Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MAE IRWD
111111111 lill 11111111111111111111111111 lill III lill ft " 4 once na�m Ha1}H gSIPJf7' IRYINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT March 7, 1979 City of Newport Beach CommunityDevelopment 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attn: Fred Talanico P.O. Box D-I.4201 Campus Drive • Irvine, Calif. 92716 • (714) 833.1223 Re: NOTICE OF COMPLETION/TRANSMITTAL IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Gentlemen: RECEIy Y D Co„u+Lrnj yD ev�I pl jent 41AR9 7979... H'EW4p� Br � �arrl=. PL 1.1 The Board of Directors of the Irvine Ranch Water District, at its August•28; 1978 meeting, authorized a program to prepare a Master Environmental Assess- ment (MEA) for the District. Section 15069.6 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, which is advisory in nature, encourages the preparation of MEA's, but does not pre- scribe the content, format, or procedures to be used in the development of such documents. The District's primary aim in preparing an MEA is to develop an inventory, or data base, of the environmental characteristics of the District which can be used to generate input parameters in the planning and design of future facilities. The MEA is also intended to provide information that can be used in initial studies and as a central source of current infor- mation that can be used or referenced in preparing individual EIR's and Negative Declarations that may be required for specific projects at a later date. In order to elicit input from affected agencies and interest groups early in the MEA development process, a "Notice of Preparation" was sent to re- sponsible agencies and interested individuals. The Draft MEA has now been completed and is being transmitted to you for your review and comment. The IRWD at its option, has decided to implement a review procedure for the MEA which is the same as the procedure for review- ing an EIR as set forth in CEQA and the State EIR Guidelines. The following review schedule has been established: Page two PL 1.1 Date Actions March 21, 1979 Last day for written comments to be received for consideration by public hearing. March 26, 1979 Public hearing. April 20, 1979 Last day for receipt of all comments on ,Draft MEA (45-day review period). Please direct your written responses to: Mr. Art Korn, Secretary Irvine Ranch Water District P.O. Box D-1 Irvine, CA 92716 (714) 833-1223 If'you have any questions, please contact Rodney L. DuBois. Sincerely, RVINE RANCH WATER ISTRICT William J. Sot Jr. Assistant General Manager WJS/RLD:pah Master Environmental Assessment- tar464MUS 94 IRVINE RANCH WATER MSTRICT Prepared by LSA / PBR LSA • 500 Newport Center Drive. Suite 525 • Newport Beacn CA 92660 • �7141 640-6363 PBR • 90t Dove Street Suite 260 • Newport Beach CA 92660 • 'ra: --9223 n RFo�/V� • b ocv 4o unityU MAC j ep men 9c�. s 197 N@gyp lTY of oqVCH,or? • R&ILLIA BRANDY REDDICK LARRY SEEMAN ASSOCIATES • • DRAFT MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA • Prepared by Larry Seeman Associates, Inc. in Association with Phillips Brandt Reddick • February 1, 1979 '• LSA • 500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 525 • Newport Beach, CA 92660 • (714) 640-6363 • PBR • 901 Dove Street, Suite 260 • Newport Beach, CA 92660 • (714) 752-9223 C C 1• I• I• I• I• PBR LSA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Report Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Findings . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INVENTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS AND IMPACT REPORTS . . . . . Setting .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . EARTHRESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Geologic Setting . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Paleontological Resources Setting . . . . . . . Seismic Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Soils Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . WATER RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Surface Hydrology Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water Quality Setting . . . . . . . . . . Groundwater Setting • . • . • • • • . • • . Applicable Laws or PlanningPolicies . . . . . . . . . . . ... . BIOTIC RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Setting •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . ARCHAEOLOGY/HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Archaeological Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Historical Setting .• . . . . . . • . • • . Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 1 1 2 8 28 22 22 29 35 39 40 42 42 49 57 58 61 61 84 92 92 97 100 I0 I• 1• 1• 1• I• I• I• • PBR LSA RELEVANT PLANNING PROGRAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Federal Planning Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Site Planning Programs . . . . 108 Local Agencies . . . . . . . . 108 DEMOGRAPHY, LAND USE AND GROWTH TRENDS . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 Historical Perspective . . . . . . . . . 115 Existing Development ... . 118 Recent Trends in Land Use and Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 Population and Housing Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Housing Needs Assessment Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AND TRAFFIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Regional Transportation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Local Circulation Systems . . . 141 Transit Routes and Plans . . . 141 Planning and Development Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 AIRRESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Climate Setting . . . . . . . 146 Air Quality Setting . . . . 153 Applicable Laws and Planning Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 NOISE............................... 158 Setting . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 158 Applicable Laws and DevelopmentPolicies . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 UTILITIES AND CONSERVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Setting .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Development Monitoring Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 PARTICIPANTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . 218 I0 C [7 I• :7 :7 ;7 • • PBR LSA LIST OF TABLES Table Page No. A General Plan Elements and CEQA Determinations . . . . . . 9 B San Diego Creek Drainage Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 C Drainage Areas . 45 D Designated Drainage Area; 46 E Principal Water Bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 F Beneficial Uses of Water . . . . . 54 G Agencies/Groups with Permit Review or Ownership Jurisdiction over Surface and Ground Water Resources 59 H Agencies with Specific Permit Authority -60 I Total County Coverage and Percent of County Total for Major Community Types within Study Area, 1963 . . . . 64 J Areas of Special Biological Significance and/or K Sensitivity . . . . Species of Special �Status and/or�Concern ands . . 80 their Occurrent within IRWD . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 L Laws Governing Land Use Decisions : . . . . . . . . . . . 106 M Existing Development within IRWD . . . . . . . . 120 N IRWD Compilation of TIC and Local Agencies Residential Population Projections . . . . 126 0-1- City of Irv-ine Cumulative Growth Projections . . . . 127 0-2 City of Irvine Phasing of Population and Residential Development .. . . . . . 127 P Projected Ultimate Land Use: City and Sphere . . . . . . 128 Q Jurisdictional Areas Served by IRWD . . . . . . . . 129 R CAA's Served in Whole or in Part by IRWD . . . . . . . . 130 S DMP Population Projections with IRWD .. . . . . . . 131 T DMP Dwelling Unit Projections with IRWD,1978-1987 . . . 132 U SCAG-78 Growth Forecasts 134 V Draft SCAG-78 Population and�Dwelling Units Projections for the City of Irvine . . . . . . . . . . . 135 W Housing Need Analysis 137 X Summary of Estimates for�Irvine's Housing Needs 139 Y Days on which Selected Air Quality Standards were Exceeded in Orange County - 1976 . . . . . . . 154 Z Days on which Selected Air Quality Standards were Exceeded in Orange County - 1977 . . . . . . . . 155 AA System Impact Designations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 0 1• r] 1• 1• 1• I• I• LIST OF FIGURES Figure PBR LSA 1 EIR Index .•• • • 2 Geotechnical/SoilsReportsIndex . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Geologic Formations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . 4 PaTeontological. Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Faults and Landslides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Seismic Response Areas . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Surface Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Flood Hazards . . . . . . . . . • • • •. 9 Dam Inundation . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Biologic Literature Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Biotic Communities • • . • . 12 Significant and Sensitive Habitats . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Archaeology Survey Index 14 Orange County Land Use Element• . 15 Adopted General Plans 16 Jurisdictional Boundaries . 17 Existing Development '• • • • • • • • • • 18 Phasing Development Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 19 Existing Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Climate/Air Quality . . . . . . • . . . . 21 Means and Extremes of the El Toro MCAS Monthly Temperature Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Irvine Ranch Headquarters Monthly Mean and 20-Year Extreme Rainfall Amounts . . . . . . . . . . 23 Southern California Stability Conversion Distribution Derived from Santa Monica Radiosonde Observations •Hazards 24 Aircraft Noise and Crash 25 Existing Highway Noise . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Ultimate Highway Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Water Distribution System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Sewer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Electrical Distribution System (12kv) . . . . . . . . 30 Electrical Distribution System (66&220kv) . . . . . . . . 31 Gas Distribution System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page No. 12 23 25 33 36 38 44 50 52 62 66 79 95 110 112 116 11'9 124 142 147 149 150 152 159 162 166 169 174 176 177 178 I0 C I• • INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY U [7 PBR LSA BACKGROUND In August, 1978, the Irvine Ranch Water District commissioned the preparation of a Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) for the District. The MEA was prepared, pursuant to advisory guidelines formulated for such documents, and focuses on identification of the, environmental setting of the District. PURPOSE The purpose of the MEA is to assemble, in a single document, a summary of all environmental information pertinent to environmental and planning decisionmaking that substantially affects the district in fulfilling its responsibilities • to provide water and wastewater service within the District pursuant to Section 34000 et. seq. of the California Water Code. The principal use of the data is to assist the District in developing plans for physical facilities that are consistent with the needs for such facilities created by local agency approval of development projects. In essbnce, the District develops physical and financial implementation plans for infrastructure requirements of locally approved development. District processes to accomplish this task are incremental in nature and parallel similar planning processes of local general planning agencies. REPORT ORGANIZATION This report is organized into sections which discuss various aspects of the environmental setting of the District. Within each section, descriptive data is presented which serves to define the existing condition of the environmental setting. Where appropriate, the descriptive information is accompanied by maps which show the distributional characteristics of the information in question, or show the location where more precise information may be obtained through reference to other studies. Following the descriptive information, a discussion of applicable laws and policies that influence the long range planning and developmental decisionmaking process of the District is presented. DATA BASE At the end of the MEA is a comprehensive bibliography of all pertinent documents. referred to in the MEA. The majority of these documents have been physically assembled into the IRWD MEA Data Base which is housed in the District's Library. It is intended that the elements of the MEA Data Base - text, maps, and reference documents - be updated" annually. I0 [1 11 PBR LSA SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (1) In planning for routing and construction of underground transmission and collection facilities, designs should take into account the seismic hazards and soil constraints generally associated with the different physiographic areas of the District. In terms of advance planning, the SCS information in the data base will provide generalized information that can be used to assist in planning more detailed soils engineering studies. Areas where detailed soil engineering reports have been prepared are indicated on the soils reports index map. (2) Paleontological resources are assuming increasing importance in the preplanning process of most local agencies, as evidenced by the adoption and implemen- tation of paleontological resource protection poli- cies by the City of Irvine and County of Orange. This should be kept in mind on projects that involve subsurface work (e.g trenching or major excavation), particularly in hillside areas where trenching through bedrock would be involved. Generally, prior to approving zoning for land development projects., the local jurisdictions will have caused a specific paleontological survey to be completed. These sur-' veys, usually contained in appendices in EIR's, would serve as a guide to District 'personnel in anticipating whether or not specific studies, or paleontologic inspection, should occur in conjunction with District projects. (3) The primary water resource related planning activity that will affect new development by and within IRWD is the 208 (non -point source) Water Quality Planning Program. As the plan progresses to final approval and implementation, the San Diego Creek Watershed, comprising the majority of the IRWD area, will be the focus of considerable attention as the program's pri- ority item. The policies relating to the management of Upper Newport Bay and watershed are discussed in the MEA. Action items accompanying these policies warrant monitoring relative to IRWD activities. In particular, the following are of special note: 0 I• PBR LSA a. an upstream sediment management program (including • grading control) and further flood control facili- ties and channel improvements, b. an assessment of the feasibility of downstream desilting basins, • of water quality constituents of the c. an assessment Upper Bay, their effects on biota; where adverse conditions are observed, action to limit the flow of these constituents into the Bay, and' d. water quality monitoring of the watershed and 0 determination of the source of bacterial and nutrient loading. V I• (4) Of perhaps equal concern to IRWD directly in the area of water resource management are the water quality objectives of the Basin Plan which constitute the basis for the NPDES permit criteria. The Basin Plan is undergoing revision as part of the 208 study and will play a,controlling factor in discharge levels and therefore facilities design of future District facilities as they are constructed. (5)' Federal and state laws and policies for treatment 'and processing the protection of vegetation 'and wildlife are aimed specifically at .protection of rare or endangered species, their habitats and particular habitat types that are generally of high value to wildlife but which are being gradually eliminated through development processes. In general, local agencies develop sufficient inventory information i,n conjunction with Environmental Impact Report processes to identify sensitive habitat areas and the location of endangered species. The District should, therefore, prior to initiating construction projects within areas approved by local agencies for development, review the pertinent EIR document and this section of the MEA to ensure that sensitive resources are not adversely affected. Similarily, for District prepared EIR's, identification of sensitive biotic resources should be a subject of focus, especially where the project involves transmission lines or related facilities in remote areas not previously subject to detailed survey. [` i* C U I0 r C 0 PBR LSA (6) Because of the unusually sensitive nature of archaeo- logical resources, it is recommended that guidelines be developed . for the format. and content of archaeological investigations of sites affected by IRWD projects. These guidelines should be patterned after those of the Society for California Archaeology and should reflect and be responsive to the differences between requirements of the various local jurisdictions encompassed within the IRWD. (7) It is recommended that a policy be implemented by which, during preplanning portions of a project, a determination is made as to whether or not the area in question contains any archaeological resources. If the area has been previously surveyed, the survey report(s) should be checked and conflicts between project concepts and archaeological sites resolved before project development proceeds. If the area has not been surveyed, it should be surveyed by a qualified archaeologist to determine the presence or absence of archaeological sites and potential constraints to the, project(s) proposed. The determination of the presence or absence of archae- ological resources should be made at the earliest possible point in the planning process to allow adequate time to mitigate conflicts and avoid unneces- sary and costly delays. In this regard,. surveys• might best be accomplished' annually in conjunction with capital improvement phasing plan development. (8) It is recommended that the IRWD monitor the annual amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act in order to anticipate long range trends in regulatory growth control that may ultimately affect the ability of the local general' planning agencies to implement their general plans. (9) Various noise standards and'reguTations will have the effect of restricting the location of noise -sensitive uses (primarily residential) within the District. As these regulations become more stringent, there may be a trend toward restricting residential development in areas now considered marginal for noise -sensitive uses. This may affect the level and nature of ser- vice requirements of.the District in these areas. '• • 11 PBR LSA • Areas most likely to be affected are the vicinity of MCAS El Toro and the areas adjoining freeways and arterial highways. The District should therefore monitor this trend to restrict siting of residential uses as service planning is refined in these areas. • (10) It is recommended that the design of future facilities take into account OSHA standards for workers. Also, the possible noise impacts of future facilities on, adjoining uses should be considered when siting these facilities. This will probably be -of importance where residential uses are in close • proximity to proposed District facilities. (11) Projections of future growth patterns within the service area by agencies responsible for • such projections do not in all instances coincide. It is recommended that the IR14D continue to utilize a '• system of evaluating each set of projections within a framework which accounts for the others, and give adequate regard to the long term implications -- economic, political, and social -- attendant upon each source. • (12) It is recommended that the IRWD continue to make available, to all relevant planning agencies, the data base it employs in developing its future service projections in order to facilitate the coordination of regional and local planning efforts. • (13) It is recommended that the IRWD continue to update its service projections on a regular basis, consistent with changes in local and regional general planning efforts .and technologies which extend the carrying capacity of its water and wastewater systems. • (14) It is recommended that the District coordinate its advance planning efforts with The Irvine Company,, the major landowner within the Irvine Ranch Water District, regarding when lands in agricultural preserve will be withdrawn from preserve status and • when specific elements of The Irvine Company's development program are planned for implementation. C I• PBR LSA The phasing of removal of land from agriculatural • preserves will affect the phasing of development in the District and the level and nature of service requirements of the District. (15) The following programs and projects will probably • play particularly significant roles in the ultimate intensity and timing of development within the District: - General Plan, County of Orange - General Plan, City of Irvine • - San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor - 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan It is recommended that the District monitor implementation of these programs for purposes of planning for future service requirements. • (16) Air Quality Management Plans now being developed for the•South Coast Air Basin, within which the District is located, are not expected to have an immediate direct effect on District facilities planning pro- gram, but in the long term could substantially affect • ultimate population and population distribution. The plan initially. relies on• technology to achieve ambient air quality standards, technology which at least in part does not now exist. Should the technology not develop sufficiently,• reliance on growth controls and/or major transportation system changes could occur, with important implications, in the long term, for district facilities requirements. It is recommended that AQMP enforcement programs be closely monitored by the District, particularly actions by SCAG and the State as they relate to aspects of the AQMP that may require amendments of • Local General Plans. (17) A large number of Environmental Documents have been produced for projects within the IRWD. Guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act permit re -use of the data contained in • these documents where pertinent. It• is therefore recommended that as EIR requirements are identified I9 is I• I• I• C 0 • PBR LSA for IRWD projects, that these data be used to' the maximum extent possible to reduce new data collection requirements. Copies of most environmental documents prepared for projects within the District are contained in the MEA Data Base. I• C I• I6 I0 I• I• 0 PBR LSA INVENTORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS AND IMPACT REPORTS SETTING The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which took effect in the early 1970's established requirements on governmental agencies that when• approving development projects environmental consideration be taken into account. NEPA applies to actions of federal agencies or actions of state or local agencies where federal funding is involved. CEQA applies to state and local agencies wherever "significant" environmental impacts can be expected to occur. CEQA is applicable to any projects sponsored by the IRWD or other agency within, or underlying projects within IRWD, unless specifically exempted. Implementation of these laws within the District has resulted in the development of substantial environmental information concerning the District. The information within these documents varies in detail, depending on the level of specificity involved in the underlying activity. For example, environmental information contained in documents prepared for the general plans of local cities is generally comprehensive but frequently lacks detail. Conversely, environmental information contained in zoning or subdivision documents frequently contains extensive detail, but is limited in scope to a small area. Provisions of both NEPA and CEQA permit the re -use of existing infor- mation in meeting the current requirements of these laws whenever that information is applicable and valid. Table A provides information concern- ing available environmental documentation of local agency general plans. The following listing summarizes environmental documents that have been prepared for other projects within the District. Copies of these documents are contained in the District Data Base files. Where possible, the geographic area addressed by each document is shown on Figure 1. All can be utilized or "incorporated by reference" in meeting current requirements of CEQA as they apply to the District, to the extent that the information remains applicable to the environmental issues at hand. U 1• 10 TABLE A Is I• is 1• L I• 1• G GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS AND CEQA DOCUMENTS E PBR LSA Date EIR Notice of ritv/General Plan Element Adopted Certified Determination CITY OF IRVINE Land Use (GPA 75-4) Conservation & Open Space Noise Circulation Seismic Safety Scenic Highways Housing CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Transportation V Circulation - Housing Scenic Highways Seismic & Public Safety Human Needs- . Land Use Open Space & Conservation Noise CITY OF TUSTIN Seismic Safety Housing Open Space/Conservation & Recreation Scenic Highways & Roadways Safety Noise Land Use or most recen amendment) April, 1978 Sept. 15, 1977 Sept. 15, 19,77 Sept. 15, 1977 Sept. 15, 1977 Sept. 15, 1977 Sept. 15, 1977 Currently being Amended April 1.7, 1.974 Oct. 2, 1974 April 2, 1975 June 27, 1978 Jan. 7, 1976. May 4, 1977 June 12, 1974 Oct. 16, 1974 June, 1975 July, 1972 Amendment in Progress July, 1972 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NO No Yes No In Progress No. Yes No No Env. Assess. No RICO Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No Yes No No No No W August, 1976 No No March, 1978 No No May, 1975 Yes No January, 1978 NO No NOTE: ND: Negative Declaration NA: Information not available 0 • TABLE A (CONY D) GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS AND CEQA DOCUMENTS 10 PBR LSA ♦ Date EIR Notice of City/General Plan Element do ted Adopt Certified Determination or most recent amendment) CITY OF IRVINE Land Use July, 1978 NO Yes Circulation February, 1966 Bike Route Plan November, 1973 Yes Yes Housing May, 1975 NO No Conservation December, 1973 NO No • Open Space November, 1973 NO No Safety & Seismic Safety May, 1975 ND No Noise April, 1975 Yes Yes Scenic Corridors February, 1975 NO No CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Circulation June 9, 1978 NO No Residential Growth Oct. 2, 1978 ND Yes Land Use Oct. 2, 1978 NO Yes Parks (Recreation & Dec. 17, 1973 No No Open Space) ♦ Public Safety Mar. 6, 1975 No No Conservation Jan. 14, 1974 No No Housing Feb. 11, 1974 No No Noise Oct. 15, 1974 No No COUNTY OF ORANGE • Noise Oct., 1975 Yes No Recreation M.P. Regional Parks May 18, 1977 NA No M.P. Trails Jan. 20, 1965 No No M.P. Bikeways Dec. 11, 1974 NA No ♦ M.P. Local Parks Aug. 17, 1976 NA No Circulation July 26, T978 NA No Safety Oct. 19, T977 NA No Scenic Highways Oct. 19, 1977 ND Yes Conservation January, 1978 NA No Open Space January, 1978 NA No • Land Use Dec. 13, 1978 Yes No Housing Dec., 1978 In Progress No I,• C I• I• I0 I0 [] 11 PBR LSA NOTES TO TABLE A Requirements for EIR's on General Plans and elements went into effect on December 14, 1973. Repo^ rnmon+c fnr the Nntirp of nptermination went into effect on April 1, 197! ✓t' i, fin' }I'�'41:� a k, ... _` t' ', _j ` ..ter V 1 � •. 1.q -tea, '.i'" �a :J' 17 ai T �rr'IJ. eCd '+f. .1'. ;✓,'�s(`j�r ._ r • c iaS4-:_c`.-.�y P 'v.iarls_.:..' "i. t"" 1' � .'mac • i ,.1 e ' ✓ ` .,• -' J �i :''•, 1. 7,1.,, ' ', .. . « - i ` .l. r� �t. J ,ice q r - ,; f r`•�� , f c .% x „ , "1' 41 �'` ; `se,'J t ` ` w . • t I t e �' ., , b:'fr. •..: • 4^; .�C ��, i 1 i.''�.';\` 1 y, , � 'i 9 \ ri ', ; to J�1 : > • '14 � , 1:r�.fJz.P� -,fµ�y 1, f.•„•,aM1y-• j�"��d a, -y: ;'- r 1��+1 • fa ••r�Si4D t:}ql .{ +a]� aJ i� d���� .. n"`m ��'��.r .•`r, •`a r• .�5, 'err �'` •^:t, «' -ti:'- ..., or ,� i• q • ,�_.: L•Y�RY _ ' I ,. .I aYe.' ._',. 6iv.:? i r`''<^• 1, e,f r'_'V -i ei i.:->t tA. F,v}.,'`,'S`b,`•Ay v'.$;�, • •u r" , .� '.) •- `l`-' _ Lyv .u6� ,o�`ti. S. 1, �,.� >i;a,,') r\�� "v °';��` , a .• " ^tom V � 1 ..u' ==� �L. '!� ' n = • �1.`, ., 'y�r. , , t i-.. x., r "-�-� �,�. �y< -1 .I. 'ir.•,(ie ,;` m 'cn•%' t,m l ••sr-•r .. Y^� Yto 1 ��t '.i' _ :;S'(r _ •.�•'•,"4!•L, :. %•t° _ _ ;:.: _ •n;^sy��e•i Ida 4%yi1`v ., :n�. x4 .N"w'PaS'iJ , _ Hai.\.4'_ r1 'lS5 -""'c _.. .. -.� ,.r•,•�q"';i 1iii�''��_'^:in,: „'v!:, ��¢. ".�=.4{�L"� 'T1:_ � ^•' '4� j-c"a-- J '�r�' �..r � f��i', �':ru: S jf,-1 �` {a '4�.- .+i' -,,,: -- 4S"�},�, :.�I ,'t.�. ��i �o. ''ate-�r. '.`id.',-K ', ...; y. •' :'-.t ,. ;�� •�,�',, aN+, •'`��.� '�hl'�lrl �l6'?C�G',!-. I.,(:':/ciS���i',j i.:' .4;}I, ;',ii f} J1N., 1� +ln' :K ,•f1 tT ,• li r(' ., 'f j i t r�. ':'. _'0. ] tv'y .' �l. a"r..' �'r"iln `J.•"r r 6�J: "� '-,; 9,$�17 'e:��• S, ..'�; _ '' -. t'_'.-._ 'y'' •Y:F .•. ��.•a = - �',,, y'} v'2a .+ L}�',4 'h.. •— (�L.. Is -'} Y.\ yy/�;l l ` l p " r, r,"e9 �}. �'Hln� i-=i. t J�� V6" � 7C�x�} ,''?-�'.it..•„ --'':" a:F'EF' we r y,p,'A� T: �l'�t `: ''w"a :.f;�'>, :'J �y "� }`ua'Jr..S,n 'lam r 1 • 1r. INDEXEIRREFERENCE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRtICT 1 • 13 • • PBR LSA LEGEND FOR EIR INDEX • 1. City of Irvine, 1977. Final EIR Bonita Canyon Road Extension, Irvine, CA. EIR on extension and upgrading of 1.52 miles of roadway in Irvine, CA. 2. Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1975. Final EIR Christ College • Irvine, Newport Beach, CA. EIR on zoning and granting of a cond�- tional use permit to construct a new four-year educational institution in the City of Irvine within the Village of Turtle Rock. 3. SERNCO, Inc., 1973. Draft EIR Douglas -Crow Irvine Detrial du anvelopment Project, Denver, CO. EIR for zoning of a large insd • commercial parcel east of Orange County Airport in the Irvine Industrial Complex -Airport. 4. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1975. Initial Environmental Study, East Irvine Auto Center, Newport Beach, CA. Environmental Assessment for an auto development center parcel map within the Irvine Industrial • Complex -east. 5. Culp, Wesner, Culp, 1975. Final EIR Expansion of Wastewater Reclama- tion Facilities, Santa Ana, CA. EIR for a proposed expansion of wastewater treatment and reclamation facilities by the Irvine Ranch Water District. • 6. Richard Terry and Associates, 1973. Final EIR Improvement District No. 3 IRWD Inceptor Sewer Project, Tustin, CA. EIR for a specific sewer interceptor project within improvement District No. 3 of IRWD. 7. Woodside/Kubota & Associates, Inc., 1976. Draft EIR, Improvement • District 75-1 IRWD, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for an improvement District 75-1 of IRWD. 8. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1974. Final EIR, Irvine Center, Tustin CA. General plans and zoning level EIR for a 480 acre commercial parcel formed by the Santa Ana, San Diego, and Laguna Freeways. • 9. Culp,.Wesner, Culp, 1975. Final EIR Irvine Lake Pipeline and Future Treatment Facilities, Santa Ana, CA. EIR for water supply facilities including pipelines and a water treatment plant. 10. Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1973. Draft EIR, Orangetree • Village, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for a small residential development project in central Irvine. 