minimize flood damage; and ND (4) All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as ' sewer, gas, electrical , and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage. (f) Standards for Mobilehomes , Mobilehome Parks and Subdivisions : (1) All mobilehomes and additions to mobilehomes shall be anchored to resist flotation, collapse, or lateral movement by one of the following -'ethods : i (i ) By providing an anchoring system designed to withstand horizontal forces of 15 pounds per square foot and uplift forces of 9 pounds per square foot; or (ii ) By anchoring the unit' s system to comply with the Department of Mousing and Development' s Mobilehome Construction and Safety Standards. (2) The installer or state agency responsible for regulating the placement, installation and anchoring of individual mobilehome units shall furnisn ' 1 certification of compliance with the above standards to the Director of Development Services . ' 1/83 S. .969.6. 19( f)(3) MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS PLANNII;G (3) The following standards are required for (a) mobilehomes not placed in monile- home parks or subdivisions ; (b) new mobilehome parks or subdivisions ; (. expansions to existing mobilehome parks or subdivisions ; and ( I repair, reconstruction , or improvements to existing mobilehome parks or subdivisionS that equal or exceed 50 percent of the value of the streets , utilities and pads before the repair, reconstruction or improvement commenced: M Adequate surface drainage and access for a hauler shall be provided. ' (ii ) All mobilehomes shall be placed on pads or lots elevated on compactea fill or on pilings so that the lowest floor of the mobilehome is at or above the base flood level . If elevated on pilings: ' (aa) The lots shall be large enough to permit steps; (bb) The pilings shall be placed in stable soil no more than ten feet apart; and (cc) Reinforcement shall be provided for pilings more than six feet r © above the ground level . (4) Certification of compliance is required of the developer responsible for the plan, or state agency responsible for regulating mobilehome place,7--,-=nt. S. 969.6.20 STANDARDS OF CONSTRUCTIONS FOR THE -FP3 AREA. ' (a) Location of Structures: _ (1) All buildings or structures shall be located landward of reach, of the -nean high tide. (2) The placement of mobilehomes shall be prohibited except in an existing ' mobilehome park or mobilehome subdivision. 0 (b) Construction Methods: ( 1) Elevation. All buildings or structures shall be elevated so that the lowest supporting member is located no lower than the base flood elevation level with all space below the lowest supporting member open so as not to impede the flow of water, except for breakaway walls as specified in this section. (2) Structural Support. M All buildings or structures shall be securely anchored on pilings or columns. (ii ) Pilings or columns used as structural support shall be designed and anchored so as to withstand all impact forces and buoyancy factors of ' the base flood. ( iii ) There shall be no fill used for structural support. ' (3) Certification. Compliance with subsections (b) ( 1) and (b) (2) of this section shall be certified by a registered engineer or architect and such certifica- tion furnished to the Director of Development Services as required by this article. 1/23 1 NG MISCELLANEOUS DISTRICTS S. 969.6.20 b PLANNING E ( ) ' (4) Space Below the Lowest Floor. (i ) Any alteration, repair, reconstruction or improvement to a structure started after the enactment of this article , shall not enclose the spacc- below the lowest floor unless breakaway walls are used as specified in this section. Breakaway walls may be allowed below the base flood elevation provided they .:re not a part of the structural support of the building and are designed to break away under abnormally high tides or wave action withOL damage to the structural integrity of the building on which they are to be used. (iii ) If breakaway walls are utilized, such enclosed space shall not be.-used for human habitation. ' S. 969.6.21 VARIANCE PROCEDURE. The Planning Cominiss-ion shall hear and decide- all requests for variance. A variance may only be issued upon; - (a) A showing of good and sufficient cause; .-(b) A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant; and (c) A determination that the granting of a variance will pith result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, and will not create a nuisance, cause fraud or victimize the public, or conflict with exist ing local laws or ordinances. All applications for a variance shall be accompanied by a fee, established by resolution of the City Council , to cover administrative costs. Only the absolute minimal variance shall be granted and variances shall only be granted to the extent necessary. Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate with the increases risk resulting from such variance. S. 969.6.22 APPEALS. The Planning Commission shall hear and decide appeals from any decision of the Director of Development Services pursuant to ' provisions of this code. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Commission may appeal to the City Council . Appeals shall be accompanied by a processing fee established by resolution of the City Council . S. 969.6.23 RECORDS. The Director of Development Services shall maintain the records of all appeals and variance proceedings and shall report ' any variance to the Federal Insurance Admin'stration upon request. f � 11r•1 '.���•• :;fir ;'i;;�',' '��'j�. � � �1 , •r .YY 7" �r I �1 r1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Gov*r"r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1120 N STREET -: SACRAMENTO.CALIFORNIA 9581A (916) 445-4771 June 13 , 1983 7-Ora-1 19 . 8/25. 9 07210 - 499850 �. Pacific Coast Hwy. Between Newport-Blvd. (Rte. 55)' and Golden Bruce E. Cannon West Street Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Sacramento, California - Attention Robert L. Cady (7) Dear Mr. Cannon: Response to USFWS Jeopardy Opinion #1-1-82-F-112 At the time of the initial consultation, certain information was provided to USF&WS which resulted in a jeopardy opinion with respect to the continued existence of the California Least Tern (CLT) , Sterna albifrons browni. Since= that time, the project has been redefined and the following data is submitted for review and possible modification of the jeopardy opinion. This data will follow the same format as that used in the impact analysis section of the letter from the USF&WS dated June 6 , 1982 (attached) . The Santa Ana River (SAR) complex will not be dewatered as pre- viously thought. Instead, a temporary wooden trestle will be installed from which five 16 ' x 50 ' cofferdams will be constructed. (See attached plan. ) These cofferdams will be the only portion of the SAR complex which would be dewatered. This dewatering will have an insig-inficant impact on the flow regime of the SAR complex. The ocean side of the new bridge will be constructed first, from August 1 to April 1 to minimize construction-related impacts on the CLT. Once the ocean side half of the bridge is completed, traffic will be rerouted from the old bridge onto the new bridge. The temporary wooden construction trestle will then be removed and reinstalled on the inland side of the old bridge. At this time, the old bridge will be removed and the second half of the new bridge constructed. No time limits have been placed on the construction of this half of the bridge, as it is felt that its construction- related impacts are sufficiently removed from the Least Tern Nesting Area (LTNA) as to be of little or no significance. Bruce E. Cannon Page 2 June 13 , 1983 The long-term impacts of the new bridge are also not as extensive as identified earlier. The existing bridge currently covers approximately 18 ,700 square feet (0 . 43 acres) . The proposed bridge would cover approximately 39,600 square feet (0.-91 acres) . . This is a change of 20, 900 square feet (0.48 acres) . The impact may not be confined to the additional bridge area alone. Some ' researchers feel that the tern will not feed in a strip of the channel parallel to each side of the bridge. This strip has been termed "dead zone" and is thought to be a function of the height of the structure. Since the new bridge will be six feet higher than the existing, the "dead zone" may increase by as much as 20 feet on each side of the new structure. Using a minimum of zero and a maximum of 40 extra feet of "dead zone" , the range of feeding area to be removed by the project will be 0. 48 to 0.81 acres. Roughly 70 acres of feeding area is available to the tern in three close inland locations: 1) The Santa Ana River and Banning Channel between the ocean and Hamilton Avenue; 2) Talbert Channel between the ocean and Brockhurst Street; and, 3) Seminoluk Slough. These ' are not the only inland feeding areas avaAable to this colony, but probably constitute the major areas. t The near shore ocean seemed to be the most important feeding area during most of the studies conducted at this colony. This, however, should not diminish the importance of the inland feeding areas. Terns, like other larids, are opportunistic and will feed where fishing is easiest. The river channel is also an important training area for the young terns as they begin foraging. The existing