11 I• 1• C 1• 1• C: 1• 14 PBR LSA 11. Envista, Inc., 1976. Final EIR Phase One Irvine Industrial Complex - East, Anaheim, CA. or zoning o e irs o eve opmen phases of the Irvine Industrial Complex -east. 12. James A. Roberts Associates, Inc., 1972. Final EIR Projects within the Villa a of Vallel View, Carmichael, CA. EIR for zoning of a 484 acre resi ential area within the 1,065 acres of Village of Valley View, now known as the Deerfield area of Irvine. 13. Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1973. Final EIR North Irvine Precise Land Use Plan,,Newport Beach, CA. EIR_ on a land use plan and rezoning of a 2,708 acre area'in north central Irvine. 14. Chapman, Phillips, Brandt, Reddick, 1975. • Final EIR Rancho San_ Joaquin Planned Community, Irvine, CA. EIR for a zone change on 298 acre site to allow residential, commercial,. industrial, open space and park uses in south central Irvine. 15. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1975. Final EIS I Regional Wastewater Treatment System Aliso lJater Management Agency, Newport Beach, CA. EIS for a project designed to implement a regional wastewater treat- ment and disposal system. The EIS considered various alternatives for the system. 16. VTN, Inc., 1973. Draft EIR SmokeIEee Townhomes, Irvine, CA. EIR for, rezoning of 25.7 acres in central Irvine to allow residential development. 17. Yeo, Ron, 1975. Final EIR Turtle Rock, Enclave II and Open Space, Corona del Mar, CA. EIR for a residential subdivision of 133.5 acres within the Turtle Rock Planned Community in south central Irvine. 18. James A. Roberts- Associates, Inc., 1973. Final EIR University Town Center, Carmichael, CA. EIR for zoning and conceptual plan approval for a large parcel east of the University of California campus in ' Irvine, CA. 19. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1975. Draft EIR, Village of Quail Hill Planned Community, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for approval of a land use plan and planned community district zoning for 747.1 acre site east of Sand Canyon Reservoir in south central Irvine. (This report was not published, reviewed, or approved, but nevertheless contains considerable information). I• [] C C7 1• C �• I• 15 PBR LSA 20. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1976a. Draft EIR Villa e of Turtle Rock Enclave IV, Area A, Tustin, CA. EIR for a -acre resi entia deve op- ment within the Turtle Rock Planned Community in south central Irvine. 21. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1976b. Final EIR, Village of Woodbridge, North- west Quadrant, Tustin, CA. EIR for zoning of a 971 acre site within the Village of Woodbridge Planned Community in central Irvine. Project included residential, commercial, park, school, and church uses and a 30 acre lake. 22. Qualimetrics, Inc., 1974. Final .EIR, Village of Woodbridge, North Hollywood, CA. EIR for zoning and development of the'Village of Woodbridge within central Irvine. Land use proposed included single and multi -family residential, commercial, schools, parks, and open space. 23. Envista, Inc., 1974., Final. EIR Irvine .Industrial Complex East, Anaheim, CA. Zone change EIR on 2,058 acre planned industrial park in east Irvine south of MCAS E1 Toro. 24. Haworth and Anderson, 1973. Final EIR Campus Drive Extension, Laguna Beach, CA. EIR for a .73 mile extension of Campus Drive in Irvine from University Drive to the Irvine Industrial Complex -Airport. • 25. Environmental Feasibility Studies, -Inc., 1975. Final EIR, Michelson Drive Extension, Los Angeles, CA. EIR for extension of Michelson Drive and construction of two bridges in Central Irvine. 'Construction of the Fluor Corporation Headquarters was included in the assessment. 26. Richard Terry and Associates, 1972. Draft EIR, Rattlesnake Land Outfall, Tustin, CA. EIR for a minor project of the IRWD. 27. Chapman, Phillips, Brandt, Reddick, 1974. Draft EIR, Village 14 (New Culver) General Plan Amendment, Irvine, CA. EIR for a General Plan Amendment related to the Village 14 - Westgate Village area of central Irvine. 28. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976a. Final College District. Northern Area Operations Newport Beach, CA. EIR and comprehensive environmental assessment for a community college site location study. The project area included most of the IRWD but focused on the site of the northern campus of Saddleback Community College in central Irvine east of Jeffrey Road. I0 1• I• [7 1• 1• ILI I• • 16 PBR LSA 29. Larry Seeman Associates-, Inc., 1977a.• Initial Study, Village of Wood- bridge - Northeast Quadrant, Newport Beach, CA. Initial environmental study for parcel maps within the 178 acre northeast quadrant of the Village of Woodbridge Planned Community. This report amends the Qualimetric zoning EIR for this village. 30. Larry Seeman Associates,' Inc., 1978a. Initial Study, Westgate Village, Newport Beach, CA. Comprehensive initial study for the zoning of Westgate Village. The report will eventually be incorpor- ated as a part of a larger EIR to be produced by the City of Irvine prior to zoning. 31. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978b. Initial Study, Village of Wood- bridge Southwest Quadrant, Newport Beach, CA. Impact study— for the southwest quadrant of Woodbridge. This report amends the Qualimetric EIR. 32. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978c. Draft Initial. Study, Irvine Equestrian Center, Newport Beach, CA. Unpublished environmental report for a proposed site for the relocated Irvine Equestrian Center near the intersection of University Drive and Campus Drive in Irvine. 33. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978d. Initial Study, University_ Town Center Residential Area CUDP, Newport Beach, CA. Initial study or precise zoning to guide site planning and eventual development of Phases I and II of the University Town Center project. This report amends --the zoning EIR-for University Town Center. 34. Environmental Feasibility Studies, Inc., 1973. Final EIR, Village of Turtle Rock, Los Angeles, CA. EIR for the 1,000 acre Turtle Rock Planned Community with residential, commercial, school and open space uses in south central Irvine. 35. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1979a. Initial Study, Village of Quail Hill, Newport Beach, CA. A comprehensive environmental document in preparation) that will lead to a City prepared EIR for this residen- tial Hillside Village in south central Irvine east of Turtle Rock. 36. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1977b. Initial Study, Irvine Center, Phase I CUDP, Newport Beach, CA. Amendment to the zoning EIR for the Phase Irvine Center Commercial development site in east Irvine. 37. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1979b. Chinon Channel Improvements. Santa A I Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA. unpuDiisnea t1K Tor conscr major channel improvements to Agua Chinon Wash in east Irvine. ne 0 1• 1• 1• is 1• r I• I• 17 PBR LSA 38. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978e. Draft EIS, Proposed Construc- tion of Alton/Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) Interchange and Modification to Irvine Center Drive/San Diego Freewa 1-405 Interchange, 'prepared for CALTRA S, Newport Beach, CA. EIS for a major freeway bridge con- struction project in east Irvine near Irvine Center. 39. Jones and Stokes- Associates, Inc., 1976. Final EIR Irvine Coastal Community General Plan Amendment, Santa Ana, CA. EIR for a Genera Plan Amendment and a development master plan for the 10,150 acre Irvine Coastal area. 40. Toups Associates, 1978. Draft EIR, Bee/Round Canyon Landfill Si Santa Ana, CA. Comprehensive environmental assessment for a mayor sanitary landfill site in the foothills east of Irvine and east of MCAS E1 Toro. 41. Haworth/Anderson/Lafer, Inc., 1974. Final EIR, Turtle Rock Enclave I, Laguna Beach, CA. EIR for a 50 acre development within the Turtle Rock Planned Community. This report amends -the Turtle Rock zoning EIR. 42. Owen Menard and Associates, 1977. Draft EIR, Irvine Industrial Complex - Tustin, Claremont, CA. EIR for zoning and development of a 315 acre .addition to the Irvine Industrial Complex -Airport (located within Tustin,.CA.). 43. VTN, Inc., 1974. Environmental Data Statement (EDS) San Onofre to. Santiago Substation 220 KV Transmission Line, Irvine, CA. EDS for the construction and operation of 28.4 miles of double circuit 220 KV transmission line in the SCE system through the central Irvine area. 44. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976b. Initial Study, San Joaquin Commercial Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA. Environmental asses- sment for a proposed commercial development project within central Irvine. 45. City of Tustin, 1978. Draft EIR/EIS Moulton Parkway - Irvine Center Drive, Tustin, CA. EIR-EIS on the realignment and improvement of Moulton Parkway - Irvine Center Drive - a major arterial highway extending west from Irvine into Tustin. 46. Southern California Edison Company, 1973. EIR, Ellis -Santiago 220_KV Transmission Facility, Los Angeles, CA. EIR for a proposed 15—mite electrical power transmission line extending through - central Irvine. I0 • [] m PBR LSA • 47. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1976a. Draft EIR Irvine Railroad Grade Se ara- tion project, Irvine, CA. EIR for apartial lowering of t e ATS railroad into an excavated area and construction of overpasses at intersecting streets. The purpose of the project is to reduce noise hazards. levels, improve traffic circulation and reduce safety • 48. City of Tustin, 1975. Environmental Impact Analysis - WAS Santa Ana, Tustin, CA. Environmental impact analysis for a proposed annexation of the Marine Corps Air Station (H) to the City of Tustin. Satisfies initial Local Agency Formation Commission and CEQA requirements for an study, and includes all required factors of an EIR. • 49. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1977. Environmental Evaluation, Bonita for a excavation Canyon Borrow Site, Newport Beach, CA. EIR proposed operation in Bonita Canyon Borrow site. 50. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1974. Draft EIR Coyote Canyon Borrow 92 borrow site Site, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for a proposed acre • extraction operation in Coyote Canyon. 51. City of Irvine, 1977. Final EIR Park -Re, ill Parcel Map, Irvine, CA. Industrial complex. EIR for a 111.6 acre parcel map within the Irvine 52. City of Irvine, 1978. Draft EIR Irvine Industrial Complex West, • Irvine, CA. EIR for four land use options for the remaining undevel- is oped land in the 11C-West Planned Community. This report not yet adopted. 53. Center for Planning Research, 1977. Final EIR Irvine High/Heritage Beach, CA. EIR for construction of a 3,000 seat • Park Stadium, Newport athletic stadium in Heritage Park in north central Irvine. 54. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1978. Final EIR Western World Borrow Site, EIR for 31+ acre borrow site located south of Irvine, CA. a proposed University Avenue and east of MacArthur Boulevard. • 55. Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, 1978. Final EIR Orange County Airport Alternative Futures, Los Angeles, CA. Comprehensive EIR for expansion alternatives for the Orange County Airport. 56. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1973. Final EIR Santiago Sand and Gravel Extraction, Newport Beach, CA. Environmental assessment for a Irvine • sand and gravel extraction operation in Orange County near Lake. 0 C I• I• 1• 1• 1• C U I• 19 PBR LSA 57. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1978. Environmental Assessment Rancho Santiago College, Newport Beach, CA. Environmentalassessment o a portion of the area near Peters Canyon Reservoir in the northeastern portion of the District. The objective of the project was acquisition of a community college site. 58. County of Orange, 1978. Final EIR Peters Canyon Regional Park, Santa Ana, CA. EIR for a proposed County Regional Park acquisition program in the Peters Canyon Reservoir area. . 59. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976c. Initial Study, Turtle Rock IV, Area B, Newport Beach, CA. Initial Study for a portion of the Turtle Rock Development. Amends the zoning EIR for the Village of Turtle Rock. 60. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978f. Initial Study, Turtle Rock V, Newport Beach, CA. Initial Study for the southeastern portion of Turtle Rock Development area adjoining Sand Canyon Reservoir. Amends the Village of Turtle Rock zoning EIR. 61. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978g. Initial Study, Turtle Rock Enclave III, Newport Beach, CA. Initial Study of a 246 acre area above the hill in the center of Turtle Rock. Amends the Village of Turtle ,Rock, .zoning EIR. 62. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1977. Final EIR Diemer Filtration Plant - Santiago Aqueduct, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for a major treat- ment and transmission facility in the northern and eastern sections of IRWD. 63. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1978. Final EIR, Santiago Aqueduct Parallel Reaches 2-6, Newport Beach, CA. EIR for the construction an operation of a pipeline to transport treated and untreated water. 64. Culp, Wesner, Culp, 1978. Final EIR Conjunctive Use Water Wells and Pipeline, Santa Ana, CA. EIR for proposed development by the IRWD of wells to extract ground water from the main Orange County BAsin, and the pipelines and pumping facilities to transport the water for 'distribution and use within the District. 65. Gruen Associates, Inc., 1978. Preliminary Draft EIR and Project Report, San Joaquin Hills Trans ortation Corridor Study —,Los- Angeles, CA. This EIR summarizes the evaluation of route location alternatives for the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, a high capacity transportation facility in southeast Orange County. 0 1• zo 10 PBR LSA 66. City of Tustin,.1976. Final EIR Irvine-M ford Annexation No. 81, • Tustin, CA. EIR on annexation o a acre site to t e City of 1U5L111 and the ultimate development under various alternative land uses.• Quinton-Redgate, 1977. Final EIR, City of Irvine General Plan Amend- ment No. 4, Long Beach, CA. Comprehensive EIR for the City of Irvine General Plan. The geographic area encompasses the City of Irvine and • its sphere of influence which includes most of the IRWD. I• 10 I• 10 10 • 1• 1• 10 1• U li I• 0 I• I• 21 PBR LSA APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING POLICIES As noted in the previous sections, two laws, the National Environ- mental Policy Act (NEPA) at the Federal level and the California Environ- mental Quality Act (CEQA) at the State/Local Agency level apply to pro- jects of the District and other local agencies with land use jurisdiction within the District. While adopted in 1969 and 1970 respectively, these laws have been amended periodically and comprehensive guidelines have been developed to provide guidance in implementation. The most current amend- ments to.CEQA are effective January 1, 1979. A copy is contained in the MEA Data Base Library. The most recent amendments to NEPA (which may 'be applicable to District projects when federal funding is involved) were adopted in November, 1978 (November 28, 1978 Federal Register) and become applicable on July 30, 1979. These recent NEPA amendments and guidelines make sweeping changes in Federal Agency EIS procedures generally bringing these more in line with California procedure. A copy of the new NEPA pro- cedure is also contained in the MEA Data Base library. I• • • • • • • • • • • i"w.','r •j r'� j,}'r F. #i�tp.,,,5\^' �..1�-r'M1 _p i % � N, . '/� 'jlL•;�\ 4_ rt �s','! ..tS� a �, .rr r � a is �'• '•, .l.• `, 1 ��/^:;• ^.' ,\ +'Y'J." `:'' 4-i �' . f'r%� � t y ,,,,;'t'< �'v �:::,,. ,, cam•-''. , r �5 ' r. • .,, ;�.,.. .,t...r, �,j'+C: 'A'' r •,i-'.1 r:...';a 'r, •i 1' ✓ ; ol...,,•'' 1 45 ,'�ti _ ;t ^ ^. � �. _ ,,..'ram✓„i ' "'- .,l•yy .., , •br, •Ct�,'^�:Q::1i'Gr :,:•;:L" - v ...-t",.<. n.,. ,_.r: 2, f4•l ;,` •!::-,-.: , A,•s Ys `v "f'?; 1; :7.•I�, .t .. t'.• '�;' �., }: j•:r i•. t, ��s.� .r.: � .., r^�: `-y.`�,.. .• A .� � 1'+- �.1)) ��' t' .•i!.}1 5 l" ir�r' Ir. ✓'. J, �L%'' ''r... �,f";ti:f.(`�iiY1 �; (\'K' C1J'h �\'•ll,t,rr ,'mot �, d':"' •Jr:(,, ,...t' Y1r�t� Ff l pl.a•�,i. ,t`� f•±,•I I, "PI 4•^i!L{f •� } -�'% f4 I ,i�r^>'1; I' Y„ 'I •} •�I)rj:C. ,; `G` J^�rtiiA +t`:�...-•: �.P:`i��n "•'_• n q ,i�`- ''�Y� fC' r } �""f. 141 ' :'y'.,t, •lF,tM •... ,s nl { ��,'L�,.l,��{_: +: e. ; ,. �lii; �`x'.�r.''e-. 1 ,t ' 'S' S ♦ :Ii�1:-v t � � _1 �iiLGl'i i �'1i � i "t. ..3 �-.f/,,Y', •-";o- .r'\,•�" � 1''iti�,l,�1-•i^r'_� ,�j....t _1 ..,...Y }'j .�—'� yJ \ - ?.:oar; ,. ^ '�r =,E 'e,. r1: i � .' mil, I..Y r.'l. i ` !J.3 •, ', ,. i' 'f 1 ;y✓t K K i ^ � 9 � t] '�s'';1(2 '! 5..� 4 Y4, `,�Y�y;.r'4N •, �..' - s.i'�(t 'f ''��rw y �t...•�"" rvq 7 lictV�� ov�Y»� ':,, .p`t�; \.� �' /j"i' i• • 2 s i•' j,�,. •'�'�" ''+�, y i•"d;' ri; .1:I,' :r ':'a ��•.I� '22 �+��'''v� �"'�'-fv: 41. C t. r�".`�.'_�t?.t.�.'","` • :, i �` t mi �i.°l'}''i f ,T .t t:�•w.,ot�.r,a� .r, � ,'�•, , ' j 1�,�� E f, .•. •,iB\,Yap t fF ;S,.'.k-ir,;!•\ i^, '- i�r- 'a'_ l•;:bE y '�Y{'' i"s if '{—_ •..•i.i.� t° s �tL...•,"'rtr � 4- :e+�;-., 9 C , '"�tr „�'I �,Tr��i' - (\•'S•srl� .;Cv;+yi' r;^�4i k:.e;'%'t.{r •�\;.ti`;+tta,` r�=ti,'•, �L �''v jF!'n `ern ,�, i;. ,. .�f.' 1 ,r.a f+ti'~ .: '. k�'r:rl;�tlt..r'`#a. �_;�-\::•`�^, >;,:.3. r. \ ,.�j,,.7''TT .f `S? ` - �'�"'.. •., ,i �ii,: r ,ii.nr:.'`'`. `'S. d2 !ail✓. j.. l- - 6•• `(r �:, S !. 12.', `•.� ii,�S��i',el:i� Lv`> �, v, , a{ 1 fr r �`±�,' t'i"G�_::. ,,. fl.i^'r• J � N'fJ::%`= �:�� `� t ,,:.,.." ^'"..�." (�'� 'r �1 .x;A \-•:+ `k„j ^I .sv .. �,i $�_,-?. \ L •3'4"";� K{t:+ "''' '_ `$� ; I }Y _ *� `�fr- _.3.1-- _ ..,E, t.sO•rm I � iA, Sao' i �j: i3,• t' ' ln�ft h.•^y. e .i. \.bwj,.. (_ .�,.p.7�r, rt- EI.L.�'. _ ss,� t?' t: ;', `.+n, ". \,' i •G t i°.�. Aa.... n'1 �, i ! 1. y1^-.� F t'Vr%y t,a,"l'. 5;$f:i: ..t ,,.f - %fill•.i J.s�, ^ ,r GI •f :,�� t:v;, ',..�r'�J'y i`-�9 �'�,� I, Il,• -%; 't�;Y.y,'rC '� v-� •'I: � !'t y^'.; J, •7,p `^•f,('` yi gn'py \'•�•:; Y,1�sr;:4 �.-1 rl . 0 t�,. .. t �ji , .e .r •. ! ., ... + " ,i•J. � ,Xi. ,'r. " �,��'�^4; . /l^d<J,ii ��,����"��rc Ott.. :;�t!`w��''` (1�a� •,^ J• , �',I+ng3{• ,,i,�t�.r'--•i r f- pFFFAEN(S.S 1110.l COVQI F}IINE MFA: 50,28rW, <2, 0.5. R IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT • 2 [7 I• 10 1• C] I• 22 PBR LSA EARTH RESOURCES For the purpose of this MEA, earth resources are defined to include geologic features, paleontological (fossil) features of geological formations, seismicity, and soil types and associations. A considerable amount of literature is available discussing these features of the District with varying levels of specificity and geographic extent of cover- age. In general, the broader scale reports with the greatest extent of aerial coverage have been produced by governmental agencies while the more detailed studies containing design type data have been produced by private geotechnical consulting firms in conjunction with development projects for more localized areas. Figure 2 provides an index to the most pertinent reports used to prepare this section. Reference to the specific reports cited will provide an extensive expansion in the level of detail provided here. GEOLOGIC SETTING The Irvine Ranch Water District is located along the southeastern margin of the Los Angeles basin and is comprised of three distinct physiographic areas. The Santa Ana Mountains and San Joaquin Hills form the northern and southern portions of this area, respectively, while the central portion is known as the Tustin Plain. Geological Units. Quaternary alluvial, colluvial, and non -marine terrace deposits underlie much of the Tustin Plain. These have resulted from a gradual accumulation of sediments in the lower Santa Ana River basin during the last 2 or 3 million years. These deposits generally consist of varying combinations of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and/or rubble. Older Tertiary formations are exposed in the mountains and hills to the north and south, as illustrated in Figure 3. These deposits range from siltstones and sandstones to shales and conglomerates. Nonmarine deposits are scattered throughout the District; they include the E1 Modeno Volcanics, Intrusive Volcanics, and the Sespe Formation (California Division of Mines & Geology, 1973). E1 Modeno Volcanics are found north and west of Peters Canyon Reservoir in the northern portion of the District (Yerkes, 1957). The Intrusive Volcanics occur in the San Joaquin Hills and are igneous rocks composed of andesite and diabase (California Division of Mines & Geology, 1973; Vedder et al, 1957). Marine terrace deposits, nonmarihe terrace deposits on marine terraces, slope wash, and beach sediments are found in the San Joaquin Hills. I• [7 1• Is 1• I• it C Ell 24 LEGEND FOR GEOTECHNICAL/SOI.LS REPORTS INDEX 1. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1976a. 2. Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1977. 3. Leighton and Associates, 1978. 4. Montano, Pacifico, 1974. 5. Woodward - Clyde Consultants, 1978. 6. Moore and Taber, 1968. 7. Southern California Testing Laboratory, 1976. 8. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1971a. 9. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1971b. 10. Montano, Pacifico, 1972a. 11. H. V. Lawmaster & Co., Inc., 1968. 12. Woodward, Clyde, Sherard and Associates, 1965. 13. AMCO Engineers, 1964. 14. Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1973. 15. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1978. 16. Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1978. 17. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1976. 18. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1974. 19. Woodward, Clyde, Sherard and Associates, 1966. 20. Montano, Pacifico, 1973. 21. Porter, O'Brien & Armstrong, 1964. 22. Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1974. 23. Montano, Pacifico, 1972b. 24. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, 1974. 25. County of Orange Road Department, no date. 26. Leighton and Associates, 1975. 27. LeRoy Crandall and Associates, 1972. 28. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1976b. 29. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1977. 30. James E. Slosson & Associates, 1973. 31. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineers, Inc., 1968. 32. California Coastal Commission, 1977. 33. California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, 1975. 34. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1976a. 35. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1976b. 36. Morton, P.K., and Mil'ler, R.V., 1973. 37. County of Orange, 1973. 38 Ploessel, et. al., 1972. 39. Vedder, J. G., 1970. 40. Vedder, J. G., et al, 1957. 41. Woodward - MacNeil and Associates, 1973. 42 Yerkes, Robert F., 1957. 43 Leighton and Associates, 1976. 44 Geo - Labs - Cdl., Inc., 1971. 45. Soil Conservation Service, 1976. PBR LSA '0 r � IjF�ti. , .� i � -'r, i" \'+G't•I. �y' ••ti.!! i•• - >,1IJ� ;'� �n �'`�' <^rl: ',-'.+j�', $'1 '" y;' t'+. 'H���,': ,*'��;�'l^,t k.':. i�f vti cr a 6 ,fr''�.' ,' ?r'r �'•c,{- �'"'��) -. ,�J•}A,'k'.k'}-f':�., •i �-�: _'!',' !'.4.W,i .'- 'r �i. `1` r .',t,•j pryy ,";, •\; N'_�'� ,VKi1;°: ..'•;�ti/•.Tsif+:, i'`- ' i'. ;'1 ., K�i-. Y I�i +, �y�.' r,„ 4:`,.., 'n`l�F' ,,; �ti;•1- Qt\ma, .....%+'; 1,r 4•'i.,'l',:. .,^3,� ",.1-, ?r ;, `'rt' _ _ . •`,,,''Yir.n'- :,-'r� i'1 �;,*t^;,y 1't„�•:..: .,• "i .r'i1• �' 'j,�tir'Nvi: ^yegy"o, ,. �''���i;(�•."I�_$t�';it ����i., :-a�'` •-•, rp r'_ , _',r �,'^,-i:`,,��r'V =_•k•. 'l '�,'�.f �,d�,ia ut •. U :�' . , . •'+.d;� r#,5;;;,a, ., , i.7 ' � (, ; t r tiy'�ar r`a P''$ .;\ r` �,i � /,. - Ir {i1',• fti�.,.t •r :i ',d°, i'.•. ,"�t,.{�A �n $?� • SI r` °Y.,• ?y :�j'.(�. � x r � + •, a'-'jP .. _ i�r.. �r`.i� i,:'�;•. '" •, -.:' {lam, Id '.4 Q1,4 1 i.T � ��-' �u1-.__•�= i 'ti�l Sri' � ,-•,.+'• :!, �.Ya' . \ I'' j..,= T--L4L'�i. •a, i 4. ' ; Y`: � ;j � ', W'�y�I.�_`` `':.� •.I'. '�h.' k ,pCa � :'�-� .. '�'•. � -• 7W.t`.,p' `rA ti�'��!'' , ••, I'' "L" "'~7- � 4.e� is Y s\d, k� �. _� fr �.t,,/i' vi, • )', .� i , F>''r5;y 1, ,. � . '�`,x�.S','k•r�+,:'J`•+`�,�1J�1.i�� �a,•'�k�,,+luP'r,•�;T `''"'r4• i GEOLOGY 3 On AoaVlum Ta llmm;sftadcs LSA/PBR Ot Terrace Deposits TO Puente Famethn Tt Topanga Famatlon Ts Santiago Famagcn In MontemShale Kw William Fametton ® p Te 'IY Capisbono Forrnetbn KI Vaqueros Fametton Lek Fomwtbn 4Q----��—l�Z� FEEF MHM WE=DURMU 3 I. 1• is [l V V 26 PBR LSA The presence of beach sediments along the Irvine coast is a result of a delicate balance between a small net loss of sand which drifts downcoast and sediment yields from nearby canyons (Jones and Stokes Associates, 1976). Periodic major storms are the primary contributors of large sediment yields required to maintain beach stability; however, insuffi- cient sand yields have resulted over the last 20 to 25 years from lack of these storms, and mild beach erosion has occurred. The characteristics of the principal' geologic units that occur within the District are summarized in the following paragraphs. The geographical distribution of these units within the District is shown on Figure 3. Alluvium. The alluvial materials present within the District reflect their sources and consist mainly of loosely consolidated gravel, sand, and silt in stream channels and flood plains. The lack of consolida- tion is a function of the recent deposition of these sediments, which occurred during the Quaternary Period. Where alluvium exists on slopes, stability is generally poor. The permeability of this material is very high and the expansivity is negligible to low. Because of the loose nature of this material, erodibility is rated very high on slopes greater than 5 degrees. Terrace De osit. Terrace deposits generally consist of very coarse poorly sorted cobbles, pebbles, and coarse sands of Pleistocene Age. They represent both marine and non -marine source deposits with the broken clasts reflecting parent material of sedimentary, metamorphic and igneous origin. Slope stability is generally rated as poor to fair with permeability being high, a function of the grain size, amount of pore spaces, and degree of cementation. Expansivity is generally low to moder- ate,. depending on whether a specific location reflects a marine or non - marine origin. Where uncemented, it is subject to wind erosion and rilling. Terrace deposits are frequently used as a source of fill material. Capistrano Formation. The Capistrano Formation consists of clayey siltstones and silty shales. Bedding planes are typically poorly developed, as opposed to the Monterey Formation, which it superficially resembles. Bedding planes that do exist are typically favorably •inclined relative to existing slopes. This material will normally excavate readily with normal grading equipment. Radiometric dating indicates the Capistrano Formation to be Miocene to Pliocene in age. [7 1• 1• 10 I• 1• 1• C I• 27 PBR LSA Puente Formation. The Puente Formation of middle to upper Miocene age is often differentiated into two members: the La Vida and the Soquel members. The La Vida member is composed of buff to brown -colored clayey siltstone with thin beds of silicon -rich shale. Occasional thin sandstones and highly silaceous ash beds are present. In areas where bedding coincides with slope direction, land slippage can occur. This hazard is compounded by the weak nature of this rock and its clay content. The Soquel member is medium to coarse -grained and massive. Because of this massive character and degree of cementation, it tends to form promin- ent ridges and has steep but generally stable slopes. Excavations in the Soquel member typically require heavy ripping due to the amount of cemen- tation in its sandstone beds. Monterey Shale. The Monterey Shale of Miocene age is typically a. thin -bedded silty to sandy shale interbedded with siltstone, sandstone, and chert. Ridges and peaks tend to develop on sandstone. Shale and silt - stone commonly form hills with rolling crests and moderately steep to gentle slopes while areas underlain by dense, silicon -rich shale tend to develop resistant ridges and steep -sided canyons. Monterey shale is subject to small and large-scale slope failure; bedding plane failure is common where bedding dips out of natural slopes and artificial cuts. Rotational failures tend to occur along slopes where rock is fractured and very moist to saturated. The Monterey Formation fs generally rippable with little to moderate difficulty With heavy equipment. Permeability is low, expansivity is moderate to. high, erodibility is high, and it has poor to fair potential as fill material. Topanga Formation. This marine sandstone of Middle Miocene age is abundant in fossils. The topographic expression is varied, forming valleys and rounded hills, and very steep, rugged slopes. The sandstone is coarse -grained to conglomeritic and buff to gray -brown in color. Bedding plane failures tend to occur where fine-grained beds dip out of natural slopes -and artificial cuts. Rockslides and slumping can also occur on steep slopes. The Topanga Formation is generally rippable with heavy equipment; however, local blasting may be required where well - cemented units are encountered. The permeability is moderate to low, expansibility is low, erodibility is low to moderate, and potential for use as fill material is good to fair. Igneous Rock's. Igneous rocks dated Miocene in age are represented by intrusive sills and dikes. These correspond to concordant and discordant tabular, formerly molten material that worked its way between bedding planes of previously existing sediments or' cut across them. Mineral. composition and grain size indicate that they cooled at some depth beneath the surface, and have been exposed through erosion of overlying material. The permeability is low, expansibility is moderate to low, and potential as fill material is fair to poor. '0 I• 1• I• I* 1• I• C I• I• m PBR LSA Vaqueros Formation. This lower Miocene age marine formation con- sists of sandstones, cTaystones, and siltstones. The sandstones are thick -bedded and well cemented, as are the cl-aystones and siltstones. This formation generally forms prominent ledges, ridge caps., and steep, rugged slopes. Where these beds are extensively fractured or dip out of natural slopes and artificial cuts, they are subject to landsliding. These rocks are rippable with heavy equipment, although local blasting may be required in occasional highly cemented units. The permeability is moderate to low, erodibility is locally moderate to low, and the potential for use as fill material is fair. Santiago Formation. The Santiago Formation of Eocene age con- sists of a marine sandstone interbedded with lenses of sandy silt and clay. Topography developed on the Santiago Formation is well rounded and subdued with local bluffs and steep canyon walls. The lower part of•this, formation is fairly resistant to erosion, weathering to a permeable clayey sand, with low expansion potential, while the upper Santiago materials weather to an expansive sandy clay of low permeability. The potential for use as fill material is good. Williams Formation. The Williams Formation consists of late Cretaceous, non -marine, deeply weathered conglomerates, and massive conglomeritic sandstones. Topography ranges from well exposed, 'incised, steep topography to rounded, poorly exposed outcrops. This formation is rather susceptible to mud -debris flows during periods of extended rainfall. These flows occur when alluvium and slopewash at the heads of steep, incised canyons'become saturated, resulting'in sudden rapid flow. Ladd Formation. The Ladd Formation consists of.marine sediments of late Cretaceous age. Materials are typically silty, poorly bedded shales with interbedded limestone and sandstone. The topography is typically rounded and subdued with broadly spaced, irregular, drainage patterns. A heavy cover of low -permeability clayey soil and alluvium limits natural exposures of bedrock material. Geologic Hazards. The stability of the various geologic formations found wit in t e District is variable, depending on factors of site location, the nature of the disturbing activity, and the nature of the formation. Slope stability is primarily dependent on the type of earth material, its general characteristics, shear strength, cohesive strength, porosity, and the steepness of slope. These properties, in addition to factors such as rainfall, erosion, vegetation type, slope position, and human activities, interact to generate new conditions which could induce instability (California Division of Mines & Geology, 1976b). Landslides I0 1• 1• 1• 1• 10 1• 1• U • 9 PBR LSA occur in the northern and southern portions of the District. Although no bedrock unit in this area is completely devoid of landslides, there is a higher instability potential in areas underlain by shale and siltstone. The most landslide -prone bedrock units in the San Joaquin Hills include the Vaqueros, Topanga (Los Trancos member), and Monterey Formations. Finer -grained portions of other geologic units also contain slides (California Division of Mines & Geology, 1976b). The steepness of a slope is another important factor in assessing a formation's potential for instability. Slopes greater than 30 percent occur in relatively large areas in the northern and southern portions of the District, and the potential for instability is higher on these slopes. In addition, the landslide potential is greatest in areas of existing instability. Other hazards related to slope stability include: rockfalls and rock - slides on steep upland slopes and sea cliffs; mud and debris flows result- ing from heavy storm runoff on steep slopes; and rilling and ravel -ling of poorly •consolidated alluvial slope wash terrace deposits (California Divi- sion of Mines & Geology, 1976b). Seismic hazards are discussed in detail in a subsequent section. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING Paleontological resources consist of the fossilized remains of prehis- toric plants and animals that are of scientific value to researchers in helping to define prehistoric evolutionary sequences. Outcrop •areas •of bedrock formations with variable paleontologic significance occur in two major areas within the Irvine Ranch Water District: the Santa Ana Mountains and San Joaquin Hills. Each area shown on Figure 4 is discussed below in terms of stratigraphy and paleontological importance, with special emphasis on paleontologic resource potentials determined primarily from fossil yield to date. San Joaquin Hills Marine terrace deposits of Late Pleistocene Age are present along the coast and in the northwestern end of the San Joaquin Hills. Similar deposits in the Newport Back Bay area (Eastbluff and Costa Mesa) and Corona del Mar have yielded abundant invertebrate fauna (Bruff, 1946; Kanakoff and Emerson, 1959), as well as terrestrial and marine vertebrae fossils (Miller, 1971). These deposits are considered to be of high -order paleontological significance (Cooper, 1978). 1• 1• 1• 1• 1• I• El I• .'7 30 PBR' LSA Miocene Rocks (Number 8 on Figure 4). The great bulk of the San Joaquin ffrTs—Mock is underlain principally by marine sedimentary rock of Miocene Age, especially in the area west of the Shady Canyon Fault. The most prevalant stratigraphic unit is the Topanga Formation, a shallow marine sandstone succession that has yielded locally abundant marine invertebrates throughout its outcrop belt in Southern California. Signifi- cant microfaunas (Bergen, 1971; Ingle, 1962) and locally abundant and important invertebrate and vertebrate fossils from Newport Back Bay and Lower Aliso Creek (Cooper and Sundberg, 1977). Both the Topanga and Monterey Formations are considered to be of very high -order paleontologic significance. This is especially true of the Monterey, in light of its yield of marine mammal kwhale, sea lion, sea cow, fur seal) and other vertebrate (birds, shark teeth, abundant fish) fossils. Monterey beds in the San Joaquin Hills are confined principally to the coastal belt. Vaqueros Formation (Number 6 on Figure 4). The Vaqueros Formation crops out in three main areas, mainly east of the Shady Canyon fault zone. It is a transgressive sandstone of Early Miocene Age and has yielded an impressive invertebrate fauna from a number of localities in Southern California (Loel and Corey, 1932; Squires and Fritsche, 1978).' Occasional vertebrate fossils have also been- reported (shark teeth, desmostylan remains, fish, etc.). Because of its age and stratigraphic position, the Vaqueros Formation is in a 'key' position for yielding significant fossils. This unit is considered to be of high -order paleontological importance. Paleogene Sedimentary Rocks (Number 2 on Figure 4). The Paleogene section in the San Joaquin Hills includes stratigraphic units mapped as Silverado Formation, Santiago_ Formation, and Sespe Formation (Morton and Miller, 1973; Vedder, et al., 1957) Both the Silverado Formation and Sespe Formation are almost. .exclusively deposits of non -marine origin and have yielded only scant fossils throughout Orange County. As a general rule, nonmarine deposits in Orange County have not produced many fossils; however, the possible discovery of terrestrial vertebrate fossils should not be ruled out. Any fossils from the Silverado and Sespe Formations would be significant (at least initially). The Santiago Formation in Orange County consists of both shallow marine and nonmarine facies (Yerkes, et al., 1965; Fife, 1973) and has produced only a comparatively small number of fossils in Orange County. However, rocks mapped as Santiago Formation near Camp Pendleton in San Diego County, as well as age equivalent (Eocene) deposits farther to the south in the Eocene San Diego Embayment, have yielded significant vertebrate fossils (Barnes, 1978; Golz, 1976; Kennedy, 1973). I• 1• 1• 1• [7 I• 31 In summary, these Paleogene sedimentary rocks have produced few fossils in Orange County. This may be largely a result of the nonmarine depositional environments, but it also may be due to the fact that these units have received very little critical study and/or have not been exposed in areas that have been prime targets for grading and development (important fossil discoveries have been - made throughout Orange County from so-called "manmade" outcrops resulting from grading activities). Although the potential of these Paleogene units yielding fossils is considered moderately low, any fossils discovered would be of scientific signifi- cance. Santa Ana Mountains. The following formations, which occur in the Santa Ana Mountains, are known to contain fossil remains. Undifferentiated Oso Sand Member of Ca istrano Formation and Soquel Sandstone Mem er of Puente Formation Number 10 on Figure The Oso Sand and Soquel Sandstone are shallow marine deposits of the Capistrano Embayment, and the combined stratigraphic unit ranges in age from Late Miocene to Early Pliocene. The Oso Sand is one of the most prolific fossil producers in Orange 'County. It represents the updip, shallow -shelf facies of the Capistrano Formation, and is confined to an outcrop belt between Round Canyon to the northwest and Trabuco Canyon to the southeast, mainly north of the San Diego Freeway. The westernmost occurrence of this important unit is shown on the map. Massive grading during the past decade "in the Mission Viejo/El Toro area has produced abundant marine vertebrate fossils (chiefly whales, dolphins, porpoise, shark teeth, etc.) from literally dozens of localities (Barnes, 1978; Raschke, 1978). Fossils continue to be discovered as • grading and development impact the remaining areas of Oso Sand. The Soquel Sandstone member, where it crops out in the Santa Ana Mountain foothills, is related to and thus a part of the Oso Sand package, and should be considered as such during grading. The Oso Sand is an extremely significant unit paleontologically and should always be closely • monitored during grading and other surface modification activities. Miocene Sedimentary Rocks (Number 8 on Figure 4). This unit includes the Topanga Formation, La Vida member of the Puente Formation, and rocks mapped as Soquel member of the Puente Formation. Paleontologic • • • 32 • PBR LSA significance of the Topanga Formation has already been mentioned; however, • it should be emphasized that abundant vertebrate fossils have been reported from the Glenn Ranch (Cooper, 1977) and other parts of the Topanga outcrop belt adjacent to Aliso Creek (Cooper, 1977; Raschke, 1978). These fossils include Middle Miocene archaic whale bones and remains of Desmostylus, an extinct hippo -like marine mammal. • The La Vida member of the Puente Formation, in the Santa Ana Mountains region, is similar in many respects to the Monterey Formation of the coastal belt. La Vida outcrops have produced numerous fish scales, fish bones, and moderately well preserved fish specimens from several locali- ties along Santiago Canyon Road (Cooper and Sundberg, 1976). The Soquel Sandstone member of the. Puente Formation is a shallow marine unit that has • yielded few fossils, but holds the potential for significant fossil discovery. The Miocene stratigraphic unit, especially the Topanga Formation, is rated as moderate to high -order paleontologic significance. • Sespe-Vaqueros Undifferentiated (Number 3 on Figure 4). This unit consists of predominantly non -marine sedimentary rocks, consisting of reddish. sandstone, mudstone, and conglomerate, which crop out in a broad belt in the northern Santa Ana Mountains. These rocks range in age from Late Eocene (?) to Early Micene (?) and include lithologies of mainly the Sespe Formation, but also marine sandstone beds of Vaqueros -type litho - • logy. Unlike the San Joaquin Hills area where the nonmarine Sespe and marine Vaqueros rocks are locatibnally distinct, the Santa Ana Mountains outcrop shows a shoreward interfingering of nonmarine (overwhelmingly represented) and marine facies (Figure 4). • The nonmarine Sespe part of the sequence is virtually unfossiliferous; however, beefs and tongues of marine Vaqueros lithology have yielded locally abundant invertebrates including diverse mollusks (bivalves and snails) and sand dollars and vertebrates (shark teeth, ray teeth, marine mammal bone fragments, fish vertebrae) from a number of localities (Cooper, 1978). • The potential for recovering fossils from the great bulk of this outcrop belt is considered low, but•the scattered occurrences of fossil- iferous Vaqueros -type beds that punctuate the succession from place to place lend a note of significance to the unit as.a whole. C • • 1� • • • '?� -� 1P t �. :r �i,".� iA,�•`-eru �`�'''.. �, ",.�...�.• /y\ f .�5•%r-� d" �A{. r�'�•M1 .' s r'✓ , J,; ' ']�y}(i'�i`',t�' .: 'e: ✓) .i; ! ;`f'xt'�.`•tt19 -�'r r -ice' •"•{,��'.a i.�Xti�.''i` � pp ff -1-:': v ��p'•i ;i. {`V�'r''ti S4r,,1 ,i�''�.r [jx•'•9'� �,r-' o•- / �f �r •.':?,3'7 .,,, •�''� Y " � �<-%" -` "' � r � ;,�__.% ;�4-.:'ram ai�.�' •,. ��yJ f:. _T. i. .k K,�^.�.. .Y: ` `, -.... i.r'• � '^'. - � ��`N .fit% t-'4`:i '/ -. '+�,.� 'y it '• ', •q2. 'J .f ,j(`. p .%,_ 'r /- L. ilj'0-�'CIf+ 'tt:.•i s .., ir''-,;,' '. 4 i , (.L� a� � +,�gr4','� }x,ti .^; 'tq 41 .� `s-�br .�*Trw"' i' lr. .',;., '4 w 1 - .O,'��� �- i• ,.• e'" d%k-..;y'.t..,. � ar: '<,,K„'f�t4�r'/`r..� � {S i; r ,'tt " a;,. <d•;. �-. ' ^.'fj,� �, fit., jit, ,�.;v• ,A'ss ra'e r-afn • ,` �� •� S'i � t, ., „j �..���j pr -nor . t: a e} - s '� `�1`J ..{r,.},"° 'V� x_, � _t4 .'�_5 ,r! >- 1:�! a .. :ri •. F; ' .., rX 'It Y"ri��`,^ �N, �1 ".=`+iJu�}' _. - _'' Is r, 'i �.+•_ "r i.' -� f{': �. E, ,.. r�li�'�'r,.r' �: ;;�;: �'''2?. lit[;Y��♦ �' -,"._.� \ ,rY .:''Is; �. rr'r,f /f�i !$. ���.Fe., �.,`�•l'�1%R��-�_ t� h'it�`-1 '-,_.7,� �. ;4'�:,i 1R `. A% �'.'r'4' , :...�..:�. .r >ta>�R"_ ,h i_._,�Td-.�e.-�-�l-,�W'rili '• l.! r 7 ;i`'„�• } r�.j' "' ...�1- ,f,.��y� 4 I` t: f - -" Y � S +,._ "•�. Ate[-.' ,- � � i C '^Jl� "� �� ti:-� - . A""�.,iL - •t}� ;�Pl14'0` `i� k� y. / JJI\ J _ r rtj�i{iJSal • �"-.. S «�.' %�;v' M1� '�' � a I:rvrt-� r *',yl^.. �'�"+. � .,I , ,,S : -� \ ?: r�R S'! Via• �' ` ��^:'.. � .,.t • w,r ' _ . t _ ' y`'K� 'u,asr ; k \��I,. •.41LP'Mc';.2''.n, a5,'��' ,r '' :.7,'.�%': _ .,R r�1 PALEONTOLOGY 4 10 - HIGHEST HANK LMJ PBR 1- LOWEST HANK Q - AHEAS OF SIGNIFICANT FOSSIL FINDS ® s 4 r�1 PALEONTOLOGY 4 10 - HIGHEST HANK LMJ PBR 1- LOWEST HANK Q - AHEAS OF SIGNIFICANT FOSSIL FINDS ® s 4 1• 1• 1• 1• I* I• 0 34 PBR LSA Santiago Formation (Number 5 on Figure 2). In the Santa Ana Mountains, the Eocene Santiago Formation consists of both shallow marine and coastal nonmarine strata that have yielded some petrified wood. and invertebrate fossils. The presence of vertebrate remains in contempor- aneous deposits in San Diego County has already been mentioned. The comparatively low yield of fossils to date may be due in part to lack of sufficient study and low amount of grading. The expected yield is considered low, but any fossils found would definitely be significant. There is very little paleontologic information from the lower Tertiary (Paleogene) beds of Orange County. Silverado Formation (Number 1 on Figure 2). The predominantly nonmarine Silverado Formation has yielded occasional poorly preserved plant fragments and scattered invertebrates, but is generally considered poorly fossiliferous. Some oyster beds, burrows, and sparse petrified wood fragments were reported from the Silverado Formation in the Coal Canyon area (Cooper, 1978). The paleontologic resource potential for the Silverado Formation is considered to be low, but it should be emphasized that any fossils discovered would be considered initially significant. Silverado -Santiago Formations Undifferentiated (Number 4 on Figure 4). Discussed in conjunction with the two preceding descriptions. Cretaceous Formations (Number 7 on Figure 4). Sedimentary rocks of Late Cretaceous Age representing the oldest rocks within the Irvine Ranch Water District) crop out in a wide belt in the northern Santa Ana Mountains. Cretaceous outcrops in the Bee Canyon area. belong to the marine Pleasants member of the Williams Formation. Several localities that have produced arrmionoid and nautiloid cephalo- pods and other mollusks are on file in the Geology Department, UCLA. North of Irvine, Late Cretaceous beds include the Holz and Williams Formations, both known fossil -producers (Sundberg, 1975, 1978). Other Formations. Areas of Figure 4 which are not numbered indicate Quaternary Alluvium (Late Pleistocene(?) to Holocene age) consisting pri- marily of recent stream sand and gravel deposits, but also including nonmarine terraces, soil, and landslide surfi.cial deposits. Such material has been known to contain fossils reworked (by erosion) from ,older formations, as well as occasional Late Pleistocene vertebrate fossils incorporated in the older stream terrace materials. Although not considered to be a major producer of significant fossils, this geologi- cally young material should not be totally discounted as a possible source of paleontologic resources. 0 1• 1• 1• I• I• • I0 J 35 PEIR LSA Mineral Resources. Mineral resources are generally found in the northern and southern portions of the District, Borrow areas (unclassified fill materials) occur in the southwestern portion. Coal has been mined near Irvine Lake, while sand and gravel, the mineral resource of greatest extent and value in the District, is currently being extracted in the northeastern portion of the District (California Division. of Mines & Geology, 1973). SEISMIC SETTING The District is located in a known seismically active region. Major fault zones capable of inducing seismic hazards in the District include: The San Andreas fault zone approximately 30 miles to the northeast; the San Jacinto fault zone about 25 miles northeast of this area; the Whittier - Elsinore fault zone approximately 6 miles to the north-; and the Newport - Inglewood fault zone on the southerly edge of the District. Except for the Whittier -Elsinore fault, these major fault zones have been evaluated as active and designated as Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones. How- ever, the Newport -Inglewood Special Studies Zone extends only as far south as Huntington Beach, about 7 miles northwest of the District, (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1976a). Other potentially active fault zones within +60 miles of the District include the San Gabriel -Sierra Madre and E1 Modeno-Norwalk fault zones (Ploessel et al., 1972; Larry Seeman Associates, 1976-). Fault zones within the District include the Pelican Hill fault zone and Shady Canyon fault; however, these are considered inactive since evidence does not indicate significant movement in the past ,3 million years (Vedder, 1970). Recorded seismic history is available only for the last 40 to 50 years and does not indicate reliable estimates of earthquake potentials (Woodward -McNeill & Associates, 1973). However, it is estimated that the areas will experience one or more earthquakes of magnitude 6 or greater within the next 100 years (Ploessel, 1972). Due to the area's proximity to major faults, shaking could sometimes be intense. The extent of damage due to such an earthquake would depend on factors such as type of earth material, distance to the epicenter, and the magnitude of the earthquake. Faults and landslides within the IRWD are shown in Figure 5. In the event of an earthquake, the District would be subject to seismic hazards including ground shaking, seismically -induced landsliding, • liquefaction, ground lurching, surface fault rupture, differential settlement, tsunamis, seiches, and dam failure. The potential for such hazards has been previously assessed by the City of Irvine (1976). Based 0 • s • • 0 •{r t„ .i' -'''• ��i.1-111 �`P�i'•'}arl" E}.��, r/�. 4 .�. •Y.l�_�.'. i. yfr 4:fer ill i i.�;•Vt1 6 p �R-1 ltx�:. �d Y .l \, r ,�_ } �k -, .11," +' • �+,t<` �I i , ..ems,; L..��:„-;"' '' 1 ' •ji\-��`: r :. `i,, •x•',as { r« 'aR <'� •{.r�.i, ° 1j �G "�. �, si (•''•'.JPP i ,+lti i. - `.,..,,i �. 1-4 RI, 1A t,,'1L11 f++' -� i`.tf ' L - ��.• ` ab - i.t;" �.4� `' , U,.ir;. ,i'7�4 .'u s-L ��• •�+!r- /�� 1: y s" w ;i,, .�••�'tt,t;, 14'�f ��:. „,.�,.`r.,i. ,��W i',' ,1 CIQD'• `1:i%�r�`;�+'�f%:a �. � �ii;'2Y:.i ��� e�<` ,�e 3jA ty °�'ftl vas > � �i.��'rf1: � )'" '' o Ir p't,F ' (.' - i. �: �J y , ,t: �'�,• \ J�/y _ It-, i 1, .�, �", r'•r"�.:'?�:L"ir %'�a °'i{2�•.. e.�rt ,r "r, t� a a rA •+.k.r. ' � Iy I , rro �i ,��p,� �1 t�`� ,w�����✓Y '`-��.*• •'yl��t'.,:,. �: �••"� j� ir.E?+ �y}.yR, _�"I•� .Jrf•5,..,-_' r ra "r��;•i i': s+' .t4', �fr .,t;, .,:,�t, KV �Re�s��`;..i��,)�-Il•;;�:•J c.ti ".i. -n 'm nd.' +-��`= '��' .� ett '{Yil x I�" A`r�;p,-, i�b4 :.+ ,1 i :' 7-{''ty �v� �,:,.�1 ''�:.,: i $'ti' r, .•� ;'t BY..,11. rvoa. .: iu5.'.. *.:: '�' . el� i"i�,.��% i .. - . �=�. .,1.'su-'aF:...:c^ ',r' •.Ri s � ,,_ �.�'Tr°f' s_i' e N ,.1 FAULTS & LANDSLIDES 5 LSA/PBR �`— FAULTS (DOTTED WHERE CONCEALED) ,t7 PROBABLE LANDSLIDE ,20 BEDROCK LANDSLIDE Q4000 FEET 2000 .FEET • 5 37 PBR LSA on variations in topography, soil and groundwater conditions, and depth to bedrock, a portion of the district within the City of Irvine and its Sphere of Influence has been divided into six seismic response areas (SRA's). These areas are shown in Figure 6 and defined as follows (Woodward -McNeill & Associates, 1973; City of Irvine, 1976): SRA 1: Potentially soft or loose soils/high groundwater. These areas have a relatively high potential for liquefaction. In some cases, deep-seated liquefac- tion could result in differential settlement of surficial materials. Most of these areas are stable due to gentle slopes. Tall structures in these areas would be subject to relatively strong ground shaking. SRA 2: Denser soils/deeper groundwater. Tall -structures would experience relatively strong ground shaking in these areas. Potential for liquefaction is very low. SRA 3: Shallow alluvium over and abutting bedrock. As slope increases in these areas, 'slope instability potential increases. Relatively strong ground shaking would be experienced by smaller residen- tial or industrial structures. Liquefaction potential is remote. SRA 4: Highlands with slopes over 20 percent. These areas would have higher slope instability, but liquefaction potential would be extremely remote. SRA 4a: Highlands with slopes over 20 percent and under- lain by Monterey Shale. Stability under seismic conditions similar to SRA 4. However, Monterey Shales are more unstable under nonseismic condi- tions and overall stability would be less than SRA 4. SRA 5: Least stable areas. These are areas of existing, mapped landslide deposits. In addition, bluffs above the beaches would be equally unstable and subject to liquefaction. • 0 IL2.�=�: I �•, ,f�), ,.J/r 'I°?yy�.; i,l+fir ; • , e�, r". M, \`, I �..5 :. i.• L �}}I (�/ j�MJG''•'^'In e eI `"� :ail` (J .W;;';•�� �''_ �,2Mw :�;i �.� •. +' '' ,fin fh'. � • � 1. . \"�'. \e' `.4 `I 1 , , - '�+` Ln� ��. �Wa?:.. ,e4�'\�\.• �.��te:� �:j,"l�r.n^p"'i\ '.:i(v `.�a4 ''�a'j''y111FFF^ �' :'' ,--.'� �� .,'+'�I^.j'�" 41i'� Ste, i`.-` L > t.ar ' w'„ • ,'a • ',; :'I , %�'- ,�j ;�F✓ / "'.r''.l. fX ,''•. ;y=%, ". y: N: '� . Ya at •. ,�1 � � , .. '$..1 _ ' (1: e`. ,'l.'t `. , : iy.'?� ;•:<%� 4; ' .'v; `� r'Sn ..,... .: 1 � �`.`.: :L , 3.. .-<.w.r: �', , �S ."F S:'i�`.�".v'_ .�J!' •� i%:Y'. 't` j, "a�•k.` �\"1.:5°n^"u•-��d�, ✓�' �-�,�,w���OIS•.r et' !-"�:Y4'. �..,':yl'n'�` W,-J ;h..a •� .. :: a,3.". ., e � OJ .ys !a .: 111. �' �, C,.;`v'�y�. �`s. WN •ham'' �r � A ' . � . ` .- . .'µ, ;c., +'r' %;.y.„'i,t!?zi�;��,�%�wj\ .. �9:©, � - `'1 �'rY�±Yy;s i �r1°,�- ;bbr`�S�T,'•P•,�-s4..: ,M,'.,,� 16„1.{';�",�, � +,• •,.�' •�r,r( t �'. , �i�'Ct �.� i �q,+��a°'G."T:; J'p` +ti q'.,''r{�p . t'^'/Ir t-���r'�lj{Nn$L i•' , "• '`G•YL �O �1 f v ry �"* •'A •+ t .as.{�.i:,2°�'I NI' ��1� : -'. (� (a •t;d�, 'is 1b i r "4 '+F� _r_ i � I�I.Ah +,. ?�`''• •. n CII p,�iy!'•it �'� .l -_- Q� J �, ti.i r' �.y E�-",O:�f•IL (� 3:,�]���L� =(}''i{�j to,I�g •'�`3av YvT',•Yk _. ' 1 ,. Ij ( iA 1s � ,y, -::K.q/� .rry'9'',` i y'.�.("„T� ,t.r�,.�rh'`.I S • �.`,,,. '•'�=,' •} �,.i '�iti.i'F', °�71-'Zi1v i f:: ';. v.�, �r_-,��_:-tr Via, it��+� s �i 1+�(/: `•� .' i. l -fs*t'�'?.�,\y��l�<"a•h .,i.«»—..bntiCr�).K.4R _ I,..' '•�•''rl�' I-y„'Y �'r,tj[�;' •S ` Tt4 ^ "� �+ ' � ��~''- L.` m" , ' 1 fir -v2 t�' �..1 ' :; . `lc „4y :.t;'^• -+ --,, ,..Y 1. I•a i> ' �,L _11y�..' `" ,� „Y, ,i'�, 4. t•,y ., l��y�"`AFrW;I,',M'�•:z�• �',+,/ :4�', ir•,%' ..:.r. w�5K1 i41 �t'�iyCl�ly�' .�C' 3% t"'/(j) i/-n,•r„' 'T le';l� i• 11 �. -` _,.'.'�•�..`t.? .-.__�^`, p;.'IS'i1.:Lt:fV:,- h:'n ,. :T. F.. .,.%. SEISMIC RESPONSE AREAS 6 1. SOFT SOILS/MICR GROUND WATER LSA/PBR 2. DENSER SOILS/DEEPER GROUND WATER 3. ALLUVIUM/SNALtOW BEDROCK A. NIONIANOS OVER 20% SLOPE 0R .SIGSIRNDS OVER 20% SLOPE-MCKTERET BIBLE - GREATER SUSCEPTIBILITY TO ® F NON • SEISNICALLY IKOUCED HAZARDS S. LESS STABLE GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS 8000 © INFOFMAATK)N LKWAII AM P: J12OOO FEET LWVUIVLS � d d � p � i 39 P$R LSA In the event of earthquake -induced groundshaking,-liquefaction and differential settlement would generally be more likely to occur in the central portion of the District, while landsliding would be more prevalent in the northern and southern portions of the District. Since no active or potentially active fault traces are located in the District, the potential for direct surface fault rupture is remote. In areas subject to liquefaction, widespread .ground lurching could occur and result in ground surface rupture (Ploessel, 1972). The potential for tsunamis would not pose significant safety hazards to the District due to the orientation of this area's coastline and the position of offshore islands (Ploessel, 1972). The only area potentially subject to tsunami hazards would be the bluffs above the beaches (Woodward -McNeill & Associates, 1973). Currently, plans for these coastal areas contemplate open space or public recreational uses. Earthquake -induced seiches could cause damage to development around lakes and reservoirs within the District. The most serious consequence of a seiche could be the overtopping and failure of a dam. If this occurred, areas below these dams could be inundated (for more information, refer to the "Dam Inundation Areas' section of the Hydrology chapter of this report) (Woodward -McNeill & Associates, 1973). SOILS SETTING Almost the entire central portion of the District is covered by prime agricultural soils (Class I and II). The most productive soils include the Omni clay (drained) and silt loam, Mocho loam, Chino silty clay loam, Sorrento sandy and clay loams, and San Emigdio fine sandy loam (Soil Con- servation Service, 1976). Orange County is a nationally significant producer of specialty fruit and vegetable crops; much of this production is accomplished on the Tustin Plains, much of which occurs within the District. The relative position of the County as a crop producer has been declining as these lands have been converted to urban uses (City of Irvine, 1976). This trend is expected to continue, as significant portions of the District under Williamson Act contracts will be withdrawn within the next few years. These soils are currently producing citrus fruits, avocados, row crops, and horticultural plants. Due to the area's proximity on the fringe of the rapidly urbanizing Los Angeles Basin, vandalism, crop theft, urban restrictions, and high land values continue to discourage continued large scale farming activities. 40 PBR LSA The northern and southern portions of the District are covered by less productive soils. Due to steep slopes and generally shallow soil depths,, these areas are not suitable for cropland; Rather, they are primarily used as pasture or range land. Soil capability classes in these areas range between III and VIII (Soil Conservation Service, 1976). Soil engineering characteristics such as expansivity, erodability, soil strength, and permeability are highly variable in the District. Because of the extreme complexity of the soils mapping data, it has not been reproduced for the MEA Data Base. Properties pertaining to specific soil series in this area are discussed and mapped in detail in a soil survey performed by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (1976) which is contained in the IRWD MEA library. Further information concerning engineering projections of soils in localized areas where soil testing programs have been conducted for development projects is contained in specific reports which are indexed on Figure 2. APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING POLICIES General Plan Seismic Safety Elements. Planning for development of water and wastewater infrastructure facilities within the District should take into account the policies of the seismic safety elements of the County of Orange and Cities of Irvine, Tustin, Santa Ana, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach as applicable. Although no formal policies have been formulated by the City of Orange for areas within its sphere of influence, the northern portion of the District could be affected 'by future policy directives of the City of Orange as it is within the City's sphere of influence and urban expansion in that area would probably be annexed to the City. Only small portions of the Cities of Tustin, Santa Ana, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach are within the District. The Seismic Safety General Plan Elements of Tustin, Newport Beach, and Laguna Beach do not include specific policies or objectives other than the protection of the public safety. Santa Ana's safety element includes goals and policies which pertain to public safety, design standards for special -use structures, and a seismic safety control program. Most of the District would be subject to policies and guidelines of the City of Irvine and the County of Orange. City of Irvine policies require detailed site studies to determine the seismic hazard potential for facilities. including water facilities, which would be critical in an emergency. Other policies are included in the City's building code, which 41 provides specific recommendations for seismic design and incorporates the proposed• seismic overlay zone requirements (or Seismic Response Area Standards) of the General Plan into the environmental impact review process for development applications. Seismic safety policies of the County of Orange include establishment of special design standards for linear systems such as water and sewer transmission facilities and identification of hazards prior to construction. Coastal Commission Interpretive Guidelines. Areas of the District within the Coastal Zone are subject to the California Coastal Commission (1977) interpretive guidelines. These guidelines require special siting and design measures to assure structural stability and - to minimize adverse environmental impacts. In general, the interpretive guidelines of the Coastal Commission are similar in level of detail to those contained in Local Agencies Seismic Safety Elements. Emphasis is, however placed on assuring bluff stability and other hazards related to safety in coastal areas. Cal ifornia•State laws which protect paleontological resources include the Public Resources Code, Administrative Code, and Penal Code. These laws focus on protection of these resources from unauthorized excavation, removal, and destruction. The City of Irvine Historical, Archaeological and Paleontological Policies require that paleontological assessments accompany development application subject to City review. Similarly, the County of Orange has developed similar policies for the protection of paleontological resources. 