bridge, with its bike bridge, is approxirately 310 , feet from the closest corner of the LTNA. The proposed bridge will be 254 feet from the LTNA, 56 feet closer. The noise levels are predicted to increase 2 dBA over the projected no project alternative as a result of the proposed bridge. This increase should not have an impact on the CLT; however, noise impacts on the CLT have not been thoroughly investigated so the 2 dBA may have do impact that is as of yet unidentified. We believe that the changes that have been made in the project will enable a conclusion that the project will no longer jeopardize the continued existence of the tern. If USF&WSknetds further clarification or still has a problem with any aspect of this project, please have them contact Mr. Chuck Morton at (213) 620-3992 or Mr- Stan Ford ' (916) 445-4771. Bruce E. Cannon Page 3 June 13 , 1983 1 Upon your concurrence, please use this information to request the Fish and Wildlife Service to continue our consultation on this project. Sincerely, E. W. BLACRMER, Chief - Office of Environmental Analysis Attachments SGF:kp bcc: CMorton SBrown RGiess SFord OEA File DTheobald •* =�-: United States (Department of the Interior A !-' FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - - C'.1 P `a Area Office _ �.nph;il 2800 Cottage Way, Room I L803 _ _ , 23 _ Sacramento, California 95825 _ 4 PROG 0 _ - - - In reply refer to: SFSO — G?ER 1 ER _ -- #1-L-82-F-112 .•!„ I {� I 7i Mr. Bruce E. Cannon ` V U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration i C Region Nine-California Division P.O. Box 1915 Sacramento, California 95809 I Subject: Section 7 Endangered Species Formal Consultation on the Transportation Improvement Project on Route 1, Orange County, ' California Dear Mr. Cannon: This responds to your request, dated 30 March 1982, for formal ' consultation on the subject project, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In question are the eEfr,cts of constructing a new bridge along Route 1 over the mouth of the Santa Ana River,. on the California least tern (CLT) (Sterna albifruns browni) . a Included with your letter of 30 March 1982, inLtLating formal consultation, were two copies of the Biological Assessment for the subject project. This information, in addition to subsequent phone conversations with your office, least tern experts, and Cal Trans staff C ' (Harold Hunt) , and data in our Service files, provided the basis for developLnb this Biological Opinion. , Biological Opinion Based on the impact analysis given below, it is o,ir Biological Opinion that the subject project is likely to jeopardLze the continued existence of' the California least tern. t Project Description The project is to improve a 6-mile stretch of the Pacific Coast Highway between Route 55 in Newport !leach and Golden West Street in lluntingtuct Beach. A number of alternatives are being considered but to date, none has been selected as the preferred alternative. According; to the Biological Assessment , a new bridge will he constructed across the mouth of the Santa Ana River, regardless of the project alternative selected. The new bridge would be designed to accommodate. the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers flood control project currently in planning stages in the Los Angeles Engineer District.'- -The bridge would cover about 48,000 square ' feet, an increase of about 25,500 square feet over the existing bridge. Telephone conversations with Cal Trans staff revealed that design specifications for the bridge are not yet complete. However, it is known that the Santa Ana River and presumably the Talbert and Banning flood control channels will have to be dewatered to enable bridge construction. Dams will probably be required upstream and downstream from the bridge. Dewatering of the Santa Ana River would be necessary during the least tern nesting season. Construction time to replace the- existing bridge is expected to be about 250 working days--or about one year. Depending on when construction begin:;, more than one least tern nesting season could be disrupted by project related activities. Species Account Once widespread and common along the central and sn„thern California coast, to the extent of being described as "numberless" (Bent 1921) , the California least tern population declined to a known low point of between 623 and 763 breeding pairs around 1973 (Bender 1974) . Since then, because of a variety of management-efforts made possible by its designation as an endangered species, the CLT has steadily increased in abundance to an estimated breeding population of 975 pairs in 1981. This species has been on both State and Federal endangered species lists