42 PBR LSA WATER RESOURCES For the purpose of the MEA, Earth Resources are defined to include surface water features, water quality conditions, and groundwater. Considerable information is available concerning each of these topics, primarily from the agencies responsible for water management and flood protection. Unlike the data source for the previous chapter dealing with earth resources, there is not a large body of privately produced hydro- logical analysis reports. Water resources are the subject of regulatory control by a number of agencies including the State Water Resources Board and State Water Quality Control Board, as well as from other agencies such as the State Department of Fish and Game. Because of the complexity of regulatory interrelationships, applicable jurisdictional involvement is shown in tabular form. - SURFACE HYDROLOGY SETTING Watershed areas. The area covered by the Irvine Ranch Water District can be divided into three hydrologic units: those lands lying within the San Diego Creek Watershed, those in the Santiago Creek Watershed, and those in the Coastal Watersheds. These areas, the boundaries of the major watersheds and sub -catchment areas, primary drainage courses, and major water bodies are shown in Figure 7. Of the 72,000 acres within IRWD boundaries, approximately 57,000 acres (79%) are within the San Diego Creek Watershed, 5,000 acres (7q) within the Santiago Creek Watershed, and 10,000-acres (14%) within the Coastal Watersheds. Surface drainage within the District has been extensively altered: The majority of water courses in the flatlands have been improved and realigned, and all of the major water bodies, with the exception of Upper Newport Bay, are man-made. The primary change resulted from the channel- ization of San Diego Creek. Historically, these flows ended during dry weather in marshlands to the north of Newport Bay, and during storm events, the runoff was carried to the Santa Ana River through channels and overland flow. Gradual building of channels and levees during this cen- tury deflected these flows to Upper Newport Bay. The stream flows were originally intermittent (with no flows for many months at a time) although agricultural and urban irrigation return waters now produce dry weather flows in some areas. San Diego Creek Watershed. San Diego Creek and its major tributary, Peters Canyon Wash, drain an area of approximately 150 square miles. The drainage area is bounded on the northeast by hilly coastal uplands, on the east by steep foothill uplands, on the southeast and 43 17t1i� southwest by rolling to steep coastal uplands, and on the west by level alluvium. The two streams, San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Wash, join to form the main channel of San Diego Creek which flows southwest approximately 4.5 miles through flat lowlands to upper Newport Bay. The entire drainage area ranges in elevation from sea level to about 1700 feet above mean sea level. The stream gradients of San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Wash range from an average of about 4 feet per mile upstream of Newport Bay to about 140 feet per mile in the upper canyons. The channels of the two streams are well defined and contain long reaches of improve- ments, including San Diego Creek downstream from Culver Road and the entire reach of Peters Canyon Wash. Vegetation in the drainage area varies considerably. Drainage areas contributing to runoff at selected points are given below: TABLE B SAN DIEGO CREEK DRAINAGE AREAS Drainage Area Stream and Location (Square Mile)_ San Diego Creek at Pacific Coast Highway (State Highway 1) 147 San Diego Creek at MacArthur Boulevard 123 San,Diego Creek at San Diego Freeway (I-40,5) 100 San Diego Creek below confluence with Peters Canyon,Wash 85 San Diego Creek above confluence with Peters -Canyon Wash 40 San Diego Creek at U.S.G.S. gage at Jeffrey Road 39 San Diego Creek at Moulton Parkway 9 Peters Canyon Wash at Moffett Drive 44 Peters Canyon Wash at A.T. & S.F. Railroad 35 Peters Canyon Wash at Santa Ana Freeway (I-5) 13 Santiago Creek Watershed. Santiago Creek has its headwaters in the Santa Ana Mountains. It flows northwestward through Santiago Canyon and then southwestward through the cities of Orange and Santa Ana into the Santa Ana River. Handy Creek is a major tributary to Santiago Creek in the study region. Most of the watershed fs within Orange County, with a small portion of the headwaters in Riverside County. Two major upstream structures, the Santiago Dam (forming Santiago Reservoir or Irvine Lake) and Villa Park Dam, constructed in 1933 and 1963 respectively, have a major attenuating effect on downstream flows. • • • • • LM "� r1.E° ,, _'t.�;•"- of l ,�_`—�r, 1~ -.�'' ^,y," :�. ... -r/'•" 1 to -'-.. \CREEK �C I .. . f�'�-oh .'^t�;t. .r,, i �`'ir .q, •i r,l" \, r7 '''�'�'4 �•N t. .•. t'�•I, ay ifff �. Ca y � '.. �-mot %,�1 .•'Ip MI - I' Y :dip I r'.'f r �� ,I., tl 4n t ',, y�eae )..�1 j !� "• - - - `+ -. ____ "�"__,'. - 1� t'r _ t� �. 1 EE CREEK •^' r' ''.' J 2r d i t '�L . -Ui.. PElEAS`WALN Vkw t - I �� � .I 11'-fir. j_`l';'����"•y 4'i� �.�r—�.J'1 njrif l-• '. ti -•_./� �:.- - 'I �.i r .. %�•' 3w Y_ >' � � i ,, �nl.. -,n V&IF115H 1, i„' 4 \ -`�• •">F j{il �pl� ` 4S» `'�.k.'rr_ �_-. y�" fir' '— t` 7i;,i' ' . " ,•',� _ •.t\- '�, p� '2,• .I t'�a{.t'IJ=al',. ,..'S�,r` ':i l'Ir=�i,rr �a 9„�Nlr'. ��i'r'l�/It,:� •A\```6'�, Vt t: - \:• '.��.� 7.1 y1`-Li•4%!"�., `. �\�~,,.���� `*:: :� ) _ �r %:Frjr!.�'�'"fit :�Cy ,�tl '" ��..r. �'r•t}. l<.'.y'��,.�ffih 'v'I�. i 1..a`-' i`�.. _ •� f�i':b:ti �•//: ri 4N, ••. r""a •h',.�.'17. ,. -,�^- ��y.,�,y �i ��_i< "�. � �L'' 's', SURFACE WqM RESOURCES 7 nmmn WATERSHED BOUNDARY LSA/PBR DRAINAGE COURSE 0 4000 SODO 12DDD �FEET L' 7 45 PBR LSA Elevations in the basin range from 110 feet at the confluence with the Santa Ana River to 5,687 feet at Santiago Peak in the Santa Ana Mountains. Stream gradients range from 25 feet per mile in the lower reaches of Santiago Creek to 305 feet per mile in the upper reaches. The drainage area totals 102 square miles. Drainage areas at specific locations are given below: TABLE C DRAINAGE AREAS Drainage Area Location (Square Mile) Santiago Creek At confluence with the Santa Ana River 102.0 At Villa Park Dam 83.6 Handy Creek (Alameda Storm Channel) At confluence with Santiago Creek 4.5 Part of the Handy Creek Watershed above Villa Park Dam) are within the Lake and approximately 8000 feet of Santiago Dam Spillway. The spillway located such that flows are directed separate watershed. and Upper Santiago Creek (i.e., IRWD boundaries, including Irvine Santiago Creek downstream of the for Peter's Canyon reservoir is northwesterly to Handy Creek, a Coastal Watersheds. The "coastal watersheds" are comprised of eleven small watersheds in the Irvine coastal area draining into the ocean and the Laguna Canyon watershed. The total area of these watersheds is about 12,670 acres. Their origin is within the San Joaquin Hills and Laguna Hills (for Laguna Canyon drainage). The drainage areas are given in Table C. Principal Water Bodies. Thirteen primary water bodies are found within the IRWD boun aries, as listed in Table E. Rattlesnake Reservoir receives secondary effluent from the existing treatment plant located south of Michelson Drive and west of San Diego Creek, and is pumped to Rattlesnake Reservoir for use in commercial agricultural and landscape irrigation. This reservoir also receives water directly from Irvine Lake through the Irvine Lake Pipeline (completed in 1978). Mm PBR LSA Upper Peters Canyon Reservoir was constructed in 1932 by The Irvine Company for use as an irrigation water storage and distribution lake. The dam is constructed of earth and has a crest elevation of 551 feet and a crest length of 580 feet. The dam is under the jurisdiction of the State Division of Safety of Dams (Dam No. 793-2). The reservoir capacity was originally 1090 acres; because of sedimentation, the capacity has decreased by an unknown amount. The watershed draining into the reservoir covers approximately 1000 acres. TABLE D DESIGNATED DRAINAGE AREAS Designated Drainage Areas Drainage Area (Acres) Boat Canyon 282 Emerald Canyon 1367 Moro Canyon 2149 Muddy Canyon 1000 Unnamed 149 Los Trancos Canyon 1200 Unnamed 119 Unnamed 219 Unnamed 204 Buck Gully 1068 Laguna Canyon 4910 Laguna, Lambert, and Siphon Reservoirs are also irrigation supply reservoirs owned by The Irvine Company. Siphon, Lambert, and Peter's Canyon Reservoir have secondary recreation use. All are under the jurisdiction of the Division of Safety of Dams. Bonita Canyon Reservoir is no longer used except for temporary retention purposes. The Woodbridge Lakes are relatively shallow (maximum depth - 8 feet) recreational lakes. The San Joaquin Reservoir is a domestic water supply reservoir operated by IRWD. The Sand Canyon Reservoir is used for storage of reclaimed water as is Rattlesnake Reservoir. 47 TABLE E PRINCIPAL WATER BODIES PBR LSA Surface Area (Acres) Storage Capacityl (Acre -Feet) Ownership Jurisdiction Irvine Lake' (Santiago Reservoir) 600 25,0002 IRWD, Serrano Irrigation Dist. Peters Canyon Reservoir 70 1,010 The Irvine Company Lower Peters Canyon Reservoir (5)3 (49)3 The Irvine Company Rattlesnake Reservoir 60 1,5004 IRWD (Recreation Right -The Irvine Company Siphon Reservoir Not Available 578 The Irvine Company Lambert Reservoir Not Available Not Available The Irvine Company Woodbridge Lake North 30 221 Woodbridge Commun- ity Association Woodbridge Lake South 24 175 The Irvine Company (Planned) Sand Canyon Reservoir 47 7685 IRWD San Joaquin Reservoir 54 3;0366 IRWD Upper Newport Bay 1000 - Dept of Fish & Game Laguna Reservoir Not Available 274 The Irvine Company Bonita Canyon Reservoir 20 325 The Irvine Company l Capacity in smaller reservoirs may be significantly affected by siltation. 2 IRWD share is 18,651 af. ("Evaluation of Proposed Irvine Lake Pipe- line", February 1976). Total storage capacity of Irvine Lake is about 25,000 ac-ft. IRWD's ownership of 18,651 of includes 6,400 of TIC recreational right. Siltation in the area of the outlet tower has been estimated at 600 af. Siltation in other areas is probable and thought to be significant. 3 Drained in the Summer of 1978. 4 Storage at elevation 412 ft., based upon as -built drawings, less estimated siltation of 230 of 5 Based on spillway elevation of,193 feet MSL elevation and lowest gate of new outlet works at 170 feet MSL. Reservoir storage can be increased by 134 of by means of a spillway dike to raise the reservoir 3 feet. If the Regional Water Quality Control Board requires a 230 of storm water storage allocation in lieu of constructing bypass facilities, the effective reclaimed water storage with a raised spillway will be 672 af. 6 IRWD share is 1486 af. 10 is If 1• 1• 1• I• Flood Hazards. Much of the land within the jurisdiction of the IRWD has been subject to flooding from San Diego Creek, Peters Canyon Wash and their tributaries. Flood problems have also occurred in Laguna Canyon and in Upper Santiago Creek. Past flooding has been caused by high intensity rainfall associated with general winter storms which are characteristic of the area. Due to the nature of the topography and soils, flood flows can arise in essentially dry streams in a matter of hours. Damaging floods have occurred in the area in 1884, 1916, 1923, 1938, 1952 and 1969. The largest and most devastating floods of record along San Diego Creek occurred in 1969. Precise historical flood data in the Irvine area, however, is very limited. The February 1969 flood had a flow of approximately 7000 cfs at Jeffrey Road. It is estimated that this flood would have a recurrence frequency of about once in every 35 years. By comparison, the Intermediate Regional Flood, or 100-year flood, is projected to have a flow of 11,600 cfs at Jeffrey Road. Therefore, floods of the same magnitude or larger than those that have occurred in the• past could occur in the future. Since 1969, portions of San Diego. Creek and Peters Canyon Wash have been improved to carry the Intermediate Regional Flood Flows. Other improvements have been made along tributary streams. Laguna Canyon has also experienced flood flows in the years mentioned above. Existing flood protection measures include a shallow flood control lagoon near the head of the watershed and an improved channel in the lower reaches. The channel is designed for a 25 year frequency storm and would be inadequate for greater flows. Along Santiago Creek, Villa Park Dam and Santiago Dam have a major effect on reducing flood flows. Considerable surcharge storage is avail- able in the Irvine Lake thus affording some protection -for the area within IRWD boundaries below Santiago Dam. The Upper Santiago Creek floodplain in the area from Villa Park upstream 3.5 miles to Santiago Dam is mostly developed County Regional Park lands. Initial studies of flood hazard areas were performed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and reported in their Flood Plain Information Series. These reports are available for the San Diego Creek and Peters Canyon Wash watershed and for parts of Laguna Canyon. A refinement of these studies, covering all areas within the IRWD boundaries, is being performed through the National Flood Insurance Program. Under an emergency program, Flood Hazard Boundary Maps (FHBM) were prepared for local jurisdictions partici- pating in the program. These maps are currently being refined by prepara- tion of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). On these maps, the area of "Special Flood Hazard" is the land in the flood plain subject to a one i• if 1• PBR LSA percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year (i.e., the area subject to flooding by a 100-year storm) . These areas are designated as Zone A on the FHBM and further refined, on the basis of inundation levels and potential ponding, in the FIRM's. Local jurisdictions are required to develop regulations (appropriate zoning) to qualify for flood insurance. The flood mapping is at various stages in different communities. The flood hazard areas shown on Figure 8 are from the latest data available. The County of Orange and City of Irvine flood hazard areas are based upon Preliminary Flood' Insurance Rate Maps. These designations will not be official until mid-1979. Dam Inundation Areas. The Dam Safety Act of 1973 (California Government Code Section 8589.5) establishes a framework for the study of all reservoirs within the State and, where necessary, preparation of contingency evacuation plans in the event of dam failure. Owners of reservoirs are required to prepare preliminary studies for the State Office of Emergency Services (the agency responsible for the program). If failure of a dam would cause loss of life,or personal injury due to flooding, preparation of an inundation map and evacuation plan is required. Of the 34 dams within the County, eleven have been exempted from the requirement, although those exempted are reviewed every two years. Within the IRWD boundaries, those dams requiring inundation studies and contingency plans are Santiago, San Joaquin, and Rattlesnake. The contingency plan for Santiago Dam and Reservoir has been prepared (County of Orange, Evacuation Plan for Areas Below Dams); other studies are pending. Areas within the IRWD boundaries which would be subject to flooding in the event of failure of Santiago Dam as shown in Figure 9. WATER QUALITY SETTING Beneficial Uses and Water Quality Objectives. The primary responsibility for regulating activities that affect the water quality of all waters within the State rests with the State Water Resources Control Board. In accordance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and the State Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969, water quality control plans were prepared for the 16 planning basins with the State. The bulk of .the IRWD territory falls within the Santa Ana River Basin and is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Laguna Canyon watershed, and San Joaquin Hills watersheds extending northerly to, and includfng the Moro Canyon watershed (hydrographic units 1.11 and 1.12), and are within the jurisdiction of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. •t,.a"� �:'a:. i x.-..11k, .,yt'. A' i �j' ', f i �' r e - ; , Ott.: ,. ;i; . ,' - �., .';e'`}- all. •- t r''! - "C�.,, p,}. ,r :iL:r`i�y,C;s4•'N:.'.�". ., f_r t �-"t;i, _ - ,', r�j..'fs ). � .r(f ,: -' ,�r o `!tlt ��d't�diej aF', '1'-`Jn�.,q� � 4•_4, n„%J`, r�, -tc,._ Z• j ist,i}:..�: }L•' < V� ,lv,,1 � .L l t � _ %i=E, i�''� �"': '`S: ! }'.%'tom. ' ti•, �-%" "'„",. ' i,`ir '. -.' �_ a13:.,;'r;7;•.. v' �?:�J�.%,K'.tf",r'f,: w c�.SJ'ti.; _„}}� �''� J1� ,,-aC,%. +�'` 'yw �,• 1;(,l :'4.°.�-; : - �`-A`:�'+ �� '•Fi.',y i.N,� ';t,c'L' }1C C`�ti Yµ .,)�I-_:� i '�':.=a.A•p,,` >� iu; a, '} jJ4>:���?' �`t_i {,'�'r .'� • 4%;y r,:.UI 9,-�5''"„ � �' ,�;, '6•��=,. r:`r s�,i .., •'•^,:•:r,:,;r_':,+��.�,'',,; ,' ,_� y3{°ti- 'Sx •�1`.�' ttJ J l J„=":•'>'` :r'.`' '/„•..; ;tl_.,',-{,��,S iL.m' .:. 5',_ .*\,n ,:\u ,"'Cr .'t'fX ,�iki��- .14 •Y •," ,' � jti %( Iti �'rl.. r.. ., j.., �i "1 ll,�'Y,,'e �n'• M' 1' ff � d� 'l�'��-�.,� Cr',q������•. ,1 i!!: �'r,�l�.\�. ti 1• r y✓.,M! /t' }.t.T Y• `4r �' ' '%,- •-.'s"I�ir�� �,' ',l,�; "�', h-7>�.•`-"--�� `a?k• .h,;,+`;�ij, i, 1�.Y';: , £�' r 1�:a"'•'�},� .'�.�}'�' 1-'t�-a ;•,`�•=).- ���..;'1�.f f3�y' ,'�'e ,£.J,V2 `�!:.,i r`'.!•..�'t ,a �„ ,;,�f�?�,\�V. �/� :� �" �� - 4R � �� 'i �1 ,� _,, .� f, ;t. ': 'F•iJr ' . �i<iP�l'IN'r °r44 {%i``'t- t'�` rt �� -=a ( �.') ._ - 9 .d ,:-r' 7.✓�','3.,; ,� KI �,,.w71JY,}i �._`s',t::�.a.��..i:. ,'�'h✓.�. .: 1`'°S�;!�siti'W�.`,^G��- "�-e Y c;.i%� o 'J' FLOOD HAZARDS 8 B INTERMEDLATE ODYER IOML PM)FLOOD LSA/PBR wm xwwwm w ovc 8 40� J12000 pwr wopoonvpe vu60o eFD `"w' FEET �ry �y,�m FROM 1NE RWp MG i i• Q 51 PBR LSA FLOOD MAP DATA SOURCES City of Newport Beach, FIA Flood Hazard Boundary Map, 7/9/76. City of Tustin, Tustin Flood Plain (map), February, 1978. City of Laguna Beach, Hydrologic Constraints Data (map) no date. County of Orange, Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps, revision to FIA Flood Hazards Boundary Maps of 1/10/75. City of Irvine, Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps, revision to FIA Flood Hazards Boundary Maps of 7/12/77. 1• A I• I• I• I• 1• 1• I• Ir r It r 53 PBR LSA The "Beneficial Usesl" of waterways within the IRWD boundaries, and water quality objectives2 required to protect these uses, are contained in the Basin Plans for the regions. Information on the relevant hydrographic areas is presented in Table F. The Basin Plans are being updated as part of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act "208" studies and revisions will be incorporated into the more comprehensive 208 plans now in preparation. The Section 208 program provides comprehensive plans for water quality and waste treatment management. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is currently preparing the 208 plan for the South Coast area. Review of the Draft Plan began in late 1978; certification by the State Water Resources Control Board and submittal to the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency is expected in mid-1979. As part of the initial work program of the 208 studies, assessments were made of water quality problems and issues within the SCAG region. A priority concern was the quality problems in Upper and Lower Newport Bay. The majority of the land within IRWD is within the San Diego Creek watershed, which drains into Upper Newport Bay, and the policies developed relating to the Bay will directly affect activities within the watershed. The following are the draft policies recommended for protection of the Bay: 1 "Beneficial Uses of the waters of the State that may be protected against quality degradation include, but are not necessarily limited to, domestic, municipal, agricultural and industrial supply; power genera- tion; recreation, aesthetic enjoyment; navigation; and presentation and enhancement of fish, wildlife and other aquatic resources or preserves." (Porter -Cologne Act, Chapter 2, Sec. 13050 (f)). Water quality objectives are the limits or levels of water quality con- stituents or characteristics which are established for the reasonable protection of beneficial uses of water or the prevention of nuisance within a specific area. (Porter -Cologne Act, Chapter 2, Sec. 13050(h)). As applied in this Water Quality Control Plan, a water quality objective for a specific water includes consideration of the past, present and future uses to be protected; the impact of the objective on the broad environmental setting of the basin; related water quality conditions subject to reasonable, coordinated controls; and the economic impact of the objective. (Additional information on water quality objectives is contained in the MEA Data Base Library). • 1• 1• I• is is �6 0 54 PBR LSA TABLE F BENEFICIAL USES OF WATERI WATER BODY FUN AGR IND PROC GWR HAY POW REC-1 REC-2 COMM WARM COLD BIOL WILD RARER MAR SiTIGR Santa Ana Region Santiago Creek -mountain areas X x x x R San Diego Creek (and other streams) X X % X Upper Newport Bay Irvine Lake X X X x X % X Irvine Lake x X X % X Lambert, Peters Canyon, Sand These lakes and reservoirs are privately owned or have restricted access, are Canyon, Siphon, Rattlesnake, generally small in size and in many instances used for wastewater storage. No Laguna beneficial uses have been identified at this time. San Diego Region Laguna and San Joaquin Units X X X X R (1.11 and 1.12) Pacific Ocean (includes Irvine % X 8 X X .X X X X X Coast) Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana and San Diego Regions (8 and 9). Water Quality Control Plan Reports (Basin Plans). AGE R - Ayricul tural Supply IND - Industrial Service Supply PROC - Industrial Process Supply BIOL- Areas of special biological MAR - Marine Habitat RARE - Preservation of rare species significance MICR- Fish Migration REC-1- Water Contact Recreation COLD- Cold Freshwater Habitat HUN - Municipal d Domestic Supply REC-2- Non -Contact Water Recreation COMM. Ocean Conmercial and Sport HAV - navigation SHEL - Shellfish Harvesting Fishing POW - Hydropower Generation WAR14 - Warm Freshwater Habitat OWN - Groundwater Recharge WILD - Wildlife Habitat 2 All coastal waters are shown as habitats for rare and endangered species. The brown pelican has flown most of the coastline but due to pollution of bay waters has become rare throughout the San Diego Region. Recent pollution control programs, however, have reestablished much of its habitat and the brown pelican is becoming well established once again. To ensure this reestablishment all coastal waters are listed as a habitat for rare and endangered species (RARE). 1• I• 1• I• 11 J Ul • �0 55 TABLE F con nued MINERAL OBJECTIVES ARE ANNUAL FLOW -WEIGHTED AVERAGE u Aq WATER BODY u o\ o\ a` o Y•.^^ v.- L m,- n^ a•.-'- u m.- n -a F- Santa And Region m m 6 u E u E u LL¢ E x E z F- E M E h 6 my E F-u fi 1- Santiago Creek -mountain areas lcla 3 12 30 2a 70U 360 1 75 220 262 2ul 2c2 San Diego Creek lc3 720b 5 262 2c2 Irvine Lake 1cl 5 7 130 10 730 360 6 110 310 262 2ul 2c2 Lambert, Peters Canyon, Sand No water quality objectives established for these waters, since they are very snail, Canyon, Siphon, Rattlesnake, privately owned, or have limited access. The Regional Board may set objectives based Laguna upon a specific need as expressed either through testimony or staff recommendation. San Diego Region Concentrations Not to be Exceeded More Than 10% of the Time during one year period (mg/l or as noted) ' T Y N N H U it C N W 2 [q 4L S 2 a m O H� O� LL Laguna and San Joaquin Units 1,000 40D 60 Soo c 0.3 0.05 0.5 0.6 None 20 20 1.0 (1. 11 and 1.12) a Letter -numbers underlined in table refer to gbneral water quality objectives in the Basin Plan. b Above Jeffrey Road. c Concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, by themselves or in combination with other nutrients, shall be maintained at levels below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant growth. Threshold total Phosphorus (P) concentrations shall not exceed 0.05 mg/1 in any stream at the point where it enters any reservoir or lake, nor 0.025 mg/l in any reservoir or lake. A desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisances in stredms and other flowing waters appears to be 0.1 mg/l total P. These values are not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time unless studies of the specific water body in question clearly show that water quality objective changes are permissible and changes are approved by the Regional Board. Analogous threshold values have not been set for nitrogen compounds; however, natural ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus are to be determined by surveillance and monitoring and upheld. If data are lacking, a ratio of N:P - 10:1 shall be used. I• 1• I• I• 10 4 I• I• 56 1. Habitat Restoration PBR LSA "The wildlife habitat in the Upper Newport Bay Ecological' Reserve shall be enhanced, where needed, and maintained in such a manner as to optimize its function as a coastal wetland resource. "The sediments not contained by upstream controls and facilities shall be managed in such a manner as to result in the least environmental damage practicable." 2. Sediment and Erosion Controls "Upper Newport Bay shall be protected from the influx of sediment to the maximum extent reasonably practicable by: (a) effective and enforceable administration and legal actions emphasizing source controls, (b) effective and environmentally acceptable land management practices, and (c) the construction and maintenance of effective and environ- mentally acceptable facilities above Jamboree Boulevard. "Such actions shall be accomplished by the appropriate jurisdic- tions within the watershed within funding capabilities. State and Federal funding sources shall be sought where they may effect acceleration ' of implementation of corrective and preventive control measures. The Department. of Fish and Game shall, as a part of the continuing action program, assess the efficiency of these upstream sediment controls and shall develop a program for management of sediment reaching the bay consistent with their findings." 3. Street Cleaning "Upper Newport Bay and its tributaries shall be protected from surface pollutants and debris through effective and enforceable actions by all jurisdictions within the watershed." 4. Water Quality Investigations "A comprehensive monitoring and modeling program shall be deve- loped for Newport Bay and its watershed integrating on -going monitoring programs conducted by existing agencies." • 1• 1• 1• I• G 1• C It I• 57 PBR LSA Current Non -Point Source Water Quality Concerns. Based upon studies of the San Diego Creek Watershed, the primary surface water quality prob- lems are generation of high nutrient levels in runoff (primarily from agricultural fertilization), erosion and sediment transport (from agricul- tural and urban construction activities), and potential effects of high levels of pesticides in irrigation return water; All directly affect the Upper Bay environment. High bacterial counts ((coliforms) are common in the Bay, but the cause of this has not been determined. It has been deter- mined, however, that there is no evidence linking bacterial contamination of surface streams to the use of reclaimed water. These factors are evalu- ated at length in the SCAG-NIWA 208 studies - specifically the final reports on Tasks 2, 5, 6 and 7. The San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh located north of San Diego Creek adja- cent to the UC Irvine Campus also experiences water quality problems. When the major source of water for the marsh, San Diego Creek, was diverted in 1968 into an improved channel, the flushing action was substantially diminished. The result is an increasing level of salinity in the marsh waters. Water management plans for the marsh have been developed, but have yet to be implemented. No priority surface water quality problems have been identified in the Coastal or Upper Santiago Creek watersheds. Point Sources. Point source discharges are regulated and the NPDES permit system administered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The following is a list of IRWD projects currently under waste discharge requirements for point source discharges. IRWD - Reclaimed Water #830142801 IRWD - Dewatering, general #830200609 IRWD - Dewatering, Sewage Treatment Plant #830200607 IRWD - Sludge Disposal Site #830014101 IRWD - Sewage Treatment Plant #830200602 There are approximately five additional NPDES permits within the IRWD boundaries. All fall within the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Area. Four apply to use of reclaimed wastewater by The Irvine Company in its agriculture operations and one applies to the Marine Corps in its wastewater treatment facility at MCAS E1 Toro. GROUNDWATER SETTING The groundwater elevations within the IRWD area vary from sea level to greater than 100 feet approaching the southeastern sections of the District, as shown on the 1977 groundwater contour map prepared by the I• I• [] 10 1• 1• I• I� [7 0 911 PBR LSA Orange County Water District. Groundwater levels have been found within approximately 10 feet of the surface in certain areas. The primary source of water is infiltration of rainwater from the San Joaquin and Santiago Hills. No water is pumped for domestic use from within the area (referred to as the Irvine forebay) due to high nitrate and salt levels. The highest concentrations of these are within the northern Irvine area. The sources of nitrates are: 1. Vertical flow from perched groundwater in gravel packed wells. Perched and surface waters have been examined and shown to contain nitrate as high as 2000 mg/l when associated with agricultural leachates. 2. The general use of ammonium salts as fertilizers. These salts not only oxidize to nitrates when percolating through the soil, but also develop acidity which increases the hardness of the water dissolving calcareous constituents of the soil. 3. Septic tanks and cesspools. The total nitrogen content of septic tank effluent typically falls in the range 20-80 mg/l and rapid nitrification converts this to nitrate. 4. Minor sources may include nitrates from air emissions and dust fall, and nitrate from the decomposition of natural vegetation. Of eleven wells in the Irvine forebay regularly monitored by the Orange County Environmental Management Agency, eight often exceed the salinity objective of 720 mg/l established for the area in the Basin Plan. While these levels do not represent a direct health problem, the potabil- ity is unsatisfactory. APPLICABLE LAWS OR PLANNING POLICIES Activities affecting the hydrology and quality of water within IRWD's boundaries involve numerous agencies with either permit or review authority. Table G lists those agencies and groups and their specific areas of interest; Table H lists those agencies with specific permit authority. C 1• 1• 1• 10 I• U I* �0 �0 59 PBR LSA TABLE G AGENCIES/GROUPS WITH PERMIT REVIEW Olt OWHERSWIP JUR S t R —SURFACE-AND GROUND WATER RESOURCES Surface Water Dam Water Groundwater Flooding gaulity Inundation Federal U.S. Army Corps of Egineers x State Itater Resources Control Board and Regional Boards x x x Department of Fish and Game x DWR x x County Orange County EMA x x x x Office of Emergency Services % Department of Nealth X. Special District IRWD x x % Cities Irvine x Laguna Beach x Newport Beach x Tustin x Santa Ana x Private The Irvine Company x % (reservoir ownership) 10 I• 1• 1• 1• I* I• 01 PBR LSA TABLE H AGENCIES WITH SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY AGENCY PERMIT AUTHORITY U.S. Army Corps of - Jurisdiction over streams with annual Engineers average flow of 5 cfs or greater - Permit requirement for fill or stream - bed alteration (Section 404) California Department of - Jurisdiction over activities with Upper Fish and Game Newport Bay - a State Ecological Reserve - Permit requirement for alteration of streambed or riparian habitat (Section 1601) Regional Water Quality - Control of point source discharges Control Boards (NPDES permit system) I0 [] I♦ C7 I0 I• I• 0 61 PBR LSA BIOTIC RESOURCES A considerable amount of literature addresses the vegetation and wild- life resources of the Irvine Ranch Water District. Several detailed assessments covering large portions of the District have been published within the last five years. Figure 10 provides an index to the primary literature sources used to prepare this chapter of the MEA. These sources contain detailed descriptions of existing plant and animal communities, descriptions of significant and sensitive habitats, and the localities and descriptions of other unique biological resources. Additionally, state, regional, and county resource inventories are useful., SETTING The Irvine Ranch Water District lies within the coastal and foothill zone of central Orange County. Ecologically, this region encompasses a wide range of habitats that include coastline, flatlands, hills, and moun- tains. Since the region is a typical cross section of the Southern California coast, it represents an ecological environment' that is much like those- found both north- and southward for many miles. In relation to the rest of Orange County, the natural terrestrial habitats found in the Study Area are part of the undeveloped lands currently covering approxi- mately 50% of the County (Orange County Planning Department, 1972). Biotic Communities. Biotic communities are assemblages of plant and animal species that are found in specific physical habitats. They are ecological units containing a diverse group of organisms that exist together in an orderly predictable manner and have a very close and com- plex set of interrelationships. These communities are commonly identified and discussed with reference to one or two dominant plant species and the nature of the vegetation. For the most part, the community classification scheme used in this report follows that of Cheatham and Haller (1975). Due to the wide variety of physiographic features and intensities of man's activities, eleven major biotic communities exist within the Study Area. These include rocky intertidal, sandy intertidal, coastal salt marsh, freshwater marsh, coastal sage scrub, introduced grassland, rural - agricultural, urban, chaparral, riparian, and oak woodland. In 1963, the California Department of Fish and Game inventoried the natural communities of the State. Table I shows the coverage and percent of total cover for the major community types within Orange County. Undoubtedly, the distribu- tions of natural communities have been reduced since 1973 by urban and agricultural expansion. Today, three of these communities, riparian, oak woodland and marsh are highly restricted in their distribution. '• • • • • • • • • • • • VIA IV, 'fr f� i �`r:,, .L,^� \' r.l ,�`�°rt •r y"t\--.r 1_r;'.F r n«.h.�53,•f,�, 7,`.tp'.ii it%xr�� llin�n�u�n� ls�y^ niu ;v..'s.\'. ^'.•a-' _ 41 xS. .•?_F_+..-,{rLF , <'S(•74 '• '-��:� rr r �I �'-j,y -,f. -}P'4 ._, ..q sr r �.1 ti`",iF1lvj`s �i; lr; w'1',1t`».;, �nt^,•.r �,:'. �, _' ,', ,'le };, ,�s'1y .3': �i �"':: r':y:(�`, ,'t:,N`,k�!' '.� •' �'" ^s("af'r.^".."'Ir"L i i . 4 C.__• Nill, y,'--L,,. ',•• ,, tp�}' "`,j'? lc_., •,(�„ ��'atr rf '_'_• '•t1 i a=�� I_ -, j �'�' :d�••r �' ;�; •'r • - ,':,: . � fi :' ra v.`-'• ry _ � 4 � ia�i�" i cs�,^ - �i �' i; 5,111 lLL _ �s 1� `ieS�6�� `rt,: g: � ;�� r; .,,•t fl-,r y- �{ � �' r, qi,`.3 /�.•L `."; .i:"� Lry' i; t<h•,«•Si.".. . •Lt •i,' . :Y; i r� wt`•` ^'• 61.E it,, i'C'°�_ - .yr •r�.,, ,."' "J fit'^ ••k``^.:, -''- ;_rC-i '��'. '•,IIK, :•� :: .+. FN./ III).�a,.• - .;..:v,.��• ;+� 1., •t ;t; r. JI 7lI�T G'' ..., ,•'c i; ••yt., •, r%yi. r...�ri�C , .; :.\.q ��; �.;+ '^'�,.'>•1„�,�. ✓�"r,��`5: i).i t�'RI- t•/i" '`%' •1^. 'Y ' J=.i ,,.1� \'; i 1' �� ! : Ii'�.+` `_ay .<y •.•` �.`:: .L, e=. "r�.' •..{rnmis,' rx r •.k. d7 I: •i.-'� t.0., d'i, � f�:�y .•.ta,�5,;,4 - ,�-.i,V-'''^ , {. ,a,Sw ai•._., ,'d'i - ; r,e}�:,° tier "C, .-@;ys��.ft ( I'S Y � ''i: t'S' i�k•t '- ':: .. ,. ,L•., w.` ;�J. •t:zi i.,� .�`i f5 - k,. E' I i :... �• ��li y+�. �.�+,�h'4:'y L -.`1 ;.�'t.�t,'• •r'.C` ':k ",:. •`'� e t'I :c L y ` 4 A" BIOLOGY , 0 0 . ....:... ... IRVI'NE RANCH WATER DISTRICT 10 I• I• I• C I• .7 • 9 63 LEGEND FOR BIOLOGY INDEX 1. Marsh, g., 1973. 2. England and Nelson, 1976a. 3. Qualimetrics, Inc., 1974. 4. England and Nelson, 1976b. 5. Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc., 1974 and 1975. 6. Chapman, Phillips, Brandt, Reddick. PBR LSA 1• 1• 1• 1• [7 [7 • I• • TOTAL E TABLE I TOTAL PBR LSA Community Type Coverage Percent of County Total Urban 169,719 acres 34.0 Coastal Sage Scrub 103,280 acres 20.6 Rural -Agricultural 85,401 acres 17.0 Introduced Grassland 74,906 acres 15.0 Chaparral 52,381 acres 10.5 Riparian 3,G73 acres 0.7 Marshl 2,150 acres .0.4 Oak Woodland 5,107 acres 1.0 Total 496,617 acres2 99,22 Sandy Intertidal 38 miles 92% Orange County Coastline Rocky Intertidal 8 miles 8% Orange County Coastline Total 46 miles 100% I Includes fresh- and saltwater marshes. 2 The remaining 3,863 acres, or 0.8 percent of Orange County is repre- sented by open water of lakes, bays and reservoirs, and by coniferous forest. I• I• [7 I• • I• 65 PBR LSA Following is a discussion of the general ecology of the major biotic communities found within the Irvine Ranch Water District. Each community description includes information on the significance, physiognomy, charac- teristic plant species, representative wildlife, distribution, and wild- life value, as well as brief descriptions of any sub -communities. Although insects and other invertebrates are generally omitted from the discussion, they play an important role in the ecology of each community by providing a vital link in food chains. Thus, as a group, they should receive the appropriate consideration when making environmental and plan- ning decisions. For more detailed lists of the plant and animal species• found in each community, the reader is referred to previous studies of more specific project areas (See Figure 10). A map of biotic communities is provided in Figure 11. Borders between communities are not as distinct as is depicted;.rather, they come together with considerable overlap. Rocky Intertidal. Rocky intertidal communities are found along short stretches of tiTIrvine Coast including rocky outcrops on either side of Reef Point and Pelican Point. These areas offer a tremendous variety of niches to organisms. As a result of the stability of the substrate, the increase in surface area, and the variation in the form and orientation of the area, the biotic diversity can increase by many orders of magnitude over that found in other coastline habitats. The distribution of plants and animals in these communities usually follows a vertical zonation pattern. Each zone possesses many niches available to many species, each selectively adapted to a particular degree of exposure to salt water or to air. While some organisms are restricted to a very narrow niche, others range through the full extent of the tidal zone and are capable of tolerating long periods of exposure or submer- gence. The predominant forms of vegetation are red and brown algae together with forms of surf grass. These are most abundant in the lower intertidal zone. The vertebrate animal species inhabiting shoreline rocky intertidal areas are predominantly birds which feed upon the invertebrate fauna present and materials deposited on the rocks during high tides. These include most of the species found in sandy beach areas (see below), as well as black oystercatcher, turnstones, and gulls. Additionally small fish, including cottid and blenny fishes are frequently found in tidal pools. Mammals are limited to an occasional seal or sea lion which may haul out on the rocks. Amphibians and reptiles are absent. • Sandy Intertidal. This habitat is common along the coastline of Southern Ca fornia. within the Irvine Ranch Water District, it generally occurs in fairly long stretches intermittent with shorter stretches of J 0 0 0 0 • 0 I % " 0 0 0 0 I 1• r-YA PBR LSA rocky shoreline. Most of the coastline receives heavy recreational use, but this has not seriously degraded the habitat within the District. The coastline here exhibits minor biological impairment with modifications limited to local areas, and minor to moderate levels of pollution (Fay, 1972). This is apparently due, in part, to the limited access and use of the coastline here which is largely restricted to Scotchman's Cove (just south of Reef Point) during the summer and on weekends (Marsh, 1973). Sandy beaches are very dynamic in physical stability .and accrete or erode on a seasonal basis. This natural instability is unfavorable for the development of a diverse biological community and high biomass, particularly when compared to rocky shores and estuaries. Sedentary organisms are either buried or are eroded away. Thus, a vegetative cover is seldom present. However, sandy intertidaT areas do provide habitat for a variety of organisms. Sand crabs are locally and seasonally abundant organisms which inhabit the surf zone on sandy beaches. Their mobility allows them to advance and retreat with the tide. Bean clams and other burrowing fauna may also be found here. These provide an abundant .food source for numerous shorebirds possessing specific adaptations for feeding or burrowing invertebrates. These include sandpipers, willets, plovers, curlews, and dowitchers. This function is particularly important during the migrations of these species. Amphibians, reptiles and mammals are normally absent from this community. Coastal Salt Marsh. A large estuary and associated salt marsh occurs at Upper Newport Bay, the extreme upper portion of which is included within the Study Area. This habitat was once commonly found at the mouths of coastal rivers and streams in California.. However, due to airport, marina, recreational, residential, and industrial developments, its distribution has been reduced by over sixty percent in California, and by approximately ninety percent in Orange and Los Angeles Counties (Orange County Planning Department, 1972, California Department of Fish and Game, 1973). In addition, many remaining estuarine and salt marsh habitats have been heavily impacted by man's activities. Characteristically, estuaries are semi -enclosed bodies of water along coastlines. They have a free connection with the open ocean, and are thus strongly affected by tidal action. However, within an estuary sea Water mixes with fresh water from land drainage and is measurably diluted. Physical conditions are often very stressful and exhibit wide ranges in salinity and temperature. Species inhabiting estuaries show wide tolerances to these conditions. In addition, plant species growing in this habitat must endure water -saturated, oxygen poor soils. For these reasons, the diversity of resident species in this habitat is correspond- ingly low. The organisms found there include a mixture of endemic species 0 If 1• C U, C U U, to m PBR LSA and those which come from the marine environment, plus a very limited number which possess the physiological capabilities to enter from the freshwater environment. However, estuaries tend to be much more productive than the marine and freshwater environments on either side, and they serve as important food sources to a great number of organisms. The reasons for this high productivity are that estuaries act as nutrient traps, they possess a variety of primary producers capable of year-round photosynthesis, and they benefit from a fluctuating water -level ecosystem which acts to remove wastes and transport food and nutrients. The vegetation of coastal salt marshes is typically dominated by low growing grasses and succulents which are adapted to high soil salinities. The dominant .plant species found at the upper Newport Bay marsh include pickleweed (Salicornia sp.), sea blite (Suaeda californica):, and saltgrass (Distichlis s icata). Several other halophytic plants that grow in sa ine soils) species are common. Past salt ponding activities have considerably altered the salt marsh vegetation within the Study Area, but the habitat'is gradually reverting back to a healthy natural condition. Currently, it exists as an expansive mudflat area, with scattered patches of native vegetation intermixed with introduced weedy species. The amphibian, reptilian, and mammalian faunas of the bay are impress- ive (Thompson, 1977). However, the area is most noted as an important bird refuge, providing resting and feeding grounds for over 200 species of resident and migratory shorebirds, waterfowl and other water birds. The natural resources of the bay are -more fully described in a report by •Frey et.al. (1970). Freshwater Marsh. This community is composed of emersed aquatic plants and is found in permanently saturated soils where the water table is at or above the ground surface. In the Irvine Ranch Water District it exists along several stream courses, along the shorelines of ponds, lakes, and reservoirs, and most extensively at the San Joaquin Marsh. The Wildlife and Habitat Inventory Irvine General Planning Program (March, 1973) describes the most significant of these areas in greater detail. Normally, it is dominated by tall reed -like species, including cat -tail (Typha latifolia) and Olney bulrush (Scirpus ol'ne i). Willows are also common. In general, this habitat remains in good condition over most of the District. However, the distribution of the community is limited. In most areas it exists as a very thin band along stream courses. As a result, it is highly susceptible to disturbances. Uncontrolled access and invasion by non -natives has seriously degraded this community in most areas. I• 10 I• is 1• • I0 PBR LSA The freshwater marsh community serves as the entire habitat or the critical component of the habitat for a great variety of'faunal species. Amphibian species include several frogs, salamanders, and newts. Most of these spend their entire life cycle in freshwater aquatic and semi -aquatic habitats, and could not otherwise survive. Only two reptiles, the western pond turtle and the western aquatic garter snake are expected in this habitat. This community is equally critical for them. Rodent populations can be found on the outside edge of the habitat, and medium- to large -sized mammals use the marsh for cover while watering, feeding and resting. These include coyote, -gray fox, mule deer,, Virginia opossum, long-tailed weasel, and racoon. Several bird species found here are also specialized for this type of habitat and can be found nowhere else. They include the Virginia rail, sora, American bittern, common yellowthroat, and long -billed marsh wren. There is an additional avifaunal•component that requires the cover of the marsh and the open water of the intermittent ponds. These include American coot, common gallinule, green heron, great blue heron, grebes, and several species of ducks. Commonly found in association with marsh areas are bodies of open water. These occur at the San Joaquin, Sand Canyon, Laguna, Bonita, Peters Canyon, Rattlesnake, Lambert, Siphon, and Irvine Lake Reservoirs. This habitat is important to, migrating ducks, geese, loons, and grebes. Most bodies of freshwater are used by these species as wintering and resting areas during their migrations. Most reservoirs and drainages are used for irrigation or flood con- trol, and the periodic rapid fluctuations of water levels prevents the formation of well -developed mature lakeside marsh that can be used by waterfowl for forage and cover. Therefore, few reservoirs offer more than marginal wildlife habitat. Those that do contain water year-round have developed aquatic communities. The largest of these, Irvine Lake, is stocked periodically with trout, bass, catfish, crappie and bluegill for sport fishing. More detailed and specific information regarding the wild- life value of marshes within the Study Area can be found in the literature Marsh, 1973). Coastal Sage Scrub. Coastal sage scrub is the characteristic plant community of the lower elevation hillsides and ridges of coastal Southern California where it occupies dry, rocky, or gravelly soils. Within the Irvine Ranch Water District this community is found scattered throughout the San Joaquin Hills and at elevations generally below 1500 feet on the Lomas Ridge. Typically, it is present on steep hillsides and in narrow canyons which are unuseable for grazing and agriculture. 6 1• 1• I• L' I0 I• 70 PBR L5A Coastal sage scrub is an open shrub community. The dominant species are shrubs that grow two to five feet high, but do not normally form a closed canopy. However, bare ground is not common. Rainfall and soil moisture are sufficient to support a rich variety of forbs and grasses. Growth of the dominant vegetation occurs in late winter and spring, follow- ing the onset of winter rains. Most flowering will occur in spring, but some shrub species continue into summer. The vegetation becomes dormant and more or less deciduous in summer and fall. Natural seeding rapidly reestablishes this community after fire, which normally consumes this vegetation type entirely. Ground cover is usually reestablished within one year after a burn. The composition of this community varies 'considerably within .the District and three sub -communities can be identified. This is the result of the diversity in climate, soils, and topography found among the coastal and mountain environments. Floral species commonly comprising coastal sage scrub communities include California sagebrush (Artemisia Cal ifornica), coastal goldenbush (Ha to a us venetus), California encelia Encelia cal ifornica), deer weed Lotus scoparius), black sage (Salvia mellifera , and California buckwheat Eriogonum fasciculatum). Larger shrubs such as lemonadeberry (Rhus. inte rifolia laurel sumac (Rhus laurina), and toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia are also common on north -facing slopes and in drainages where coastal sage scrub resembles chaparral in growth pattern and appearance. Common groundcover species are annual grasses and forbs introduced by man through grazing and agriculture. These include black mustard (Brassica ni ra), red -stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), foxtail chess Bromus rubens), soft chess (,Bromus mollis and wild oat (Avena fatua). Remnant perennial grasses (Stipa spp., Elymus condensatus) may also be found. Where this community occurs on ocean bluffs, it is commonly termed a seabluff succulent community. This is an uncommon vegetative association composed of endemic shrubs and succulent herbs which differs greatly from inland coastal sage scrub. Common species here include ice plant (Mesembryanthemum spp.), live forever (Dudleya spp.) and bladderpod (Cleome isomerIs). Within the District, it is found at scattered localities on the coastal cliffs and bluffs. of the Irvine Coast. Another form of coastal sage scrub, maritime sage scrub, is found covering the hilltops and slopes of the immediate coast. This sub -community is more diverse than the seabluff succulent due to a more favorable environment, and it contains many shrubs and herbs. The most common sub -community occurring within the District is the inland sage scrub. It is generally found at higher elevations than either seabluff succulent or maritime sage. Where it occurs further inland, the hotter and drier climate results in a reduced species diversity. I0 I• [7 I0 I• I• 71 PBR LSA Coastal sage scrub is highly productive and supports a surprising diversity and abundance of wildlife. Amphibians are generally absent; however, several reptiles, including western lizard, side -blotched lizard, gopher snake, red diamond rattlesnake, common kingsnake, and red racer are commonly found. Rodents and small mammals are very abundant and include dusky -footed woodrat, deer mouse, western harvest mouse, pacific kangaroo rat, California pocket -mouse, and Beechey ground squirrel. - Audubon cottontail' and brush rabbit are also numerous. The large number of smaller mammals supports a relatively large number of predators. These include those snakes mentioned above, and in addition, fox, coyote, bobcat, and raptorial birds (hawks, eagles, owls). Larger mammals„ represented by mule deer and mountain lion (in the Lomas Ridge area) also commonly utilize this habitat within their ranges. Characteristic bird species include the brown towhee, several sparrow species, California thrasher, blue -gray gnatcatcher, and the roadrunner. Other small migratory birds become common in the winter and wide-ranging predatory birds are frequently seen overhead. These raptors roost in nearby riparian woodland, and on cliffs and rocks. Chaparral. Chapparal is widely distributed throughout California on dry slopes and ridges at low and medium elevations where it occupies thin, rocky, or heavy soils. A well -developed chaparral cover is fdund in the extreme northeast corner of the Irvine Ranch Water District. Elements of this community have also been reported from the San Joaquin Hills (Jones and Stokes, 1974). According to Marsh, however, these do not represent chaparral communities as a distinct and discernable entity within this area (Marsh, 1973). Vegetative composition varies considerably; however, most species posses small, broad, hard leaves. These characteristics allow plants to photosynthesize and transpire under semi -arid conditions without wilting and to reduce their evapotranspiratory water losses. Most plants are evergreen, growing and flowering primarily in late winter and spring and becoming somewhat dormant over the summer and fall. Chaparral species commonly grow six to ten feet high and often form dense nearly impenetrable stands. Chaparral communities are usually dominated by chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum). This is also the "indicator species" for this community. Other common species include California sagebrush, lemonadeberry, laurel sumac, black sage, scrub oak (uercus dumosa), and toyon. Typically, a large accumulation of litter is found surrounding the base of shrubs and I0 • • 72 a-M , • is important to the overall ecology of the chaparral community. It func- tions as a "groundcover" in place of grasses and forbs to retard rainfall runoff, thereby inhibiting erosion and enhancing percolation of water into the soil. • Additionally, the leaf litter is highly flammable and readily burns during the drier parts of the year. Periodic burning (every twenty years or so) is a key element to the maintenance of a healthy, productive. vege- tative cover. The plants of this community are adapted to recurrent fires and either produce seeds that require high temperatures before germinating (scarification) or possess root crowns that send up sprouts following fire. Furthermore, fires recycle nutrients held in the plants back to the soil in the form of ash. If fire does not occur, the soil becomes sterile and plants eventually become decadent and die without replacement. This can lead to problems in wildlife and watershed management.. Following a fire, annuals produce a dense groundcover that holds the soil in place until the larger shrubs and the litter are reestablished. • The diversity of wildlife in pure unbroken stands of chaparral is limited. However, community productivity is high and large numbers of individuals of each species are often present. Under natural conditions of recurring fire, the chaparral is regularly burned, thus creating open- ings that often support many grasses and coastal sage scrub species. This • process is extremely important to wildlife. These openings provide an edge between the successional' vegetation and chaparral that is much more diverse and able to support a greater number of species than either commun- ity alone. These animals are able to utilize this interface as an entrance to dense chaparral in areas that would otherwise be closed to them. The characteristic wildlife species found in this plant community • are virtually the same as those found in coastal sage scrub. Introduced Grassland. Introduced grassland, also referred to as valley grassland, is a vegetation type that replaces native communities following dryland farming, heavy grazing, and other artificial clearing. Natural plant species are either cleared or are destroyed and are replaced • by adventitious species that can withstand constant disturbance. As a result, the flora of this community is dominated by annuals and perennial herbs that grow one to three feet high. The majority of these are non-na- tive and are often considered to be "weeds". The vegetative cover of this community characteristically germinates during the late fall rainfall, with most growth and flowering occurring from winter through spring. • Plants then die and persist as seeds through summer and early fall. These characteristics are in contrast to native grasslands of Southern California which are composed of perennial bunchgrasses (Stipa spp., Poa spp., Aristida spp.). • I• U 10 U I• I• • I• • I0 73 PBR LSA Relatively large introduced grasslands are found primarily in the broader valleys and on the more gentle hillsides of the Lomas Ridge and on coastal benches and ridgelines of the San Joaquin Hills. 'Presumably, these areas were once covered by a• native coastal sage scrub community. However, as ranching and agricultural practices grew in the region, these areas were treated with herbicides and were either converted to grassland to improve livestock grazing or plowed for farming (Jones & Stokes, 1974). Dominant species include various introduced grasses (e.g.Brome spp., Avena spp., Festuca spp. Hordeum spp., etc.) and mustards (Brassica spp.). Numberous spring -flowering native wildflowers are also present in limited numbers. These are rapid -growers, shooting up out of the soil in a matter of a week or two under the proper climatic conditions and adequate rainfall. When the weather becomes hot and dry, they disappear with the same rapidity. Introduced grassland is easily reestablished after fire; and, on -going grazing and agricultural practices will continue • to promote this vegetation. However, if left undisturbed, these areas will eventually revert back to their native conditions of native grasslands or coastal sage scrub. Large open expanses of grassland support a limited diversity of wildlife, but those that are present are normally abundant. No amphibian species are expected in this dry, disturbed habitat. The side -blotched lizard, western fence lizard, red diamond rattlesnake, and gopher snake are the characteristic reptiles of this community. The latter' two species as well as larger mammalian predators, such as coyote, fox and bobcat, are supported by abundant populations of rodents and small mammals, including meadow mouse, deer mouse, Botta pocket gopher, Beechey• ground squirrel, and Audubon cottontail. Two groups of birds dominate the avian fauna in this community. Grassland birds such as the western meadowlark, water pipit, savannah sparrow, lark sparrow, and horned lark forage for seeds and insects on the ground. Several of these species will nest here if not disturbed. The second group of birds are the predators. These species are expected to include the red-tailed hawk, marsh hawk, white-tailed kite, turkey vulture, American kestrel, barn owl, and great horned owl. For these organisms, grasslands serve as important feeding grounds where they prey on small mammals, lizards, and small birds. However, they depend on woodland habitats in the region for nesting and perching sites. R1 avian.• Riparian communities are found along drainage courses throughout a ifornia where moisture is at or near the surface on a year- round basis. These conditions are favorable for the establishment of a '0 [7 74 WE • rich cover of trees, shrubs, herbs, and grasses. This community type is found along numerous drainage courses in the District. It was once much more extensive in the region; however, flood control and irrigation pro- jects have severely restricted its distribution. Due to the wide varia- tion in the intensity and extent of man's activities adjacent to and within these areas, species composition and growth form vary considerably. • Community associations within the District are of three types: 1) south- ern alluvial woodland; 2) mixed riparian woodland; and 3) willow thicket. Southern alluvial woodland typically occupies broad canyon outwashes such as that found along Santiago Creek below Irvine Lake. The vegetation here characteristically consists of scattered trees, including western • sycamore (Platanus racemosa) and coast live oak ( uercus agrifolia), and a sparse understory of shrubs with large areas of barren sand and'gravel. Shrubs are predominantly those found in adjacent coastal sage scrub toward the margins of this community; however, towards the main drainage channel more water dependent species, such as mulefat (Baccharis glutinosa) and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) become more common. • Mixed riparian woodland refers to riparian community associations which are generally narrower and have a more dense vegetative cover than alluvial woodland. These areas are also dominated by western sycamore and coast live oak. A dense understory of large shrubs, including toyon, elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), laurel sumac, and lemonadeberry, is coin- • monly present. The groundcover is usually a thick layer of leaf litter. Aquatic and- semi -aquatic plants, such as algae and water -cress (Rorippa nasturti um-aquati cum) are found where surface water is present on a year round basis. Poorly developed examples of this association are scattered throughout the District where it occurs as a narrow band or as scattered clumps along drainage courses. Only where it occurs interspersed or inter- mixed with oak woodland (see below) is it well developed. These areas include several canyons in the coastal San Joaquin Hills and in Bee and Round Canyons in the Lomas Ridge. Willow thickets occur in localities with permanently wet soil; thus, • they are usually found near seeps or, at the 'margins of perennial streams and marshes where drainage is too poor for the development of a mixed riparian woodland. Characteristically, this association is dominated by dense stands of willows (Salix spp.) nine to fifteen feet tall. These plants reproduce readily from seeds, broken branches, and underground shoots. Understory vegetation is normally lacking. Willow thickets are • found along irrigation ditches and streamcourses throughout the District. The most significant of these are found at Peters Canyon Reservoir and along San Diego Creek south of the San Diego Freeway, particularly where i* I• I• 75 PBR USA it mixes with the San Joaquin Marsh. Much smaller examples are found scattered throughout the District surrounding reservoirs and in the larger drainage ditches. Due to the similarity of wildlife habitat provided by riparian communities and oak woodland, this aspect of this community is discussed in the next section. Oak Woodland. Major oak woodlands are found in Bee and Round Canyons in the Lomas Ridge and in, Willow, Los Trancos, Moro and Emerald Bay Canyons within the San Joaquin Hills. Minor woodlands can be found in numerous other canyons within the Study Area, however, most of these were not mapped due to their small size or lack of information regarding their location. These communities are dominated by coast live oaks ten to twenty feet tall with an understory of grasses and scattered shrubs. Large shrubs pharacteristic of the chaparral and coastal sage scrub communities, such as toyon, laurel sumac, lemonadeberry, Mexican elderberry and coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica) commonly occupy the openings between the oak trees. The majority of the oak woodland communities within the District are in good to excellent condition despite the fact that the native understory vegetation of most has been heavily disturbed by recreational use and/or heavy grazing pressure (England & Nelson, 1976a, Marsh, 1973). Fire results in the clearing of litter and dead vegetation, and loss of approximately 50% of living material on oaks. Rejuvenation of the woody vegetation will occur after a •fire. Annual grasses and chaparral type shrubs in the understory will reseed and resprout after a burn. "Oak and riparian woodlands are very uncommon in Southern California. In 1963, these habitats were estimated by the California Department of Fish and Game to cover less than 1.7% of Orange County. This figure has undoubtedly' been reduced since then by urban and agricultural expansion, .particularly residential development and flood control. This is contribut- ing to the loss of regional wildlife resources because woodland habitats are of high ecological value. For a given number of acres of habitat, they support higher population densities of wildlife than any other terrestrial habitat. Oak and riparian woodland habitats, normally possess a high diversity of plant types, enhanced by their overlap with surrounding vegetation types (edge effect or -ecotone), which in turn support abundant and diverse wildlife resources. All woodlands should be viewed as components of a regional system of woodland "island" habitats. The number of wildlife species each woodland island can hold is a function of its size and its C r [l [] 1• I• 1• [] I• PBR LSA isolation. Larger woodlands and woodlands located close to other wood- lands (such as in the same canyon or in adjacent canyons) can hold more species than smaller ones or isolated ones. If an individual woodland or a large portion of a woodland is removed, the diversity and abundance of wildlife there, as well as in surrounding woodlands, will decrease. These habitats normally support relatively high numbers of amphibians beneath leaf litter and along moist stream, banks. Several reptile species are also common here. Rodents are common along the edge of neighboring habi- tats and in areas where seasonal flooding does not occur. Particularly in lowland areas, woodlands are very important to furbearers (rabbits, raccoons, skunks, foxes, coyotes, weasels, bobcats) which use these habi, tats for cover, food, and denning. Populations of furbearers commonly reach their greatest densities in and around these areas. Woodlands are very important to bird species. Nearly all the species .found in surrounding habitats can be found here. In addition, it supports others that require the moist vegetation and/or trees. Hummingbirds, woodpeckers, many flycatchers, thrushes, vireos, warblers, and most finches forage and nest in this habitat. Many of these species are - migratory, and utilize this habitat for over -wintering. • Hawks, owls, falcons, kites, and doves specifically require the trees as 'perching and nesting sites and forage in surrounding vegetation. Some predatory species such as Cooper's hawk and sharp -skinned hawk forage in the habitat itself. These habitats serve as wildlife dispersion corridors important to regional wildlife populations. Many wildlife species, particularly medium and large forms, must move from place to place to forage for food or meet other requirements necessary for their survival'. In addition, the disper- sion of young after reproduction is essential to prevent local population crowding and -to maintain genetic variability and numbers throughout regional populations. Wildlife dispersion usually takes place along canyon drainages and streamcourses, not only because topographic resis- tance is minimized, but also because they commonly support woodland habitats which provide cover, food, and/or water during movement. Rural -Agricultural. Generally, this community orchards, cultivated croplands and scattered residential tures, and is found mostly on valley floors where land agriculture and irrigation is available. This communit much of the Irvine Plain and the broader 'foothill canyon tural land uses have a fairly long history. y s is comprised of and farm struc- is suitable for is found over where agricul- I• [] 1• 1• [] C I• I• 77 .