since 1970. Sandy beaches close to estuaries along the coast of southern California have traditionally served as nesting sites for the least tern. Human pressure to develop beaches for recreational, residential and industrial purposes has steadily reduced the number of suitable nesting areas. These migratory birds usually arrive at the nesting colonies in late April and complete their breeding cycle by the end of August. The breeding range of the CLT in the U.S. extends from San Francisco Bay to the Mexican border. Least terns feed almost exclusively on small fish common to nearshore waters, shallow bays, and estuaries. After eggs hatch, breeding adults catch and deliver small fish to their flightless young. The young begin flying at about 20 days of age, but are not yet efficient foragers. Parents must continue to feed both themselves and their young even after the young fledge. Reproductive success in most colonies is, therefore, closely related to the availahClity of an unmolested nestinS site and the accessibility of an adequate supply of small fish. The California least tern nesting colony at the mouth of the Santa Ana River is one that declined to near extinction because of the loss of both nesting and feeding habitat. Only a remnant of the once extensive salt marsh system at the river mouth remains. 'Whereas several hundred least terns nested in the Huntington Beach sanctuary at the river mouth 10 years previously, only five pairs attempted breeding in 1974. Since ' I -3- 1975 however, this colony has recovered to be the second largest colony in California. In 1981,, between 105 and 120 pairs fledged about 168 young from the Huntington-Seach colony. Two of the more important ' factors contributing to the recovery of this colony are the increased size of the available nesting area, the installation of an improved fenced nesting enclosure, and the presence of a normally dependable, nearby food source. The Santa Ana River, along with the Talbert and Banning Channels, is well documented as important foraging habitat for terns nesting at the river mouth (Collins et al. 1979; Massey and Atwood 1981) . Impact Analysis Within the overall 6 mile project corridor, only disturbance and habitat ' loss associated with bridge construction across the Santa Ana River would result in impacts to the CLT. Because of the lack of specific information available on the bridge design, and because dewatering of the river and the two flood control channels would be necessary for bridge construction (Hunt, pers. comm.) , we must assume a worst case ' scenario in our impact analysis. Dewatering would result in the temporary loss of an undetermined amount of tern foraging habitat. This loss remains undel ermined because there are no specific project designs completed at this' time. We assume this loss is foraging habitat will occur during the nesting season because the construction period will extend for at least 1 year, and dewatering ' would occur during the dry season (spring through fall) to avoid flooding hazards during the wet season. Flows in possibly all three flood control channels would be impounded (or diverted) at some point upstream of the bridge crossing, and either the "natural" sand bar or additional obstructions would be required at the river mouth to exclude tidal waters from the construction zone. Thus, an unknown amount of important tern foraging habitat, extending from the river-ocean interface to some point inland of the bridge would be destroyed for at least one tern breeding season. It is conceivable that dewatering could be necessary during more than one tern breeding season if there were construction delays. Collins et al. 1979, and Massey and Atwood 1981, quantified the amount of least tern foraging in the Santa Ana River mouth. Although they found that least terns foraged to a greater extent in near-shore ocean waters than in the river channel area (at least during the years of the studies) , it would be a mistake to under-estimate the importance of ' riverine and estuarine habitats to least tern foraging ecology. The absence (due to past destruction) of any significant estuarine ecosystem near the Huntington Beach ternery and many other least tern breeding colonies, cripples our ability to study and understand the h.ihi.:at preferences and ecological values of these wetlands to least terns (Massey and Atwood 1981) . Protection and restoration of remnant estuarine ecosystems may well be critical to the long term Survival of , the CLT. The importance of the availability of alternative foraging; habitats is being exemplified this year (the L982 tern breeding season) , as northern anchovy (Engraulis morciax) abundance appears very low in ocean waters and least terns •.ire showing indications of food stress (abnormally high numbers of dead chicks, probably caused by starvation) . The fact that the CLT, throughout its range, invariably nests close to estuaries indicates a strong dependence on thesO habitats for suitable prey and probably for other less obvious reasons. To even temporarily (one breeding season) eliminate the availability of such important foraging habitat at the Huntington Beach least tern colony poses a real threat to tern reproductive success for at least one year, to population recruitment for several to many years, and potentially threatens the continued integrity of the ternery and thus, the long term survival of the CLT. There would also be long term impacts on least terns relating to the size and alignment of the new bridge. The bridge would cover about 48,000 square feet, compared to the 22,500 square- feet occupied by the existing bridge. This would result in a permanent loss of about 25,500 square feet of feeding habitat. In addition, Cal Trans field studies have noted that there is an effective buffer zone or "dead space" on either side of the existing bridge in which terns do not feed. These preliminary studies indicate that this "dead space" approximates 50 feet in width. This aversion is also noted by the fact that least terns, as well as other larids, never fly under the bridge; rather, as they approach it, least terns gain altitude and then descend again after flying over the bridge, resuming normal foraging behavior. Thus, in figuring the permanent loss in foraging habitat, one must include this "dead space", in addition to the area actually covered by the bridge. Just as important, or even more-so, all of the proposed bridge expansion (the additonal 25,500 square feet) would occur on the side closest to the ternery. According to the Biological Assessment and conversations with Cal Trans staff, the new bridge would be built approximately 100 feet closer to the tern colony than the old bridge. With a "dead space" of about 50 feet added to this intrusion, this would result in a significant encroachment (60 percent closer) on the nesting colony, 1 since the existing bridge and dead space is effectively only 250 feet from the ternery. Preliminary studies by Cal Trans show that noise levels from vehicular traffic associated with the new alignment would probably increase by 3-4 decibels. It is difficult to predict the degree of threat posed by these impacts, or other unforeseen impacts that might occur during actual bridge construction. The important point - is that this disturbance and habitat loss would occur as close as 100 fret from tern nesting colony, all in important foraging habitat. We must assume, because of the lack of data to the contrary, and the potential for significant adverse impacts, that at the least, breeding success would be affected, and at the worst, other more far-reaching impacts, could threaten the welface of the Huntington Beach nesttit,, colony. ' Biological Opinion Based on the preceding analysis, it is our Biological Opinion that the subject project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the California least tern. Loss of foraging area, and construction disturbance for one or possibly two nesting seasons, as well as encroachment into the foraging habitat of the CLT, could significantly reduce the liklihood of continued productivity at the Huntington Beach least tern colony. r -5- I The 1978 amendments to the Endangered Species Act include a mandate that "reasonable and prudent .alternatives" be suggested when a Biological Opinion indicates jeopardy to a listed species. "Reasonable and prudent alternatives" refer to alternative courses of action open to the Federal agency with respect to an activity or program that are technically capable of being implemented and consistent with the intended primary purpose of the activity or program. We propose an alternative that is similar to the one implemented in connection with our formal consultation (1-L-79-F-26) on the Orange County Flood Control Project on the Santa Ana River in 1979 (Corps of Engineers Permit No. 78-153) . To allow completion of flood control work (including dewatering the river channel) during the least tern nesting ' season, without threatening the continued existence of the CLT, alternate feeding habitat wus provided on a 17 acre are.1 Immediately across the Pacific Coast Highway from the Huntington Beach CLT colony - (Figure 1 and 2) . This temporary marsh restoration (designed by B. Massey) was so successful in terms of least tern use as alternate foraging habitat, that it is appropriate to use essentially the same plan again (Massey pers. comm.) . The following guidelines and the ' attached Specifications and Maps, depict our recommendation. It will allow bridge construction and dewatering. during the least tern nesting 4. season by providing short and long term foraging habitat restitution. 