__ The prevailing orchards and row -crops. found here are far removed from natural conditions and represent environmental simplifications which are artifically managed. Eucalyptus windrows composed of single rows of blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) fifty to seventy-five feet high, are commonly aligned between fields and orchards. These were originally intended to reduce crop damage and excessive evaporative water loss due to wind. These hedgerows visually dominate the existing landscape and are currently being retained in urbanized areas as a visual amenity. A wide variety of roadside 'and irrigation ditch weeds complete the vegetation of this community. The native flora in rural communities has been heavily impacted, and natural habitat diversity and productivity has been greatly reduced. Consequently, the diversity and abundance of fauna is very limited. Croplands and orchards are capable of supporting a relatively small number of wildlife species. These include several perching birds (starling, mourning dove, western meadowlark, horned lark, several sparrow species) and birds of prey (red-tailed hawk, turkey vulture, white-tailed kite), few reptiles (gopher snake, side -blotched lizard), a number of small rodents and medium-sized mammals (meadow mouse, house mouse, beechey ground squirrel, Audubon cottontail), and an occasional larger mammalian predator (coyote). The type and number of wildlife vary with the crop present and the season. Adjacent eucalyptus windrows are frequently used by birds of prey for roosting and occasionally for nesting. The use of the numerous flood control channels and irrigation ditches by wildlife depend largely on their location, design, substrate, presence or absence of surface water, and the degree and frequency of weed.control and silt removal. Most are dry for the greater part of the year and/or are frequently managed. Thus, permanent resident wildlife populations are limited. Others support a surprising number of species including those species found in adjacent croplands; plus, several shorebirds, waterfowl, and amphibians which depend, on surface water and/or moist soil and vegetation. Perhaps most noteable in this regard is the San Diego Creek Channel which in the past possessed considerable lateral vegetation along its margins. Urban. Urban communities are located within cities and towns with- residential' subdivisions, parks, golf courses, commercial areas, and industry. Within the Irvine Ranch Water District, this community is represented over much of the Irvine Plain which is rapidly urbanizing. Noteable urban features of the area include MCAS E1 Toro, MCAS Tustin and the scattered residential developments of the Irvine Villages. Generally, all native vegetation in these areas has been removed and replaced with non-native ornamental species which are frequently manicured. I• 1• r 1• I• 10 I• I• m -W_Qa Faunal diversity is extremely low. However, several animal species thrive under these conditions. They include Anna's hummingbird, starling, mockingbird, house sparrow, house finch, Brewer's blackbird, common crow, house mouse, and Botta's pocket gopher. The house sparrow, the starling and the house mouse are introduced European species and are considered to be "zoological weeds" that compete with native species. Areas of Special Biological Importance and/or Sensitivity. As -can be seen from the preceeding discussion, the Irvine Ranch Water District possesses a high diversity of biological resources. Many of these are in excellent condition and represent some of the few high quality examples of their type remaining in the region. Others, although often very restricted or in poor condition, are important because they represent some of the few examples of their type remaining in the region. The importance of these resources has been recognized by various conservation groups, researchers, and planning agencies in the past. Their individual efforts to document and plan for the preservation of these resources have resulted in the publication of several studies identifying "areas of special biolog- ical importance and/or sensitivity": Areas of special biological importance and sensitive habitat areas identified in these studies are shown in Figure 12. In many cases there was partial or complete overlap among the studies.. For this reason, it has been necessary to draw boundaries around a concentrated group, of areas and discuss their importance as a whole. Areas of special biological importance and/or sensitivity are briefly described in Table a. Summary resource descriptions shown on Table a were prepared from information contained in the studies in which they were identified. '0 'Cw.ky S;': fi�\:i:r,��: v:�,v 'i.;��;•l.t;p�.:•°e�, i° .\ :�;i!�•'!'' �. i• �`�:�;�:,"P��ti:i;.'�l'�'sJ<, J{'"7''3i�R,t��.4 :�,; •t, J: ,"? -, e e:` r�'�f .:',y N,. ✓;'••:i..:=�'�,^;'A-_Y'-'r', ',.;��t+ '�{tac e.J `: `�`:t) ,6.\tiF...'�9 *- ';:' °�;:�4 "`�'! �' .'�:il �'R:,�.•.^.' -fit .f'." . ;� t+ !{(�.q4�lr •i:A�'� i �v .f• �' i. �(', � ai>,Y',F�.`1. i'a`\�.',�n"• �+,..i%•,;.w�i.:,�1 k�'r J �iY+il��'$'u, � �' `' ,F6,' `:1�9"'``��Y�J `, ,a�..'r�•'. 5J' ��..�r ,t��T _li ,"v_ r ..• 1. �' �-;-'.;• r '.l Ti•` l.� i, ,1`-c� J!'. • •�'" a•� _. rr=)L•','.a n7,y 1.F-a ,i ,`r,. , "i'"L4': `. 'E�l �. I .F }j'Yf�'cT.:�� � ' •�_`!C`.-y ��,' J� r_���,..++��vv��`' ��••} ��'`l,••�"`J.S�}.r �;! :i. :1'..r'�`':+:% y- ,•.�'� V��;s�ri r�, �;�: ��;,i h: _2!lC,•' ]..k.1..., c.. _. ' {� .-•?i'.'T}ia Slikw� ':t.wrEa ``+' -L .t r�G 0 IFICANT AND SENSITIVE HABITATS 12 I IORINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT 12 10 I• 1• 1• U �6 PBR LSA TABLE J AREAS OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE E Y STUDY IN WHICH NAVE AREA WAS IDENTIFIED RESOURCE DESCRIPTION Pelican Point Jones and Stokes, 19151 Includes populations of rare and endangered Orange County Powell, 19742 Turkish Rugging (Chorizanthe staticoides ssp. chr sa- cantha). Irvine Coast Hood, 19753 Includes nearly all of the Irvine Coast Marine Life C. C.Z. C.C., 19754 Refuge. C.D.F.G., 19775 Possesses rocky intertidal and sandy intertidal habitats in good condition. Associated biota is more abundant and diverse than most similar habitats in Orange County. Coastal Canyons Mood, 19753 Includes Los Trancos Canyon and Buck Gulley, Moro Canyon, Marsh, 19735 and Emerald Day Canyon.' • Each contains extensive live oak -sycamore woodlands, coastal sage scrub, and grassland ecotones and perennial water sources which support exceptionally diverse and abun- dant wildlife populations. Moro Canyon includes a small cluster of uncomuon hybrid oaks uercus macdonaldi). Emerald Bay Canyon also possesses a Sinai) stand of MacDonald oaks or an unusual occurrence of Mesa oak (Q. eneelmanii) m n U I[] 9E PBR l5A TABLE J (continued) NAME AREA WAS IDENTIFIED RESOURCE DESCRIPTION Willow Canyon flood, 19753 Contains extensive oak -riparian woodland habitat. flarsh, 1973 6 Ecotone created by mosaic of woodland, scrub, and grass- land habitats possess greatest potential for wildlife of any interior canyon in the San Joaquin Hills. Also reported to contain population of endangered Laguna Beach live -forever Dudle a stolonifera) Upper Newport Bay Rood, 19753 Last example of near -natural estuary and salt marsh along C.C.Z.C.C., 19754 400 miles of coast between Morro Bay and Estero de Punta G.D.F.G., 19775 Banda in Mexico. C.D.F.G., 19737 Includes a portion of the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. Valuable spawning area for over GD species of fish. A wide variety of fish and wildlife inhabit the area, the most conspicuous being birds, with over 159 species of birds recorded. Bay provides wintering and resting grounds for migratory shorebirds and waterfowl, as well as nesting areas for a number of resident birds, including the endangered light- footed clapper rail and Belding's'savannah sparrow. Censuses conducted by the California Department of Fish and Game in 1967 and 1968 estimated 4.000,000 bird use days annually for the bay. San Joaquin Marsh flood, 19753 Supports diversified flora of aquatic, semi -aquatic, and C.C.Z.C.C., 19754 riparian vegetation providing breeding, resting, cover, and food requirements for an abundant fauna. Best and most extensive example of freshwater marsh remaining in Orange County. Possesses prime habitat for waterfowl shorebirds, perch- ing birds, and birds of prey with over 170 species of birds having been recorded from the area. FA li I• G r, �0 �0 �0 PBR LSA TABLE J (continued) SJUDY IN WHICH NAME AREA HAS IDENTIFIED RESOURCE DESCRIPTION Laguna Lakes Marsh, 19736 Only known examples of natural lakes in Orange County. Hood, 19753 These two and sometimes three lakes represent the historic collecting sites for early botanists. Many aquatic and marsh -associated plants collected here still represent the only locality where they occur in • Orange County. Peter's Canyon Reservoir England 3 Nelson, 19768 Supports extensive marsh and willow thicket habitats along margin of reservoir and major drainage courses. • Provides excellent riparian and fresh water habitats to a • wide variety of wildlife forms, including open water and marsh for migratory and resident waterfowl. Bee and Round Canyons England & N�Ison, 19769 Extensive oak woodlands and spring. Marsh, 1973 • Represent wildlife habitats of regional importance. Fremont Canyon hood, 1975U3 Combination of habitat types and grographical setting which give area high value to local and regional wildlife populations. • Extensive oak woodlands in good to excellent condition. ' Represents major wildlife dispersion corridor. The Sinks Hood, 19753 Contains unco moon geological formations, including steep inaccessible cliffs potentially important as raptor roost- ing and nesting sites. 1• [l FOOTNOTES: for Table J 1 Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc., 1975. 2 Powell, R.W., 1974. 3 Hood, L., 1975. 4 California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, 1975 5 Department of Fish and Game, 1977. . 6 Marsh, G., 1973. 7 Department of Fish and Game, 1973. 8 England and Nelson, 1976b. 9 England and Nelson, 1976a. I• • I• PBR LSA I• 1• I* I• I• I• nil PBR LSA Species of Special Status or Concern. Widespread habitat loss and degradation in Southern California is now indicated by the relatively high number of rare, endangered, or protected, plant and animal species found here. Numerous species which are known or may be expected to occur within the Irvine Ranch Water District have been given special status designa- tions by Federal (USDI, 1976) and State agencies (Department of Fish and Game, 1976) and private organizations (Powell, 1974; Arbib, 1977). Juris- dictional agencies and legislation applying to Federal and State designations are described in the following section. Those from private groups are advisory only and include: 1) bird species which are of special concern to the' National Audubon Society and have been "blue listed" due to recent or current declines in their population numbers; and 2) plant species which are native and considered "rare and endangered" by the California Native Plant Society. Table K lists those plant and animal species which have received special status designations and may occur within the Irvine Ranch Water District. Additional information regarding the range, regional distribution, and habitat requirements of these species may be obtained from the aforemen- tioned literature plus Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (1973); Stebbins (1966); Burt et. al. (1976); Peterson (1941); and Munz •(1974). APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING POLICIES Federal Endangered Species Preservation_ Act of 1966. This act gave authority to the Secretary of the Interior to declare as endangered those wildlife species which are native to the United States and are threatened with extinction. Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. This act strengthened many of the provisions set forth in the Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966. Administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, legislation charges all Federal agencies with the direct responsibility for ensuring that actions authorized, funded,'or carried out by them do not either jeopardize the continued existence of Endangered or Threatened Species, or, result in the destruction or adverse modification of the habi- tats ivate actionsf that doenot involve Federal funding or State,red or Threatened Secies. pprovalodolnot fall runder the terms of this act. I0 I• 1• is I• 0 • • m PBR LSA tl� tE N yp-P"rlliiTflu s1ANs uu W cwA[ux 11 I 1 me fill 1 SIAluS SVEC [5 Stela iWerel L.N.P.S. AYJ. Sot. [Ir<unentt xllPln IxND lY admin Inlly P+mx Wwr Dlitrkt 1. ftlt w,A 1IN9-14I11. t» fN11Y fotalLJ. - Itl urfM1 a WY+r Ikryort Wy. p» .r fcY t »tutxtl pmltcwJ , fur•bun' J rtr WWort WY Ilbr%4..M - blw IIStW p+Y.aSw JwJxN1n tIM1cu.tlllw. warn Y eN IpedwYMruf wclwnwlt+l tlwy mtlr. cwstllw mblJ. Jf W.Wlny A."..Gllfonit bow w11uA Fw.w", tcd.nY.r" - - , "m"u clik.t-M wll MrnkuslMOY pnkttW P. blw II».J Nlnwr r»IJanl tlony <wslllw nd It Wpu N.Wort pay. w tarot uMat. - In�bnoctu.ctliWw+w31 rbltur tD Wprr &Wort MY ✓d Sa Jo+yuU - - • W. ❑it" u4J.r Mrab. tt�lrtbrtu sll Inrr1+1 Mlv 4 wL uY 1Wrbn wWbMsa funwf In ynp• MIw•ttll.J pit. /u11Y p' otectea I'M, .W .vr"AItu..l trus. [ ..t L_i • W. IIf[W MUJIoY nslwn[ Ir wll•wrrluwJ wA .M rlpulu wxb toa�r9 Mutes cloltt wr11 b wll•J.nIDwJ wt ud rlWrbn vad- - blw IWO Inter rls4ar k[I Iwr str »u 1 In Yraul+Ms. • plw IIvtW xlntar ritlwr;•f.uwa mnN MA tt Ircus t uuus Waut In nlI-JanIWN cat +M rlWrlon xwJ t t• 1 'NwlwM NA - fu[ua cadet. - .olilt" f rn tlutw wuu j W1.l fa'"W) I M. 110.4 Imr 0.101t mnwl In Wa.awMa. i Irrnylmw MA Slalut W.L. - pule n.al ls) war larel bMia of x»w w JoM <wft n Nart rd or ' swlM11 MIJ axYi. EWmYnJa [n0eapnJ. - fu11Y p ret.tW Nnwr retlJmt. IM Inet lo_�ecrp_h+l�t YrolectW Mer MIJ ua .wx. 1 F.YL Xl Nr.+JInD nslJent 14 uljWM mewl ad WSW aru.. polt�11•Anr tos p,MIlt" tact" '"'E.Or - t MIJ I0 I• I• is I• L • IS PBR LSA SY[l[ b IcoutbwJl Wi[ISS STANS StLU (.Areal L.N.Y.]. IuJ. Sm. Occurnrlu YII\In IMW AYnwN mppn���� Ipa"Iw!!SL'l+�5) - slat., e"u. blue ❑lt" Inver nslMrt nm 11rW 1"Inv el atrf IMINIM I411N rcser.Ylns SIN Jw9u1N Mrab, a" bppu Mpert 1.Y. M.111M WnWIM /uLw ["amlenJ, [NLNYWN - - aloy Lt151 +s trbutM orxlntte W.M.n prnarlMs rn.twl Iu11Y pret.w W+Iru f+lcw rala MtlLansl blur Iis{" vIMrr Ylsltor u NIWaM tbrouYluut. M Ib Truro nlubarlml stow$ uWYt. - ue blIM" Ylpur tlsltof rcW1nl YItbroa rant. " buns bin 1•punriusl - - - blur list" br.W1, raid..t tb,myMYt. bluParuwJ blybt in. N t ma n c1�Y_Icorat) - - blue lilt" brtMIYY n11d.M In n1i•benleYN NulMs, wr91nb0, Uawf Mymt II, a" U. J"NYIN Nanb. L+rIL+Y bitty. (1YUww LnllalMtoll - - - blue list" bnrrin, .11J t bl a+il•o... I tb Mr1Ms, well<4br1y 111stin gwstlow +bh fbr reYloel Lp"l NrvWrl by a" $1, Jolyule Mnb. Iv'1t bi u. Illsl cbusu _ blue (bind brnJl nslaNt b wlk"Mo a wr3M, nY Pr weticululY Ljpu Mrywt [ay utl San JwpYb Mrib. Mlb-land Ub iphokil. albl bIw IIatN vinbr Halter to U. J."I. Mrsb. ll ballwt" llulrlII'll lYtiws) fuilYYtrN, f"atytlN - _ bnNlnY rn1aM Lt hyper NLpwrt MY. ' Protect" Gllfml+blW nil oleo.... Yusls 11n, b1i - - bn"IM n110YM n W,r W,.t My. nlurn cYwsua p.t"w uowuln plonr 141r�slS mulaM - lulm uw.t. - _ wrier rn lon, M Uywr X..Yeu uY a" 51N JwyYln Mnb. f NYw Ylbrrr 1a.na Y ,L.wrbYLl U.N. uNrt. - b1M Iiand Nnter n11",i at 0Wr Mpwt My W Sn Jwyvlr Mrm. Imydlll" cwl« 1N="•LY aaYrlw 1 - subs nJrt. - dolt, n+NMt M V tr Magwl 1, uYl U. Jw I. Mru. 3 I• I• Eh PBR LSA • 7A9 f K ICOAIIw l • yp[LILS 51A745 Autl. Soc. ucurm—xlnln Aw Stilt io.rYl L.W.M. dnbr rwlmnt It lyyr WwUn Do .nd S.n Jayuln sbrt•b111N dwlt[Mr Itlrndrt.n loaf � e1YflM Jt%cwitllm. ' EW.%.ndi ENw4rW - blur Ils[W • Lt'SlbrAb 1.11, prMNLN - xlnbr mldmt +t Wpr Murat WY Yr1110% cUtftltM• _ Mr1yT.n1 Elnnt dre ) X Muut J�y_+_ny bnWl%nfld.. M 9n3flq+lt .W Nrltult". rnf. tutus aWrt. • blw lilt" 111 al.9 tYntlwr bYrin4 w1 n. atilt Ia n91u) S tt tt cw n +r . b[WI% ntld a tTrou4Twl• _ blur HOW We wl ISywiW blw IItIW Inter Ylslt9r tW xtYnnf In 9u31110s tW WIr Mlt fl..l WW.rt My. b Wl% wid.nt 1. wll•wxdtpJ at uw Npul+n wad• • - - blw Into I+Wy b.111 w Ik.r Ihoratwa rlllefuf) blw IIstW btWl%nslJ.nt In cwsttl f•vt aruL• �Iltlo rbltr aW .IW+M Urv%hwt• Clw llsud xintr xnfltnlal® 1_anq ' (��'• n31Jnl tl�rv%lout. _ _ blw IIstW btuJl% IdyWMW SMIM u uJYdcOwl _ tW d4nM lMaY1MYt. tun M. lift" xlntxr rllllr • ydlw wrNtr b.rv4tlt+ tMT +) - n31Jmt rt Me N+yxle wn4. blw IIatW OruJl% ytnYthbia lfYlflntl t OraW I%rulU.nt le %rlcultura yn+s .W YnubWt. _ blw ❑Slur yrnlMlyer tp+nw p.preus uY.w W) • br.11,-lid.nt It WMr kW... a". Ytldl%f vrMMb fprfw 1(+ann.lua nnbl[Wflf MIDI I [N.%m0 - _ _ rlfl{a In +9rlcultuNl .r4f +W 9nfsl+Nf. . _ biw IbtN xlntr YMprwµMrwr Im) • • • 0 -,, i• I• PBR LSA • ' YE[IES SAb TA9lE 9 1 1.0.,11 STATM EMlul C.p.R.S. Mi. Sol. , ucnrren.n RIAIA ROD [4{t M1,M4 111,1a A 1q LOfpY[W - StIt., W 0. - - n.{AI uYn u{ul. C,Ilfenll M•Ie99M fr 1p,�ii ,=Rn) Rjppthl� - - ,run In InInN n"neln !M ynwely tM ]4 4w9u1n wnA. W,nyq EwV Tw JA.11" LbY "elM .A ICR b pm 1N EN,n9"N le "NY tell an unR.11urH In ronl+lu u,++dm A a" mqn [mlllin. all urA bill'{ W[L WN Ilvtrill - EMMLrN RW ,nJ[nd RUntblly vlHn Irrw Maue Ynr Rblrilt In "t- • r IA [t WRRr & Illy. l[yy��+!!��W[cA 11Yw(RnYM IJ!Ei ttR Lr.� (N"ya,N p,n ,na - potrntlAllY vIll$. Inln. R,"b Will Ol.trl<t m cl lfft EN[ JerN [orerN v1U cafbl ......rill. w"-.tuWW IIY.-IunYH IRMIrYE +vltluulit) (M[n9,rM R.n,N plull1lly YIthl. In$,. Aln Olt.r tl.Arta 1. by EN1n9YrN .tMY pill" within c""ll "" ulub. 10 [7 r PBR LSA Should the Irvine Ranch Water District become involved in an action coming under the terms of this act, the action must involve consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to the Interagency 'Cooperation Regulations set forth in. the act. Briefly defined, consultation involves examination of the action to determine whether or not it will jeopardize the species or its "critical habitat". Once this determination has been made, modifications to the action may be required to receive Federal monies and/or approval. The greatest likelihood of this occurring exists within Upper Newport Bay where Federally funded or approved actions may jeopardize light-footed clapper rail populations. The possibility also exists within potential habitat for Laguna Beach live -forever, many -stemmed live -forever, and salt marsh bird's beak, where undiscovered populations of these plants may exist within the District. No other Federally recognized Endangered or Threatened Species are known or are expected to occur within the Irvine Ranch Water District. Listings of Endangered and Threatened Species -of plants and animals the Federal Register. are revised and amended at irregular intervals in be from the Federal Office of The most current listings may obtained Endangered Species. Other Federal Designations. Since 1965, several reference documents have been published by the • regarding Endangered and .Threatened Spec.ies the Interior (office of Endangered Species, 1974). These Department of publications contain information on native wildlife species that are Endangered Species status. either Endangered or are candidates for Categories used in these documents include "threatened", "peripheral", and I♦ "status undetermined". These are not official status designations and are interest, impart used only for reference purposes as a means to stimulate knowledge, and solicit data about species of special concern which may be used to compile the official list. Other Federal Legislation. Federal protection is given to migratory to bald and golden 0 birds t ough the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended; through the Bald Eagle Act, as amended; and to marine mammals eagles through the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Basically, these acts make it It is unlawful to "take"•or possess any species afforded such protection. by the Irvine Ranch Water District highly doubtful that actions undertaken would constitute a taking or possession of such species. Additionally, '• there are no provisions for habitat protection under these acts. California Species Preservation Act of 1970. Prior to enactment of a limited number of birds this bill, California law had fully protected and mammals. Such protection was granted only through legislative I0 I• I• is IE I• I• I• I• PBR LSA approval and included unique or attractive species which were not necessarily threatened with extinction. This act provided that the California Department of Fish and Game shall prepare biennial inventories and reports on the status of the State's threatened- birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fishes, • and establish criteria for the classification of these species as Rare or Endangered. The act also revised the list of fully protected birds and mammals and added fully protected fishes, amphibians and reptiles. Under this law, no such designated species or parts thereof may be taken, possessed, or sold within the State of California without authorization by the California Fish and Game Commission and/or the Department of Fish and Game. There is no provision for the preservation of the habitat of these species under this act. As a result, the Irvine Ranch Water District is not likely to fall under the provisions of this law. California Endangered Species Act of 1970. This act defines Rare and Endangered Species and gives the Fish and Game Commission the authority to declare which species fall into these categories. The law prohibits the taking, possession, or selling of any bird, mammal, fish, amphibian or reptile, or parts thereof, that the Commission- determines to be Rare or Endangered. Many of these had already received protection under the California Species Preservation Act. The act has recently been amended to include plant species and an Endangered Plant Program was recently initiated.. To date, no rare or endangered plant species within the District have been placed on the official state list. Unlike the Federal Endangered Species Act, the California law does not currently include consideration for the habitat of Rare or Endangered Species. However, the only species designated by the State that is not also found on the Federal list is the Belding's savannah sparrow, which occurs at Upper Newport Bay within the District. California Marine Refuges. The California Fish and Game Commission has established various marine reserves where limited consumption uses are permitted. Within the Irvine Coast Marine Life Refuge, only twelve forms of fish, molluscs, and crustaceans may be taken under the State Fish and Game Code. All other fish and forms of aquatic life are protected and may not be taken without written permission from the Department of Fish and Game. Whether any Irvine Ranch Water District actions which may destroy protected life forms would constitute "taking" is uncertain. Other California Fish and Wildlife Protection and Under the provisions of the State Fish and Game Code, Chapter 6, Sections 1601 and 1603, actions which may alter streambeds or lakes from which fish 0 1• r] r: 91 PBR LSA and wildlife resources derive benefit require the review of the Department of Fish and Game. Briefly, the process involves submitting plans indicat- ing the nature of a- project to the Department. These are submitted as a 1601 or 1603 permit applications. Normally, within thirty days the Depart- ment will return the plans with a proposal for reasonable modifications in the project which would allow for the protection and continuance of fish and wildlife resources. Within fourteen days of receipt of the Depart- ment's proposal, the affected party notifies the Department as to the proposal's acceptability; •if unacceptable, arbitration is necessary. All major drainages within the Study Area fall under the provisions of this chapter. California Coastal Act. Section 30230, 30231• and 30236 of this act require that marine resources be preserved and restored; that special protection be given to areas of special biological significance; and that the quality of coastal water be maintained for the protection of human health. This act also requires the control of runoff, the prevention of ground water depletion, the prevention of interference with surface flow, the encouragement of waste water reclamation, and the maintenance of riparian buffers along drainages and mitigation when natural drainages are significantly altered. Additionally, Section 30240 of the Coastal Act requires that sensitive habitat areas be protected against significant disruption, and that pro- jects in adjacent areas be designed to prevent the degradation of these habitats. All portions of the coastal area including Upper Newport Bay and the San Joaquin Marsh, falling within the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission, are subject to these policies. • 0 I• • 92 PBR LSA • ARCHAEOLOGY/HISTORY Archaeological and Historical Resources are treated. as a separate chapter in this'MEA because of the extent to which Federal and State laws govern the disposition of such resources, the widespread evidence of • archaeological sites throughout the Irvine Ranch' Water District, the emphasis placed on the scientific research value of such resources by local agencies in their planning process, the potentially explosive impact that disruption of such sites by construction can have, and the possibil- ity of adverse effect on scheduling and completion of projects by the District. Since the City of Irvine and County of Orange have developed • the most sophisticated approach to these issues of the local agencies with jurisdiction in the District (and -probably statewide as well) this section focuses on"these agencies procedures, as well as applicable Federal and State laws. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SETTING Culture Prehistory (7050 B.C.-1768 A.D.) Culturally, the Southern California Coastal region is represented by common cultural traditions that persist over a long period of time and that exhibit a notable conser- vatism when compared to other 'regions in North America. Archaeologists generally divide the prehistory of the region into a four -stage chrono- logy. The first cultural tradition, called Early Man by Wallace (1955) and the San Dieguito Tradition by Warren (1968), has been defined for San Diego County but as yet has not been documented ih Orange County. - Representative tools are numerous scrapers and scraper, planes, choppers, • large leafshaped knives and a few large points. The millingstone complex (manos and metates) is absent. The subsistence base is unknown but hunting is inferred. This tradition began sometime before 7050 B.C. and lasted until sometime between 7540 B.C. and 6500 B.C. • By 5500 B.C. a relatively uniform gathering economy, the Milling Stone Assemblages (Wallace, 1955), or the Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968), existed along the coast region from Santa Barbara to San Diego County. This tradition is characterized by metates and manos, a few large leaf - shaped dart points, crude choppers and chopping tools, and a paucity of bone tools and shell items. The subsistence economy was based on • wild -seed gathering and shellfish collecting. "By 3000 B.C. a new tradition known as the Intermediate Horizon (Wallace, 1955) or the Campbell Tradition (Warren 1968) had developed in Santa Barbara and Ventura County. The tradition is characterized by the E I0 93 PBR LSA introduction of the basket -hopper mortar, pestles, broad leaf -shaped blades, heavy often -stemmed projectile points and some bone and antler items. Warren suggests a stabilizing sea level led to the loss of scouring action that keeps the bays and estuaries in optimal condition for shellfish. Subsequently, as silt filled the bays and estuaries, the society adapted by developing an ocean-going technology and an economy that focused on deep sea fishing and sea mammal hunting. The introduction of the mortar and pestle indicate that acorn processing was also becoming an important economic activity. As Warren points out, the narrow coastal shelf that exists in Santa Barbara and San Diego Counties would allow and perhaps require that the inhabitants of the area exploit both ocean and foothill habitats. The ocean-going technology of the Campbell Tradition did not spread to Orange County. Apparehtly the large bays and wider coastal plain of this• area allowed for the continuation of the Encinitas Tradition wild seed and shellfish gathering economy. However, certain traits of the Campbell began to appear in Orange County around 2000 B.C. Rice (1976) refers to this Orange County manifestation of the Campbell. Tradition as the Encinitas II Tradition. It differs from the Encinitas I Tradition by the addition of the mortar and pestle and stemmed and notched projectile points to the tool assemblage. The Late Prehistoric Horizon (Wallace, 1955) or Shoshonean Tradition (Warren, 1968), characterized by the occurrence of small triangular concave -or -convex based projectile points, steatite containers, use of asphalt, many and varied bone tools, and an increase in socio-ideological objects, began approximately 500 A.D. (Cottrell,' 1975; Rice, 1976.) Latter during the latter portion of the Shoshonean Tradition, the occurrence of aboriginal plain brown -ware pottery and ceramic pipes became evident. This latest prehistoric period ended rather abruptly with the Spanish expeditions and the establishment of missions and outposts during the 18th century. With the establishment of Mission San Gabriel Archangel in 1771 and Mission San Juan Capistrano in 1776, the prehistoric way of life was abandoned as more and more Indians became neophytes of the missions. Epidemics and finally secularization of the missions in 1883 led to the almost complete extinction of prehistoric populations although `rem- nants of these populations continued to eke out a marginal existence on the great cattle ranches during the first half of the 19th century. By 1860, droughts (which brought an end to large scale cattle ranching), and smallpox epidemics (brought on by contact with the white man), had effectively eliminated the Native American population in Orange County (Friis, 1965). I• 1• 1• 1• 1• I• I• I• • I• PBR LSA ArchaeologiSu cal rveys. Extensive archaeological/reconnaissance sur- veys have been conducted within the Irvine Ranch Water District in recent years (Figure 13). Guidelines established by the City of Irvine in 1975 and by the County of Orange in 1977 to implement the California Environmen- tal Quality Act of 1970 have made surveys a required procedure for most areas undergoing private or public urban development. Prior to the -imple- mentation procedures, many sites, both recorded and unrecorded, were destroyed by agricultural activities or urban development. Nevertheless, many sites still exist within the limits of the Irvine Ranch Water District. Archaeological Site. Locations. Archaeological investigations have shown that a preponderance of sites within the District are located along the coastal terrace between Newport Beach and Laguna Beach and -in the rolling terrain of the Santiago Hills. A moderate number of sites have been located and recorded in the Santiago Hills area while relatively few sites have been recorded for the Tustin Plain. In general, sites are found on level terraces or knolls overlooking the ocean, bays, arroyos and washes that would have provided water sources and also food and raw materials resources. To date, over 500 sites have been recorded in the Irvine Ranch Water District. Probability of Finds in Unsurveyed Areas. The probability of finding archaeological sites in unsurveyed areas of the Irvine Ranch Water District varies depending upon the geographical location. The probability of finding additional sites in the unsurveyed areas of the San Joaquin Hills is considered to be very high in view of the large number of sites located in surveyed areas. Archaeological surveys of the Santiago Hills are relatively few in number and of recent origin. Nevertheless, numerous sites have been recorded on those surveys conducted to date. The probability of locating additional sites is considered to be high. A number of reconnaissance surveys have been conducted in the Tustin Plain area but only a few sites have been located and recorded. The locations of these sites are recorded on a confidential map maintained by Archaeological Planning Collaborative for the District and available for reference by qualified individuals. The probability of locating addition- al sites within this area would appear to be low. Nevertheless, the Tustin Plain is considered a potentially valuable corridor between the coastal and inland regions. Sites within this area have additional research potential in understanding prehistoric settlement and inter - settlement movement patterns. I0 .:-�• : f '. 