1. Appropriate individuals, assisted by representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) , will supervise on-site construction and ' overall implementation of the plarF. Ms. Barbara Massey, a least tern researcher from Long Beach, has performed such work in the past and has offered to supervise this effort. She can be reached at 213/431-9635. 2. Cal Trans will be responsible for restoring tidal influence and salt marsh conditions in the designated area (Figure 1 and 2) according to the specifications and designs attached herein. 3. This 17 acre marsh restoration will be preserved in perpetuity following bridge construction, being maintained by Cal Trans or by a fish and wildlife agency, to benefit least terns and other wetland dependent wildlife. 4. Excess fill and foreign debris will he removed from the site, or used to construct a flood protection levee along Brookhurst Blvd. , or other appropriate location agreeable to our Service, to alleviate possible flooding hazards, if deemed necessary by the Corps of Engineers and Orange County Flood Control District. 5. The reintroduction of tidal influence, and other stipulated marsh restoration work will he completed before bridge construction or dewatering of the river channel begins. 6. The tidal regime in Talbert Channel must not be altered during the construction period. , -6- 7. In the event that natural rainfall is not sufficient to fill the two freshwater ponds adequately (Figure 2, Ponds 13 and 14) , Cal Trans will be required •to provide freshwater in the ponds to such a depth as to support populations of mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) . 8.' Cal Trans will provide or arrange to be provided, stocks of mosquito fish for introduction into Ponds 13 and 14 (Figure 2) . The quantity and timetable for stocking will he as stipulated by the CDFG and the FWS. The fish stocking operation will continue at least until construction related disturbance has ended. 9. The alternate feeding habitat (Ponds 13 and 14-Figure 2) must be usable by the least tern (i.e. , containing sufficient numbers of fish to support the breeding colony) before dewatering of the Santa Ana River mouth begins. Construction that may disturb least tern nesting or feeding behavior will not begin until the FWS and CDFG have assessed the viability of the alternate feeding site. 10. A new S foot chain link fence, or repairs to the existing chain link fence, which ever is more feasible, will be provided to keep human related disturbance out of the 17 acre marsh restoration area. 11. Certain aspects of the previous marsh restoration effort did not conform to the specified slopes and configuration given in Figure 2. In every detail, the project should conform to the guidelines given in Figure-2 and the :attached list of specifications. We request that this formal consultatton remain open past release of, this Biological Opinion so that continued coordination can take place. We would appreciate notification of your intent in light of this opinion. If you have any question, please contact Peter Sorensen at FTS 448-2791 or (916/440-2791) . Sincerely yours, y Area Manager \ cc: Director, Washington, D.C. (OES) Regional Director, Portland, OR (aFA-SE) Field Supervisor, Zcological Services, Laguna Niguel, CA (ES-LN) Attachment to Figure 2 SPECIFICATIONS ' I . Two openings from Talbert Channel , each with two 41 ( internal diameter) culverts, bases to be set at -1 .0' Mean Sea Level (MSL) on the marsh side, slanting to -1 .5' MSL on the channel side. 2. Approximately 3,800' of tidal channels in an undulating pattern, 10' wide at the base, with sloping sides at about 4: 1 . 3. Three sets of shallow pools in replicates of three, oval in shape, ' approximately 15' x 501 , of varying depths and dug from several elevations. Pools to be located in widened places in the tidal channels. 4. Two pools, 20' x 20' x 5' deep, one at each entrance from Talbert Channel . 5. One pool 20' x 100' x 4' deep, in central cross channel . 6. Three mudflats, at elevations 1 .0' , 1 .51 , and Z.0' MSL. 7. Non-saitmarsh vegetation to be removed from elevated areas between channels and other designated-areas. 8. High ground not to exceed 5' MSL in areas between the channels. 9. Two depressions on high ground 20' x 70' x 1 .5' deep, line with non-porous material , for freshwater ponds for fish. 10. The entire periphery Is to be fenced with chain link material 5' in height. . - r r i ! • � � mil�'�I _- •• . — -� ill ;, •/ �r::•,_c» .� \�— r �• j I' �i /�' 7 ' AZ" in a � ' E f �- II ��'�f • -"f�1/1/• l r f i 4�� . •'«•_ ;13 orn----- I !' �:�---��; •�.!1;,91ti.1"—� v TGi . to AV IL WT t .. t� ` ,l aQ' Sze`` Q �I E.oa ` �/ q ���' I �_ �•Q �` IjI —��3 Zit �►�- )Z �aI � F _•+i SEWA- Ponda 1978- s .� �. s r Site of Alternate Feeding Area � _` :y .` • _ H.B. Least Tern " �` ) i' r`�' •%�`r'•'�"`I\ -- �� J Colony21 Santa Ana River Mouth • ;i�• �-� �=��' — Figure 1 . Location- f -lternate Least ^21, — •s Tern Feeding Area and Huntington Beach Nesting Colony `. I CALIFORNIA DIVISION P. 0. Box 1915 Sacramento, California 95809 March 30; 1982' 8B-CA Mr. William Sweeney, Area ?tanager File: K 5001(14) H. S.- Fish & Wildlife Service _ Endangered Species - I= 8 Street Consultation Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Mr. Sweeney: Enelosed are two copies of the Biological Assessment for the transportation ' improvement project on Routs 1 in Orange County. The project limits extend -�- from Route 55 in Newport Beach to Golden Hest Street in. Huntington Beach. The Biological Assessment indicated that the project may impact the California leant tern population in the area. 'therefore, we request that the consulta- tion process be initiated. If you have may question, plasm* contact Mr. -Raymond Okinaga at (916) 440-3578. -- Sincerely yours, -RAYMOND I. OKJNAG.i ' For Bruce E. Cannon Division Administrator Eae losnra � ec: Caltrsns, Asa Barkley FETA, Ray Okinaga t PZK leskovic:ms r STATE OF CAUFORN1A—AUSINESS AND TRANSP08ATION AGENCY EOMUND G BROWN 14 G*WW* r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF TRANSPORTATION PLANNING y J r 1120 N STREET - .. _r "c P.O. so 14" SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA 95807 a L r r.,:+• >.w. A(916) 445-7111 r ' dv .r r ✓moo - - T ILI - - f •- -.% ` y 4 .� - _-' -- •.S• - Y��-•a•a:-tom*.. �= tzi• '•' .*•� a: '�- ,?• Jaya` Y March 10, 1982 _ 07-Ora-1 19.9/25 .9 ' a ' r.y .:F - 7 - �. Q 10 4998 2 50ss = C Mr. Bruce E. Cannon Division Adminstrator " Federal Highway Administration -'Sacramento, CA 95814 "� - ' ' ' `=" -" Dear Mr. Cannon: Request for Endangered Species Consul tation`T - }. ._.?: � .-.y.--__ --:.__ _[`.0 -.: =^•-_� - __--' �S•--v'c-.'. r• - a' ^�' -- :.....• „ .,.-• .`-- : '--}....i_'a_.-�....:• -1F.,.-�•1� �'""'►'�-`'`'-'a�yda�{�`f Caltrans is investigating` various alternatives' to 'improving;araffic ;.4 flow along a 6 mile section of the Pacific Coast Highway in Huntington p- Beach and Newport Beach, Orange Comity,- California.-. -All of the alternatives except the "No Project" will necessitate replacement 1 - of the bridge over the Santa Ana River. A Biological Assessment has been performed by the Caltrans' ,District.=Q7"" staff. - The conclusion of this assessment is that the bridge replace-. ment portion of this project may have a short-term and long-term impact on the California least tern, (Sterna albifrons browni) . s This bridge' is over a' feeding area of the least tern'and within approximately 200' feet of the Least Tern Nesting Refuge on Huntington ' Beach State Park. Since bridge construction will take a full year, construction activity will occur during one breeding season .which may have a short-term impact on the tern. A long-term impact may occur when the new bridge is widened 'which will remove about 0.6 acres of feeding area from the mouth of the Santa Ana River. It is not known if feeding area is the limiting factor influencing this tern population so it is not possible to predict what effect . the removal of 0. 6 acres from the feeding area will have - _ M�. 1 ,! Mr. Bruce E. Cannon _Page 2 t March 10, 1982 , The -attached Biological Assessment . (4 copies) is being sent in accordance with paragraph 402.4 (al (11of the Interagency Cooperation Regulations published in the January 41 1918 Federal Register-. for :; < = r. Jam^'_-•, -��- -implementation of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of .1973. y�.��.