'r.J . ;r; 'ft"Y. ii}„.^.1'l `oi �: il. `.J, - f/. � x�'8��� ��iL1�a ..C9C.�' i� cj�'p'x • `• .4�(\_ �' ; ,4' •1 :' `A� . a � s a r ' <' /-� ' ' �.-;YP:� ,ZM' �, L7i, v �L .+ ,w ''�.�" y, ri y,;/., .i.� 'K';* '�<� �'rE:�r,i y, x , a; i., tf� • �•:; �.r . y., w_ f•. xx>4t' �•: k•, ,..!^ ' � ii_�7�!(�r?..,i• `:'.: �.: c�,k:ri;j• , �t : t � '' ' r � ..: y'%•�+i ° rY'vi :�}S `:''it .t,',1,��:.:f:' .•tx` •• '1 'rY»•Y ?'S;i". "s `•` '.Z �'�Yj�j%f?tia:'i"L--^� •.s' .::� '"'1.:=%J'.�•�� _ ,.%.e: ;•,N'C�'y'.'',w: 14XI. :3 4 ',',Y.rl^ 1.': r Y': .i ..; . _ %r.' C«+AC' li� ' �' �' , �s�,. /,•'.'r i/✓..�,C;11r�' (i.• ='.y•`� .�.:;,•. r:;.,: .. .1:; y .,;1�•:,.; IV ,y`'r• Jr'. it,i'.t '_i ;,.- .r` it .nY:::. i, 1':' •ct '±'n'^).(C''. µ:' 7 t .i : _ / Via• ..'Ir' r.'. i?�aS\yam it +'_:'':r '`'t.f"�r� {/' Tr .. � �e�i,' ' 7, : �. -i 1 i; . 1' ' . .J '- .:•-' ..+,u :>� .'i�ivfif• ��i=•Y'1Y' ,' ' ,, r.. 4AFf•", am )frs L" i _ ..Y �' '.p„x _,1rr^.. :1',/.�S.,i '\. •+t�.l . ti'U t;3i 1�j�yd�%'xt,?,' r , 4..'y x ) , r { 1r _ {^;..r x`S4 'Y.:i,�'. i:•}ar,,f,wt.�,c;.+,j, r• .t t'" + x i_ ��7•�ir�f' ✓. • -l.; t; �; a, e; .�,7: yn '.'T:; .�.fi apt '`��� \ '.J `� ,L> '"+tit •�,- ';y -e„�iA , j,N •;r- .:,.,f,.,•,: 4 1';%%grHl �� It''i'+r he: l.yi� i'r j ` y i ,i i�A. V�:�•� {, •�;% ' .S'�, TSI+I' Kta'r. ys�i;'-`;A, r:. �. F _ l:, �.� ✓:`fir. jet: � . , i`.`a , � Wr:.� � V.. � ` .t'^�� F�6. nn •1, ~ Jl . . t' SA,gfi._'yt:���'•�c'. .t . �,"" a�T 4� `ii `7 it . �•.. ,r i t� "� •i ... � ,?, : r .'� j Y,. �{ r,�i.' 5 1�4 ••~ 'jYa• /��l��u fi`�i1 Y."i "37�t�di.'�' lJ±�—[.,�: +il"�• "F, .r ~t_ _...i.-. •�.., 1. '�Yf9."t".�. Ia, ! '\i' a �`bV. 'yrt } rf P .•� • �' ,�6=i"�+"..• . �r�4t;.:7-'�'S'�.�• Y Pt5•`r , � a""` ; : ' • ., ..• _i. ' y;�;? .may+i �' ��-!` :T't';• I :"Anal�l'CCak t711`=f6". In = r'.> .:-�>'+^r �.,,�.:io ,Sr:� ;.';s+i;:, :} ?�;ari�\� �v, �#:y„� �,{—:t. _, V.•LwYtit�4`'�;.f} `^'.�Y=at��tTls yC'.S7F�, :! `:S•i IM.95 � •• „ �� .: � �lli��'� ♦Y j^...,i;��:%..'.�+'` �T \': :.. ��� `>' _ xy %� .� h' f� N." � '- :W ' . Y ' t\�"''�T"�'Yr. " s7�, L'•v."f. � � < t Cl,S'"r y Y - �* 2i.. t• r"!ti :y`•`••,f •� d'ffi. i F ',- �• k of _ < tis`rrix >r=_+F. nh•: El a' J �:.^. r 1'i.IS .I �ti .�.,�N.^+�.'-. y 'x'Ci .�/c:5• { �, , •` .. I ay qr i.f � un± ., 1.�q��yyy,e•�r / =^� ` -.. -, d��>fry x��T• _ 1Nk t''irtµ�,�•e�,,:,�,t��,�x,,•`�; ���(�:�•'�Y\e • « .k' •` _ t}'' �"?S+�': -a'-, yt?.: �',:'tti.:r �,�'<��.•� r •-`�ta`�e: 1�'i��t� '�g..i�^Y";nJ"•`"-;'y3 :y,� 1'. • x �I . , -!h .: r'?i•+.t r, �_ ,wP'j "°�: "�XJ`^�: �$,'a�`'4 '•4'• %o'>M1Y hM'•^' _ '" }. r6y,• ' .." F .. • . a u`:��" �1;•}��tt,•Yr'{;.M';� �'t,�: ,ry�� `� i�[D,nG'ih7;'. � "_-. �� J • `�,•,i• _ ; � Yi;�l r'��.;�ti ;'.: n;^4' u%'�k y/ ,.._' ,�' Y_ ' :. x ' :r•t�'tt•F! 'r .tt �(i('ii�•,` x •';S�(rA,`;%. �{�..• O y'1 �� 1 ' � `-.••+- �' r,.>{f f`� S> <$F� .�x'�V..•"-r.w,,fr•i�F.e {.I'L .lit i ..jy.�` .• a , r�{7' '�q�,FYw"!, .`r' `;�yyam '� :•Jp ., (P.b'g�s YPFi,rF `'a' %. ,Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL INDEX 13 AFFas SURVEYM LSA/PBR ® 0 q _n I M-L20aoo 13 • 96 • LEGEND FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY INDEX 1. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976h. 2. Archaeological Planning Collaborative, 1978. 3. Archaeological Resources Management Corporation, 4. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976i. • 5. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973b. 5. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972c. 6. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972d. 7. Archaeological Research, Inc., 19761. 7. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976k. 7. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976j. • 7. Irvine Co., 1976. . 7. Koerper, H., 1974b.• 7. Koerper, H., 1975. 7. King. T., 1973. 7. Koerper, H., 1974a. 8. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977c. • 9. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977d. 10. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972a. 11. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972e. 12. Magalousis, Nicholas M., 1977. 13. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973c. 14. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973e. • 14. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973d. 15. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976m. 16. Archaeological Research Management Corporation, 16. Archaeological Research Management Corporation, 17. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973f. 18. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1974c. • 19. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973g. ' 20. Public Antiquities Salvage Team, 1973. 20. Leonard, Nelson N., III, 1975. 21. Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc., 1978. 22. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976n. 22. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977e. • 23. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973h. 24. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976o. 25. Archaeological Research Management Corporation, 26. Archaeological Research Management Corporation, 27. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973i. 28. Langenwalter, Paul E., 1974. • 1978a. 1978b. 1978c. 1978d. 1978e. PBR LSA I• 97 • HISTORICAL SETTING PBR LSA Historical Period (1769-present.) The historic period within the IRWD boundaries begins with an expedition from a neophyte presidio established in San Diego in July of 1769. On the 26th of July, the expedition, led by Don Gaspar de Portola, entered what is now the IRWD • portion of Orange County on its way to the port of Monterey. Portola and his men traversed the area, keeping to the foothills. Until the founding of Mission San Juan Capistrano in 1776, some seven years later, Europeans crossed the area infrequently on the way to and from San Diego (Meadows, 1975; Freiss, 1965). • From 1776 until 1833, when secularization was decreed, the missions and outposts of the Franciscan Order controlled the region. Converts to Christianity were assidously sought, and to make the missions self-support- ing and to assure a Christian way of life, the Indians were encouraged to work on and settle on mission lands. It was the Franciscan fathers who gave the local Indians the names by which they are known. Northern Orange • County Indians were named Gabrieleno after the Mission San Gabriel, and Southern Orange County Indians were named Juaneno after the Mission San Juan Capistrano (Meadows', 1975; Freiss, 1965). With the secularization of the missions, the era of the great land • grant ranchos began. The mission lands were divided and granted by deed to early Californians between 1833 and 1846. These ranchos, although large, usually grew only enough crops for internal use since lack of water discouraged extensive agriculture. Instead, herds of cattle, goats and horses were grazed over the vast holdings. Three of these large ranchos became, in whole or in part, the, present day Irvine Ranch. The Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana land grant was formally confirmed on July 1, 1810; • the Rancho San Joaquin grant was confirmed on April 16, 1837, and the El Rancho Lomas de Santiago grant was approved on May 26, 1836 (Meadows, 1975; Freiss, 1965). The vagaries of Southern California weather, periods of long droughts • followed by flood rains, had a major impact on the economic stability of the ranchos. In 1868, Abel Sterns, a large landowner and rancher who had obtained an interest in the Rancho Santiago de Santa Ana, succeeded in a suit to have the Rancho divided among its many owners. About 3,800 acres were awarded to James Irvine and his partners, Benjamin and Thomas Flint and Llewellyn Bixby. In 1864, Jose Andres Sepulveda, owner of the Rancho San I0 is m PBR l5A • Joaquin, was forced by adverse circumstances to sell his rancho to James Irvine and his partners for a mere $18,000. The third rancho; the Rancho Lomas de Santiago, was sold in 186o to William Wolfskill, who six years later sold to the Bixby -Flint interests. Thus, during the years 1864 to 1868, the present-day Irvine Ranch was formed, a domain that extended from the Pacific Ocean northward some twenty-three miles to the Santa Ana • River. In 1876 James Irvine became sole owner of the Ranch by buying out the interest of of his partners (Meadows, 1975). Under Irvine's control, agriculture became a more important part of the activities of the ranch. Crops of corn, potatoes and pumpkins were planted on the fertile flatlands while cattle and sheep continued to roam • the hilly country. Produce, cattle, and wool were shipped from Newport Bay. When James Irvine died in March of'1887, the Irvine Ranch holdings were left to his only son, James Irvine, Jr. It was James, Jr. who formed the Irvine Company in 1894. Economic activities on the ranch became more • diversified as various new crops and methods were attempted. Sheep were phased out but cattle still grazed the hills.' Raisin grapes and olives were tried but weather conditions were unfavorable. English walnuts were more successful but a lack of irrigation water limited expansion. However, barley and lima beans, grown primarily by tenant farmers, were highly successful. By 1890, 30,000 acres of the former San Joaquin Rancho • were planted in beans and barley. . Shipping was no longer necessary from Newport Bay as a hundred -foot right-of-way across the ranch was sold to Santa Fe Railroad with the stipu- lation that a siding and depot be established on the ranch. In 1888, a warehouse was built to house the harvested crops, primarily beans. and • barley. By 1895, a second warehouse became necessary. To provide for the growing number of workmen on the ranch and in the warehouses, a post office and a school were added. •The post office, named Myford after the infant son of James; Jr., was opened on May 20, 1889 (the name Irvine was III already appropriated by a central California post office.) Between 1889 and 1914, houses, stores and other buildings were added at the Myford • Crossing (the intersection of El Camino Real and the Santa Fe tracks and the only road south to Laguna Beach.) On March 17, 1914, the name Irvine was transferred to the Myford Station as the central California post office no longer existed. • After World War I, improved water supply led to an increase in the farming activities of the ranch. Groves of valencia oranges, surrounded by rows of eucalyptus trees, were planted. A marsh was drained and chili peppers, asparagus and sugar beets were planted. '0 r 1• I• I• 1• I• I9 IE • • World War II brought an end to the 75-year harvest of beef, barley, beans and beets. In 1942, the Marine Corps acquired two large parcels of Irvine land. The influx of people into Southern California during and after the war created a demand for houses and educational facilities while rising land values and higher taxes made agriculture far less profitable. In 1959, the Irvine Company offered a gift of 1,000 acres as a site for a state university and plans for a city of 50,000 people on the lands surrounding the university were developed. An industrial complex and planned communities or "villages" came into existence, and on December 21, 1971, by a vote• of two to one, the City of Irvine was incorporated (Meadows 1975). From 1929'to 1960, nine dams and reservoirs were built. Santi-ago Canyon Dam, which created Irvine Lake, is the largest and was built jointly by the Irvine Company and the Serrano and Carpenter Irrigation Districts. However, even this water system could not keep up with the growing demand. Following the example of other areas, negotiations were begun on the task of importing water. In December of 1956, the first Colorado River water flowed through a Metropolitan Water District pipeline into Irvine Lake. By 1960, the Irvine Company Board of Directors had commissioned a master plan for developing the entire ranch. Without access to increased water supplies from the Metropolitan Water District, large-scale urban development could not succeed. The area needed a water agency. After considering several alternatives, the Irvine Company decided that a California water district would be the best solution for the ranch. On January 23, 1961, the Irvine Ranch Water District was formed and contained 39,500 acres; today, it contains 72,000 acres. In addition, the District in 1963 formed 'Improvement District No. 1, taking over County Sanitation District No. 14. Thus, one agency is responsible both for providing imported water and for reclaiming sewage and selling the reclaimed water for various uses. Historical Site Locations. The domination of the area by cattle ranching and agriculture has created a history that is rural in nature; characterized by a country store, a packing house, an old rail station, ranch buildings and stage shops. Other sites related to the earlier historic period also exist, although their identity may be more ephemeral: the Swamp of the Frogs referred to in an early grant petition, Tomato Springs, believed to be one of the Indian villages visited by Portola's expedition, and several adobes. Unfortunately, many historic sites have been destroyed as a result of both rural and urban development. 0 I• 1• I• I• • C; I• • 100 PBR LSA The majority of historical sites within the Irvine Ranch Water District limits are located on the Tustin Plain or along the base of the San Joaquin Hills. APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING POLICIES Federal Laws. Since 19.06, the Federal Government has established laws, po icies, and guidelines for the preservation and protection of historic and prehistoric archaeological resources. These resources are considered to be an important part of our nation's cultural heritage. These Federal laws, culminating with the most recent National Archaeo- logical/Historic Preservation Act of 1974, are briefly described as fol•1 ows: 1) The Anti uit Act of 1906. This act sets forth the Federal Govern- ment s asic principal —of protection, preservation, and public availability of archaeological resources. The act provides for Federal Control of all archaeological resources on Federally owned or controlled land. 2) The His Sites Act of 1935. This act declares a national policy to preserve historic (including prehistoric) sites, buildings, and objects of national significance for the public. 3) The Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960. This act provides for the survey and necessary research of archaeological sites affected by the construction of dams and resultant reservoir areas. This act may affect treatment plants, storage plants, and rights -of -way as well as dam and reservoir areas. . 4) The Historic Preservation'Act of 1966._This act provides for an expanded National Register of districts, sites, buildings, struc- tures, and objects significant in American .history, ,architecture, archaeology, and culture and makes provisions for matching funds to help acquire and/or preserve them. This act also affects pro- perties eligible for listing. 5) The National Environmental Policy Act (1969). Provides for the protection or enhancement of the cultural environment. "An act for the preservation of American Antiquities." 6) The National Archaeological/Historical Preservation Act of 1974. This act provides Federal agencies with methods of mitigating impacts of their undertakings upon those historic properties that contain scientific, prehistoric, or archaeological data. • is r L I• r. • 101 PBR LSA The main thrust of the Federal regulations has been in policy, laws, and guidelines for preservation, protection, and public access to historic and prehistoric cultural resources. The State of California, on the other hand, concerns itself primarily with the protection of these resources. These State laws provide for the punishment, as a misdemeanor, of any person who willfully destroys, disturbs, or defaces archaeological, paleontological, or historic features on public lands. Public lands are those owned by,. or under the jurisdiction of, the State, or any city, county, district (such as the IRWD), authority, or public corporation, or. any agency thereof. The State, of California also has several laws whose purpose is to maintain the sanctity of cemeteries and human remains. The State defines' cemeteries as areas containing at least six burials, but may apply to areas with lesser numbers as well. These laws are meant to include prehistoric as well as historic cemeteries. In 1970 the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was enacted. This act sets forth guidelines for preparation and utilization of an environmental impact report on properties where development may have an adverse effect on the .environment. The environment is meant to include "cultural and archaeological resources." The California laws are briefly described below. 1) California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.5. Provides for the prosecution as a misdemeanor of any unauthorized person or persons who willfully excavate, remove, destroy, etc. archaeological,. paleontological, or historical features on public lands. 2) California Administrative Code Title 14 State Di, vision of _Beaches and Parks Section 4307. Archaeological features. No person shall remove, deface, or injure any property of the State Parks system. 3) California Penal Code Title 14 Part I (State of California), Section 622 1/2. Provi es for the punishment as a misdemeanor of any persons , not the owner thereof, who willfully injures, dis- figures, defaces, or destroys any object or thing of archaeological or historical interest or value, whether situated on private lands or within any public park or place. 4) Public Resources Code; California Environmental Quality Act, Section 2100 et seq. Additional State protection for cultural/ .scientific resources is to be found in CEQA. CEQA provides for public review and disclosure. ' s ' 102 PBR LSA 0 5) California Health and Safet Code Sections 8100 and 7052. Forbids disturbance o n pan ceme eries. 6) Public Resources Code Section 5097.53. Requires moratorium on Indian burialsite unti reviewed by State Resources Board. 41 Orange County Policies. In mid-1973, the Orange County Board of Super- visors aaopted the Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan, which identify in part broad policies relating to cultural/scien- tific resources and propose the development of a resource management ordinance and program encompassing the seven major areas of resource management. The Board adopted, in mid-1974, interim guidelines for the management of resources to serve until ordinances could be developed, In March 1976, the Environmental Management Agency embarked on an effort to provide a report which would, as a minimum, recommend changes to the interim guidelines adequate to assure reasonable consideration in the decision process of cultural/scientific resources. 0 In conjunction with the recommendations of two groups called the, "Natural History of Orange County" and the "Pacific Coast .Foundation Archaeological Society," the budgeting of two new positions by the County Board of Supervisors was provided -for: 1) Planner III - Archaeologist-EMA. 2)'Administrative Analyst - Museum Curator -GSA. Also through the efforts of the two above -mentioned groups and the Environmental Management Agency, a Cultural/Scientific Resources Task Force (CSRTF) was established to report on the state of Orange County Cultural Resources Policy and Procedures. The resulting report, issued'in March 1977, sets guidelines, policy, and recommends procedures for dealing with cultural/scientific resources within the County's bounds (Report for County of Orange, EMA; 1977). These goals, policies, and implementati'ng procedures are intended to parallel existing State and Federal require- ments related to the management of cultural/scientific resources. Policy and implementing procedures are outlined for the two goals set forth by the CSRTF. These stated goals are: 1) To ensure the protection and proper disposition of cultural/scienti- fic resources within the County. 2) To provide tangible results from information and materials recov- ered relating to archaeological, paleontological, and historical resources. 9 I• I• 1♦ I• 1• U U, I• • 103 PBR SSA On May 24, 1977, the Orange County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolutions 77-866 and 77-991 which established the above -stated goals as County policy, and established specific procedures for implementation and disposition of cultural resources within the County. Included in these resolutions were provisions for potential County reimbursement in the event of salvage or preservation. In addition to Federal, State, and County regulations, the individual cities within IRWD have laws, guidelines, and policies relating to cultural/scientific resources.. For the most part, these regulations closely parallel the State, County, and Federal requirements, although the City regulations primarily address themselves to actual implementation and disposition of these cultural/scientific resources. City of Irvine Policies. In 1973, the City of Irvine adopted a General Plan that outlined goals, objectives, action policies,. and standards for community development. The Historical and Archaeological Sites Element of the General Plan provided a broad policy guidance for the disposition of historic and archaeological sites and a base from which to establish and maintain the historic context of the Irvine area. With the passage of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in 1970 and growing complexities in certain developments within the City, the need for a more definitive policy arose. In February of 1975, discussions on the proper role of archaeology, history, and paleontology in the overall planning policies of the City began. These discussions culminated in the adoption of a Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Policy. and Program. The policy package and action program: 1) Established historical, archaeological, and paleontological plan- ning programs as a priority item in the City. 2) Allocated staff time and City funds to the pursuit of the policy. 3) Establish a "Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Commit- tee" as an advisory committee to the Planning Commission. City of Newport Beach Policies_. The City of Newport Beach, on January 13, 1975, adopted a general policy to guide the development or redevelopment of lands within the City. This policy includes specific guidelines in regard to archaeological resources. The intention of these guidelines is to insure the preservation of significant archaeological resources and require that the impact caused -by any development be mitigated in accordance with CEQA. 0 is I• Is 1• U I• '• 104 PBR LSA -These guidelines detail procedures by which the general policy is to be implemented (i.e., record/background search, on -site survey, evaluation of impact, development alternatives, and archaeological excavation). In addition, the guidelines state that the minimum qualifications for consult- ing archaeologists shall be satisfied by their listing in the Directory of. Archaeological Consultants, available from the Society for California Archaeology. City of Orange. The City of Orange, having no specific guidelines in reference to cultural/scientific resources, adopted by resolution (4506-Fels. 1977) an ordinance whereby State EIR guidelines should be followed. City of Santa Ana. The City of Santa Ana has no specific EIR guide- lines, but follows the State regulations. City of Laguna Beach. The City of Laguna Beach has no specific EIR ordinances at present, but is in the process of developing such. In the interim, the City is referring to the State guidelines. City of Tustin. The City of Tustin has adopted Environmental Quality Guidelines Public Resources Code, Sections 21000-21174), which state policies and procedures for the implementation of CEQA. Included in these guidelines are procedures for preparation of an environmental impact report, a section of which regards the description of any characteristic of the site containing historical, archaeological, or paleontological material. Professional Criteria. Besides the government regulations regarding cultural/scientific resources, there are professional societies (i.e., SOPA, SCA), which have established criteria by which the professionals in, the field can be evaluated. Although these societies have no legal authority of their own, inclusion on their lists of professionals is usually required by government agencies for certification as a working consultant. The Society for California Archaeology gives criteria for minimum qualifications as a professional archaeologist, methods for EIR evaluation, and a Code of Ethics. In addition, the SCA has set up district clearinghouses for the centralized location of site reports and other information important to the professional archaeologist (Society for. California Archaeology, 1976). 0 I• [] 11 1• I• • • • 105 PBR LSA RELEVANT PLANNING PROGRAMS This section summarizes various public agency planning programs which affect the IRWD, or other local jurisdictions within the IRWD. The section is organized by level of governmental jurisdiction - Federal, State and Local. APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING POLICIES Until recently, growth and development decisions within the IRWD have fallen exclusively under the structural and regulatory framework 'provided by the General Plan Land Use Element of Orange County and its local juris- dictions. Indeed, these plans formed the technical, legal, and philosophi- cal basis of all land use decisions in the regions they cover. In the recent past, however, a number of regulatory programs have been created, which serve as an adjunct .to, offer guidelines for, or have authority over, local general plans. These programs will undoubtedly have a major impact on the pattern of growth within Orange County and the District as time goes by. Table L outlines briefly the major programs and agencies which currently contribute to growth regulation and land use planning within and around the District. FEDERAL PLANNING PROGRAMS The Federal Government has several broad scale' planning programs that affect the IRWD either directly or indirectly. through local agencies. The details of these programs are discussed in the appropriate topical sections of this report in the context •of the topic. In general, these programs are either administered directly by the federal agency through permit processes. However; in the case of broader scale programs such as the "208" planning program, an outgrowth of the Clean Water Act, they are influenced by the responsible federal agency but are administered through the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 'Local agencies participate in these broad scale federal programs through membership in SCAG. Enforcement of these programs is typically through local adoption of the program in building and zoning codes. The penalty for non -partici- pation is typically restrictions in federal funding of projects within the non -participating jurisdiction. Further discussion of SCAG is provided in the following section on Demography, Land Use and Growth Trends. The broader scale federal planning program can therefore be viewed more as multi -agency programs as a result of the multi -layered involvement of other agencies, although the programs originate at the federal level and are funded by federal tax dollars. • I• [7 [7 Ul I* I* �0 �6 106 PBR LSA TABLE L LAWS GOVERNING LAND USE DECISIONS Applicable Responsible • General Relation to Provisions Agencies Land Use Planning Federal Environnental EPA Federal EiS,necessary for any Impact Statements. Federal action which may sig- nificantly affect the quality of the environment. Requires areawide waste treat- ment management planning in areas designated as having sub- stantial water quality control problems. Provides for control of non -point source pollution. in "critical air area" which exceed NAAQS. Participation in long-range Air Quality Main- tenance Planning (AQMP) is a condition on acceptance of Clean Water Grant funds. Strict limits placed on fundable capa- city of facilities. 4. State Porter -Cologne Strengthened the powers SWRCB, RWQCB Land use plans must be consistent Water Quality Control of SWRCB and nine RWQCBs with policies of Water Quality Act of 1969 to evaluate water quality, Control Plan Report adopted by develop water quality RWQCB and approved by SWRCB. (Division 7 of California control plans and enforce Porter -Coigne directly addresses Water Code) waste discharge require- water reuse: Policy is to devel- ments. op reclamation facilities, and for the State Wealth Department to establish reclamation criteria. Legislation of Authority 1. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 2. U.S. Public Law 95-SOO Section 208 3. U.S. Public Law 91-604 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (Clean Air Act of 1970) EPC, State, SCAG EPA; State required to have Implementation Plan for Achieving, Maintaining ing NAAQS. 