��;•-- .'Please begin the consultation process directly with the SacramentoF r, _office of the Fish and Wildlife Service at your earliest convenience:' further information is required, please contact Stan Ford of .'staff at (916) 445-4771. Sincerely, Original Signed by �`• %�' W.H. Hagen �•• ANN B /Ei - - �- - �•-- Chief Atta hments • .,�. I.w r r.. a e ���,r �•��.: p bcc: < < RSteele - 07 BGiess i ,~ SFord Rsmith AMoore :. f llOTP File Environmental File Alan Craig _ I California Fish and Game y (Non-Game Section) - -- 1416 Ninth Street, 12th Floor s Sacramento, CA 95814 - Or United States Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior Uoyd 500 Building, Suite 1692 0 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland.Oregon 97232 In Reply Refer To: AFA-SE Your Reference: August 18, 1983 1-1-82-F-112 Mr. Bruce E. Cannon Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Region Nine, California Division P.O. Box 1915 Sacramento, California 95809 Dear Mr. Cannon: Subject: Continuation of Formal Endangered Species Consultation on the ' Route 1 Transportation Improvement Project, Orange County, California This replies to your request of June 17, 1983, for reconsideration of our June 6, 1982 Biological Opinion (1-1-8Z-F-112) , which suggested a reasonable and prudent alternative to offset project impacts that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the California least tern (CLT) (Sterna antillarum (= albifrons) browni ) . Attached to your June 17, 1983 letter was a modified project proposal submitted by CalTrans (in a letter dated June 13, 1983) that was designed to eliminate those aspects of the original project that jeopardize the CLT. Specifically, rather than dewatering the entire Santa Ana River . Channel in the vicinity of the project during construction, CalTrans now proposes to construct five temporary 16-foot x 50-foot cofferdams to exclude water from around the areas where bridge pilings would be built in the channel . Thus, with the new design, the flow regime of the Santa Ana River complex would not be significantly altered during construction. Also, construction of the new bridge closest to the Huntington Beach CLT nesting colony would be scheduled from August 1 to April 1, avoiding the CLT nesting season. Second phase bridge construction, furthest away from the tern colony, would occur during the CLT nesting season, under the assumption that construction disturbance would-be- far enough removed from the tern colony so that it would not affect tern nesting success. Including a "dead zone" of 70 feet on either side of the new bridge, in which least terns would probably not feed, the new bridge would eliminate about 0.81 acres of CLT foraging habitat in excess of what the existing bridge currently covers. The proposed bridge would also be about 65 feet closer to the CLT nesting colony than the existing bridge (245 feet, rather than 310 feet) . Mr. Bruce E. Cannon, Federal Highway Administration - 1-1-82-F-112 In examining the modified construction proposal , we find that those features of the original project which jeopardize the continued existence of the CLT have been eliminated--dewatering the entire river ' channel and construction close to the CLT colony during the nesting season. Thus, the construction proposal described in the CalTrans letter of June 13, 1983 constitutes a reasonable and prudent alternative that is in conformance with our Biological Opinion on this project. There would remain, however, a permanent loss of 0.81 acres of tern foraging habitat from the modified project. Because this loss would adversely affect the CLT (although not sufficiently to result in a jeopardy situation) , it should be compensated for. Thus, in furtherance of the purposes of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Sections 2(c) and 7(a) (I) ) , which mandates Federal agencies to use their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation and recovery of listed species, we recommend that FHWA require CalTrans to compensate for the loss of CLT foraging habitat by accomplishing recommendations I and 3 below as our first preference, which would increase the potential for recovery. However, if accomplishment of I and 3 are unacceptable, then 2 and 3 will provide for the conservation of the species. , 1) Restore the 17 acres as recommended in our original reasonable and prudent alternative. I 2) Restore about 0.81 acres in either or each of the following areas : a) the 17 acre site; b) Victoria Street Pond; c) the Power Plant Pond at (near) the Southern California Edison facility. 3) Enlarge the Huntington Beach CLT colony by moving the fence on the seaward side of the enclosure 65 feet closer to the ocean to compensate for the bridge being moved 65 feet closer to the CLT colony. This concludes formal consultation on this project. If the proposal is significantly modified in a manner not discussed above or if new information becomes available on listed species or impacts to listed species, reinitiati.on of formal consultation with this Service should be considered. We would appreciate notification of your final decision on this project. If you have any questions, please contact either Gail Kobetich, Project Leader, or Peter Sorensen at FTS 448-2791 (916/440-2791) . Sincerely urs, ' Acting fo William F. Shake Assistan Regional Director Federal Assistance