1• I• I• I41 i 107 TABLE L (continued) Legislation of - Applicable Authority Provisions 5. California Environmental Environmental Impact Quality -Act of 1970 (CEgA) 'Reports 6. State Conservation and' Provides for local gen- Planning Act eral plans and elements related thereto and pro- vides for implementation and L.U. Regulations. 7. The California Coastal Provides policy guide - Conservation Act of 1976 • lines and criteria with- in the coastal zone. 8. Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 Establishes voluntary Councils of Government which provide areawide review and coordination , of applications for Federal grants and aid, as established by the Intergovernmental Cooper- ation Act of 1960. Responsible Agencies PBR LSA General Relation to Land Use Planning Varies with jurisdiction. EIR required for airy action with - For current project: i51DOC, in the State which may signift- County of Orange. cantly affect the quality of the environment. O.C. Board of Supervisors Establishes 'policies and programs with administration dealing with land use utilities, delegated to Planning Com- public services. mission and EMA. The California Coastal Com- Requires all jurisdictions within mission and six temporary the coastal zone (varies from , regional commissions. less than 1000' to 5 miles inland) to bring their general plans into conformance with the Act and imple- ment them through the local plann- ing process. i i Regional Councils of Govern- Strengthens coordination between ment. In this area: SCAG local and regional planning ' (Southern California Assoc- programs. ' cation of Governments). m Sources: CPR, -Supplemental EIS, AWMA, Dec. 1976 League of Women Voters, California Environmental Laws and You, 1976 SCAG, Watermarks, Jan. 19 9 I* I• 1• 10 I• I• I• STATE PLANNING PROGRAMS State Planning Programs are as numerous a details of the more issue oriented programs in the context of the affected environmental also has its broader scale planning programs District through State review of local promulgation of policy guideline documents. PBR L5A s the state agencies, and the are discussed in this report issue. The State, however, which indirectly affect the agency general plans and The principal environmental policy guideline document produced in recent years by the state is the Governor's 1973 Environmental Goals and Policies document which identified areas of statewide environmental concern (e.g. prime agricultural lands). More recently, the state has produced an Urban Policy Document which encourages the concentration of new development within areas where urban services already are available. State review of local agency planning programs compatibility with these broad scale state policies is through review processes recently incorporated into the California Environmental Quality Act which requires state review of EIR's prepared for development projects (e.g. residential, commercial, industrial) which meet certain minimum threshold sizes. State review for conformance with broad statewide planning policies also occurs through review of Local Agency General Plan Elements. Therefore, state- wide land use planning policies are implemented through state review of local agency planning and development approval processes, except for issue -specific programs (e.g. water quality maintenance) which are admin- istered through permit processes. Local Agencies Local Agency Planning Programs may be grouped into two categories - issue specific programs and general planning programs. Issue -specific programs, as with those of the federal and state agencies, have been treated elsewhere in this report. General planning programs consist of land use plans which are in turn supported by nine state mandated elements that provide policy support to the land use element. For the purposes of this report, only the land use and housing elements of local general plans are discussed since it is these elements which have the most immediate influence on the facilities program of the IRND. To the extent appropri- ate, other general plan elements have been introduced in other sections of this report. I0 I• [7 1• I• I• [7 PBR LSA Orange Co_u_nt� General Plan. Land use planning efforts within the portion tie 6isErict currently subject to Orange County jurisdiction are conducted by both individual landowners and governmental agencies. The land use proposals cover a variety of projects which represent intensi- fication of use. Most of these are contained within the City of Irvine Sphere of Interest, and it is assumed that annexation will eventually occur. A comprehensive representation of existing and future land uses in the unincorporated portions of the District is shown on the Orange County General Plan Map, which establishes County land use designations that currently guide development in the area (Figure 14). The Land Use Element of the General Plan is the major policy document establishing guidelines for implementing County General Plan. The element attempts to describe land use policies for all unincorporated lands within Orange County. It identifies issues to be addressed by subsequent levels of planning, and provides guidelines for implementation through regulation of development and specific' planning. California Government Code Section 65880 establishes that City and County zoning codes must be consistent with respective General Planning Elements. Insofar as the land use element is the principal land use policy statement in the, General Plan, it is in turn the key factor in determining consistency of proposed land uses. At present, approximately half of the IRWD is located in unincorpor- ated Orange County; development within this area is therefore subject to the policies of the, Orange County Land Use Element. From a generic per- spective, the portions of the IRWD located in unincorporated territory are designated for various low -intensity uses, including general agricultural, open space, exclusive agriculture, recreational and natural resources areas. Additionally, the Marine Corps Air Station at E1 Toro (MCAS E1 Toro) is designated as a public facility. Several areas within the District are designated in a reserve status. Reserve areas with "R" designations may be subject to any level of County planning short of implementation. Removal of the "R" designation must be by formal amendment to the County General Plan Land Use Element. The land use element (Reserves Guidelines Supplement) provides criteria to be established if "R" removal is desired. The current County General Plan Housing Element is derived from a policy statement issued by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and subsequently adopted by resolution of the Orange County Board of Supervisors. The intent of the Board was to adopt the '0 r...: • l'lf , - y,"�' i' C°�''/r`i`. �• . ,.'{�;'.i�� �'i "rxT, e ♦�'� j '' .S= 4+�. 7,` ,��7-"'t.-; •J",n : •v'��, . F'�r'i{''`C-. it'�}.a Y}2i'�•: ''t 1 �� a ' ruin / ., ..P>]`..".{i „ (Y,h•'yi, .d .1� h(Q.''`Ci�P n1.,' !;,$„ '�tr�;�k Y }, •, �S TIi Ir.. Imo• ' �: �', i.S,/ �,-•t�\�: •� ..Y� 'r:��*.f-4: _ � V� ^F. 9T., s`'t �', ntl��h� �,: "}t`+` ii if�'t ISM"� � �ipn: :� "z". - .- � M .!},'.5�'�• +Jvox.1 �1, ��_+`a'S;:L_O�L.�� jiE{�_"�;,"cF, ',���; 1. `� �,1•..--''._'� • r • ' �) r`=' ��`J, I I,• �Sr1 l�l: I,-'SaN.•�, F,K�'r' :�t•, ��G'' 14, ' v r���;i .•'r �'' 'say?�,;.,.,„y .Y:;Y' >� �.�'�: , .. 1 �.aS,7�.ii?(',:'�'1'+":+v#:�'l,�i�•��a.4/•?tt�. jS td 4t``� ,S-�: �,,^ �[p� vx;t �." iK: �, �'n:*r'�v�yF�v�'• ivt, ,f 1, ',` f,T tg'•� ORANGE COUNTY LAND USE ELEMENT 14 1.1 Low Density Residential 3.3 Heavy Industrial L/PBR 1.2 Medium -Low Density Residential 4.1 Public Facilities 1.3 Medium Density Residential 4.2 Ouasl-Pubic Facilities 1.4 High Density Residential 51 Natural Resources 15 Heavy Density Residential 5.21 Etcluslve Agriculture 5.21 General Agriculture 2.1 Local Commercial 2.2 Community Commercial 2.3 Regional Commercial 5.3 Recreation 5.31 Tourist Recreation/Cc mmerdal O 4000 8000 12000 3.1 Industrial Park 5.4 Other Open Space FEETT 32 Light Industrial Silt Conservation Mm Ram WA70 WORM 14 1• 1• 1• I• [] G I• I• III PBR l5A policy as an interim means of permitting residential development until such time 'as,the Orange County Environmental Management Agency (EMA) could prepare a comprehensive element adapted to the unique and rapidly changing Orange County housing situation. Policies outlined in the currently adopted element are relevant to residential housing projects proposed for unincorporated Orange County. According to these policies, the County is committed to: 1) an adequate provision of housing for all residents, including those of low and moderate income, 2) ensuring housing opportunities within close physical proximity to employment centers, and 3) reviewing large development projects most suitable for providing low/moderate-income provisions: Unfortunately, the adopted element has not fulfilled its mandate to accommodate housing for a variety of income levels, especially those on the lower end of the income scale. In an effort to rectify this situation, the EMA has initiated a program which will eventually result in the preparation of a new Housing Element. As part of this effort, a Housing Element Update Resource Document was prepared to assist a composite citizens' committee in developing guidelines for EMA to follow in writing the revised element. Of particular emphasis in the new policy document will. be implementation guidelines for achieving low-income housing opportunities. According to EMA staff, many unique planning strategies are being considered, including restrictive zoning guidelines and density tradeoff programs. The citizens" committee has completed its study, and EMA staff is in the process of finalizing an initial draft element. Optimistically, the new Housing Element may be available in early 1979. City of Irvine General Plan. The City of Irvine at present comprises just under half of the IRWD. Its sphere of influence, or the area that eventually is projected to be annexed to the City, represents an additional 40% of the IRWD. In light of this, planning policies and activities initiated by the City significantly affect land use planning within the District. The City General Plan is a policy statement developed to guide urbanization of the City and its sphere of influence. Included in this plan are definitive guidelines and implementing policies relative to: urban design, land use, housing, open space preservation, conservation, noise, circulation, transportation, safety/seismicity, scenic highways, waste management, cultural/scientific resources, population/economics, and public utilities. Additionally, the General Plan outlines criteria for involving citizen input in the planning process. Land use designations of the City General Plan are shown on Figure 15. Land use designations of the cities of Santa Ana, Tustin and Newport Beach are also shown on this figure. '• • • • • • • • • • •-i+_',`': 11-n'l("'qf,V� Ilk' IV Ir rl�������5n�:::' •','�::::,� ,i•—: �Y::"''' y l�.r j r _''tJ31'r�'i�i3'1 _n - 3'IiiV�i� _ _ �,•���Q/. :•:::. - � r _M1-'.I'kay�d, _�u'„�'.:/:.�. '•_L •:,::ram;'. � , 11 ` I*l { a.. I-•ldti.: " - 1:c.:i.. l _t —_ _ r EL TORO iS..x n Ir _ ,•�R4111 _mum - S -1 , - _ _ 1•; _ UNTA ' :". >'• r•' l� jjj tttd. �i'{..(u: - dru rr'-:`�5j,:- 1 _ �!'-�. 7-.`�' �!: •�/1,:' r�if •,WIMI,IIpf ��N{Npfi. _ , 4,` :.•`i, q .'j3 _ JyY� Ir.+r ((� ` -,,' TT 1 ��� '- /�� :_ .. \i 's 1:'' -f'.`}.4.•r •r ' i r n ..:;F-�.i�.`t,.],� n. t 1 (•F til ADOPTED LAND USE 15 a s�str� DUI=E EM"^ © LSA/PBR al-UFSIME EFllSRY PLSTIf11,lONAL ® 0 EM p�pU/yM�]1�E © OVQI ^u,W.E 8 WJY6 0 © HI•u G1lAGAE0f1q ® umuw 40 000 SODO 12000 ®0 0-0W/ACPE © Mu111•L6E F • 15 • • 113 PBR LSA The Irvine General Plan was recently amended, and a comprehensive Master EIR prepared addressing the infrastructure inherent in implementa- tion of the General Plan. The General Plan Housing Element, like the housing element of the County, is currently under revision as a result of legal challenges to the adequacy of the existing element,, and is expected to be reviewed by the City Council in early 1979. An important aspect of the revised housing element is a requirement for inclusion of low and moderate income housing units in new developments proposed in Irvine. This requirement is most likely to be applied to zoning applications for new residential development proposed in the city. Other Cities General Plans. The Cities of Orange, Tustin, and Laguna Beach General Plans cover areas of the County that are within their Sphere's of Interest, as defined by the County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). At present, major general plan amendment programs that will lead to general plan land use designations and annexation within the next year or two are underway in all three jurisdictions. The General Plan amendments each involve establishment of land uses that represent implementation of The Irvine Company's Development program for the affected areas. In each case residential land uses are contemplated to be supported by commercial or recreational land uses. The Housing Element of the General Plan of the City of Orange has been recently revised, while the Housing Elements for the Cities of Laguna Beach and Tustin are pending revisions within the year in an effort to comply with State General Plan Housing Element Guidelines. The existing Housing Elements of the three cities advocate the need to provide adequate housing to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. This policy is primarily implemented through the use of rental assistance finding as administered by the Orange County Housing Authority. For the most part, rental units are presently the 'major source of affordable housing in these three cities. In addition,• the cities are attempting to formulate measures to provide new housing in the affordable price range. Laguna Beach plans to use federal funding to construct 100+ units which would be affordably priced; however, because this city is nearing build -out, it is unlikely that a significant` amount of new affordably priced units will be con- structed with the city. In an attempt to disperse affordable units throughout the community, the City of Orange has formulated a policy that no less than 20% of any new tract will be affordably priced. Minimum standards for such units have not been established, and no new units have been constructed at this time. The City of Tustin foresees the potential for establishing new affordable housing units in The Irvine Company land currently being annexed to the City, though no specific strategy has yet been developed to accomplish this goal. • I• I• I* I0 I• WE,] -The Cities of Newport Beach and will be revised during 1979. Like primarily on rental assistance funds PBR LSA Santa Ana have Housing Elements which other cities, Newport Beach relies and rental units to satisfy the needs for affordable housing. There are currently no plans to provide new housing at affordable prices. The City of Santa Ana, unlike other cities in the County, has an abundant supply of affordable housing within its city limits. The City utilizes federal funding for rental assistance and housing rehabilitation, but does not require new development of affordable units. C: A �• �• • C C 115 PBR LSA DEMOGRAPHY LAND USE AND GROWTH_ TRENDS The following analysis presents past, current and projected land use, housing, and population characteristics within the IRWD. It also describes jurisdictional responsibility and policy direction inherent in the various planning programs of the agencies who make fundamental land use and growth decisions within District boundaries. With the exception of the City of Irvine data, -each of the information sources used provides data covering the entire Study Area or beyond; data compiled by the City of Irvine is oriented exclusively to areas within its boundaries and sphere of influence. Because of the relative homogeneity of these sources vis a vis coverage of the District, no Index Map is provided. The reader is referred to Figure 16, however, which illustrates relevant jurisdictional boundaries in relation to the IRWD service area. The IRWD, while providing water and wastewater service within the District, is not a governmental agency which makes decisions as to future growth or development of land within the District. Rather, the District provides service in response to planning and land use decisions of local and regional governmental agencies who consider the often .conflicting objectives of land users and land use regulations and developing general plans that balance these conflicting objectives. The IRWD, in meeting service demands, has developed a multi -level fiscal and facilities planning program that is similar to, and parallels the multiple layered local agency development review and approval process'. The IRWD responds to local agency general plans which in turn are a response to varied planning programs of other agencies with special functions. This chapter attempts to outline the interrelationships of the complex process as it affects IRWD facilities planning. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Like Orange County as a whole, the bulk of population growth in the Irvine Ranch Water District "has occurred in the relatively recent past. The City of Irvine, for example, experienced a 480% increase in population over the seven year period between 1970 (population: 7,572) and 1977 (population: 44,538) (Quinton-Redgate, 1977). Much of this growth has occurred in conjunction with an overall expansion of the his base into five southeastern sectors of the County. • • • • • • • • • • • `,y ; r`,' - <:" 'f '�•-�hI r`..::i..; ,' q, .'`,;;fi`•'+a {t:, ., - .t .'f`'`.r'.:. ..rr •ss"r, 'Y .r. 'n^.5, >,°. ^iiF -..� 1 f.i 1 rt 'r l.'i �4•��:r,- •! •4,'n. ii4'�iiv •• •' re �•. '14 • �C Y, t - r� wli , �• l�Jn• ' y� + PrT Vl lu �igj./, •,/.- ' �`:i �` ,.{, r„ :Y<a .x ,t,,. (t tt S•*N'•''irJ '-(j_ ,/' p Phil`„ �' t ` � ,'4„'.I}},,,, .' \e•yl a,l"'i,}'-` ^i. wJ: '�l"L', I, `' /a. -���'. .' �.' r',I '">:`i'i{i'S\'-:'A''.}>a�� iKv',+; 51^.,: r: r•l,\ ' -'. r •..tyfi 1, •' S1k _'�j\�'r-.r,' t' '{'- 1 i �ts', t.l a.$, � \. ,., M �� +,, .. _-; , 'a` "S"f�<TI 1,�.�!`,"y-P .;X �:-.+ry'''r'l� 5"� .;G•'�j�aSr'�''rt'}�rv.'t\yf;}' 'r ,a;fl'i':r,'i�..: `ry::lr_ ,yrI- �11�I )�,t,. .fir= � • 1 .�j,'j;-.�„"�' •„j ,.'• - ' ,'�'p->r�..-'• r•.. � ;�., : "9°:,; <V'L••'1�:'tt��M3 ,11 .i•. f:`'✓Y"-S h �''%'tt a' I' -1'le 'j^��',• � t�- �rrd• �—^'� -�i it, > T _ •��r�qs� _I t.:y •. 6• •'I'�••'..r :��(i��lrirx lM -I'l..t i �`•, ,p;i: "�. lt� �",(,,:vj,lfff�.,ll'''%'F•. ,, ::''z{:�. '1', Y ;)a,•irrt,+, i.;%t l- .+'•w f-� E�, -aL—:- •:.%Tf`i. �'+♦�,�A.e �, ,f._ �N; 4'� `��s. .,.,; •II Fry :,..t: .1..t � a 1,;; ;'•-� i �, .; } >- .l♦ 'ill ,r ` :''Wa{Y1-i_�l _vi+tt l�si �1I)�'">,` }��" ... y..:. t •i' •''i �'z . 'y'C :. :,.+. '''>'y-�.!"}'F'=%'4: ••va `� ` ` `�'�?''t. ' : -- 4�"i."'� 4 Iif 7 `�, � "1 .�'`_,', v :-IC l� w'{ � } �.♦, ` •\ . �':�I .+ i� i- '- .}tit, i ,--GG::. ^:\.�`.^' Y ' r A. "` it ✓�' 1 , 1 i¢ _i`ai -r. t.'!`�`'•'t,y �ik#a, irrr r .f,`.,? 5, .�.-/'{�,Ytf�i, �x Wi�f/r�. S>�:r Ct� •,,j,;�f„` t -'`•' ,�/ �, . n �jf^J w.}'; ., "Pri i i��� la .L•'` }; ai .r. .- . ,hc '! : � .. . _ /. rY- ,.; •\:.; „' ,„ y psi 1 I[f\, ••/,�a•,<�,t '. .< ,-a., .•1> `"o' �a,,.�;,.+'-n• ��+:rS jl(•,I'•��i4 '�ii°�(„�17' lf�•; ke2,�tc.dh. ��; n'.'•vu ,-�nr•r> JJJiii��1�1 r�,'",^�. '2"�.�, `tiyl ��` �Y1:.iF.j; t �/. �Y: "]"�,�� N�BM,�ht�y�;':t -•FL' tIiI I, r.YiY�;'u i"fkv:?^•vl L�•n;:.fa!-,�(i'•.x�?7H^14 aty 1'-'.^,^.^'y'JI F{.: f�'v ;;nLs, � %., : J Y ^i�•t �'`'• ~ I ' i'i <t+1_ -• a"tt`, -'Y' : iiit-i r,r' l f� 1�,: r�rr� „t.,1•tP r; `r 4:' ` ��"y.i,' �"�� � � : ' -, a '1 ,hai'- • ti '• .I r ` A' ` .4 ,.: .'�',���i�y\y. �"]-1�,''f'rG �„, �r`-.': uV;°l. =h[ a;r�IV," 'i;:��(r i��'it,t,.,,a�fw.� ';•wfli y Ilr YYY rb �u; f•.,�ca-a; /: SpleM,M, _ \, 1�:.1�,`..fl,"h� •1`„)u,i� ,.1 ,1'' UI 'Y; - r'., �'t 1'�4'i ,�t�} '• .G..a, y\ 14 ,f+ , n 4' YIS�' •` " i , \ _ � 1 4 - .,,.µ - �Z•,'� k\�:,.;;"'�xl ,j':_'�11i-�: is-1'c{ti �f.�-'.;:,-i ,: f,,,.... ',ii�tASll '• . � 4' : � - ; t � 9-• 7>. � :,...�Cg f , _ -• ♦ , 4'_ pS .^: a -.� Z; � ., r' ,t' '-`''-•�"ltp•'s-Jd'4>:.I JURISDICTIONAL i 1 + IOWN INE 0 RANCH LWATERN RE I SON Rl I NOTM A 16 117 PBR LSA Among the factors contributing to this pattern, several are widely acknowledged as having played key roles. These include: - provision of convenient regional access as occurred with the construction of the San Diego Freeway in the 1960's; - the presence of an established infrastructure in the communities of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa to the northwest, - the relative lack of natural physical constraints to development, - the strong demand for industrial sites and housing throughout the 1970's, and - the proximity of large undeveloped, and easily developable areas adjacent to existing urbanized areas. A fourth factor, of special significance to the Study Area, was the presence of The Irvine Company (TIC). In the pursuit of its long-range development plan, TIC has had a dominant role in the evolution not only of The Irvine Ranch, but the County as a whole. Thus, a number of conditions were brought to bear which lead to the rapid southward expansion of Orange County's urban boundary, and in partic- ular the remarkable growth of the Irvine area. Within this framework, it is the fourth contributor -- the presence of TIC -- which has had perhaps the singlemost influential role in determining the extent, character and distribution of this growth. Though the Irvine Ranch was under sole ownership of the Irvine Family from 1876 until the mid 1970's, significant development presures did not arise until the 1950's (Urban Land Institute, 1974), when numerous purchase offers and an increase in assessed valuation necessitated consideration by TIC of a comprehensive development policy. The first major commitment to proceed in this direction came with TIC's donation of 1,000 acres of land to the Regents of the University of California system in 1959. The following year, William Periera's plan for a 10,000-acre area surrounding the future University of California at Irvine provided the focus for TIC's long-term commitment to build a satellite new community. One year later, in 1961, the. IRWD was formed to provide for water systems within the Ranch; its scope of activity was further expanded in 1965 to include sanitation among its services. I• 1• C I• I• I• U U 118 PBR LSA On a schematic level, the original Periera plan still serves as the basis for most of TIC's development guidelines in that that plan formed the framework for general plans subsequently developed and adopted by the City of Irvine. Initial plans called for the gradual phasing of development from the southwestern through the central and finally the mountainous northern sector of the Ranch. This continues to serve as a guiding concept although the majority of the coastal southern sector is now envisioned to develop in the final stages of the plan, a shift which is due largely to the controversy surrounding the entire coastal acreage. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT At present, land within the Irvine Ranch Water District is approxi- mately 20% built -out; major residential, industrial and commercial components have become well established and form the nexus of a region, which has been called "one of the most important economic centers in the Country (Business Week, 1977). However, the fact that much of the local economy was and is new has created special conditions, effectively insulating the region from certain national influences while magnifying others. This phenomena has allowed the job market and the "gross regional product" in Orange County to maintain a sizable growth rate; in turn, the demand for goods, services and housing has been brisk. On the other hand, the region has been more susceptible to inflation than many areas due both to the high percentage of initial investment over a period characterized by inflationary interest rates, and also the fact that Orange County in general, and Irvine in particular, has for sometime now been a prime market for speculators. Due to the latter conditions, housing cost has become a primary determinant of demographic migration patterns in the Southern California area. Existing land uses within the IRWD may be grouped as residential, com- mercial, industrial and institutional. Existing development is shown in Figure 17. Existing development by City and County is shown in Table M. For the purposes of this analysis, existing development includes only that development currently in place or which has received entitlement from the local general agency to begin construction (e.g. subdivision map/parcel map approval). Areas that have been granted P.C. zoning are considered future development inasmuch as additional local agency discretionary approvals are required before actual development would be permitted. Agriculture, while widespread as an existing use,. especially on the Tustin Plain, has not been included in this tabulation since as a new development is approved, it supplants the existing agricultural use. '0 C • I• I0 • • ''"a '. � i.' ;,i':,. .,.t t,ii i/tlr:+::—t,,r• +�' ;'P,' 1..5.,^. vi, ..{ . .'9 CJl� a.': f' „^, ...r.�. i',.'•u. ••. I\_ ''`�, •,).Mi rv;`C l .Mn.. a iyl( n al'�`:,�i'�'r: �:_ `#,,: /` 'i} ,.. ,. r _, ,'Sr .i1•�:.,'•. -, i. n`.: M."tLL ii', " '. '•v�•"v •''t ;' t(^:?>�•}r,; r�'; •. ,"w'Ip•��} � �i.4+•,,a:nr`•" _YV .i'i V•, lrit- .1 � rs-3 "i.r i.' 'r •� .•rrl' ,.'�,/''i :. '.•F 5 F' tar 1,., .1.'' ',.',r. i.R , i�a�„? -� �'�._ 'r - I (.-�....�. ,a-•! (• '�• 'I'll* Y `�_-"% ^,� %'. ' ! - ,� - _ , ' :,at: � }��c��"'ia"t'\�r'i�fit n'ri',i,a •'ti'' �' _ 1 \ - ri LT T .•-F-'�� � ;, �';,..:�-r• 'ate' '7 "s/''�.L:•. '�:-.••=e r'a•''`=,r�, i"" '�,a�.�'1 .7, ��.. ,'.�{��•�p ter_ - i •�'+ ; �7 r'�^i-^J •'�>v' __r_.�� � �- J ��~ - ,i r,'��:,"'��,sR �'�l•; :• `�r,\`'�-7: •,.'r'i ,./ fh ��,>�5, '{ ., t r,V a 51�'� I , �.r I i• ,tr Jr ,rrtiv, ' `+.,:d �i�r ✓;r 'r; .: •;'w1.-t .:i _ i A -3t-' A,• :ice: .A •, Y r I_:�n�'�• v'. _`i.'f; "may �!+'Q�`,'.��. T=.y h'r•-', ,594. b,,,y' � `'-'} , '.{ p rt••, 'i :!'.1 ,iv':1"',L �r t'�� 1 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT 17 1 LSA/PBR 000 HMO ° 17 1• I• U I• C U • • I• 120 PBR LSA TABLE M EXISTING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN IRWDI (APPROXIMATE ACRES) Land Use Residential Commercial/1—nd-ustrial Institutional Total City of Irvine 2,000 1,900 2,400 6,300 City of Tustin 200 200 700 1,100 City of Santa Ana 200 200 City of Newport Beach 75 25 100 County of Orange 3,900 3,900 Total Acres 2,200 2,375 7,025 11,600 Estimated based on development data provided by Public Agencies and The Irvine Company. In general, existing development within the District has been the subject of analysis in the CEQA Mandated -Environmental Impact reporting process which has been a mandatory requirement of local government since 1971 when CEQA was enacted. Figure 1 in the first section of the MEA presents an index map of EIR's that. have been prepared for development projects within the District. Over 60 EIR's have been prepared to date. As new development proposals reach the General Plan or zoning level of.the local agency review process, EIR's are prepared for those actions. In addition, since 1974, general plans and general plan amendments of local agencies have been subject to CEQA requirements. Table A in the first section of the MEA summarizes those general plans that' have been subject to EIR's. As noted in the Table, the City of Irvine's GPA EIR was prepared as a Master EIR and thus addresses all future development proposals that are consistent with the General Plan at least at a general level of specificity. RECENT TRENDS IN LAND USE AND HOUSING Over the last five years, the cost of housing within the District has increased to the point where housing availability has become a potentially pivotal factor in the continued growth of the economy. In the seven years since 1971, the median sales price of new homes in Orange County has risen from $31,000 to $110,000 (Agid, 1978). The value of resale housing has also been highly inflated (median resale value in Orange County is currently $88,250 (Protas, 1978). C 1• r: I• 1• 1• I• �• I• C I• 121 PBR LSA This phenomenon, coupled with a marked residual 'demand for housing in the affordable range, (while an estimated 83% of all demand for housing in Orange County is for units priced less than $100,500, only 41% is currently priced within that category), has restricted the housing market for most moderate and lower income families (those earning $22,230 per annum and less) by necessitating high down payments to qualify for loans. Most hard hit are first -home buyers who, lacking equity from previous home -ownership, (average equity of Orange County home buyers is now on the order of $40,000, Ken Agid). can neither meet prevailing down -payment requirements nor qualify for the outstanding mortgage values. The demand for housing is primarily a function of job formation and economic growth. At present, the Orange County job market is expanding by approximately 26,800 (Agid, 1978) jobs per year; this is supported by the Draft SCAG-78 Growth Forecast Policy which shows an average annual increase of 29,250 jobs through the year 2,000 in'Orange County. On a general level, there is increasing concern that the scarcity of affordable housing will create an obstacle to the expansion of existing industries in the County. Perhaps more significant for the long-term picture is the possibility that new industry will elect not to move into the area as a result of inadequate local housing supply and the difficulties associated with a commuting labor force. On a more tangible level, the housing supply situation has been manifested in numerous legal challenges against local governments, as discussed in greater depth below. In October 1978, a suit was filed against the City of Irvine by a legal advocacy coalition representing lower income gro.ups in Orange, Los Angeles and San Diego counties. Charging that the City has failed to meed its fair share requirement for low and moderate income housing, the coalition is requesting the court to impose a moratorium on all industrial and commercial development in the city which "may generate additional employment for low and moderate income persons (L.A. Times, 1978)." This action follows on the heels of an earlier lawsuit, filed by the Orange County Fair Labor Council, which also charged the City with providing inadequate affordable housing opportunities. Settled out of court in September 1978, both the City and The Irvine Company were committed to the construction of 700 lower priced housing units as part of the final settlement. - Perhaps more significantly, the IRWD was itself subject to several lawsuits during 1978, one of which charged that the District had under- taken major water supply improvements without adequate regard to the I• 1• I• I• C I• 122 PBR LSA employment and housing needs of low and moderate income persons in the region. Filed in April 1978 by a coalition of private individuals, organi- zations and legal foundations, the suit further contended that the District had violated the California Environmental Quality Act in failing to prepare an EIR on its bond authorization program (Daily Pilot, 1978). This action was followed the next month (in May 1978) by two additional lawsuits against the District, both filed by the Irvine City Council (Irvine World News, 1978). The first suit closely paralleled that filed earlier inasmuch as the City charged the District with having violated CEQA in failing to prepare an EIR prior to its proposed $995 million bond authorization program. The second suit challenged the make-up of the District's Board of Directors as unconstitutional. At present, two of the Board members are elected by residents while the remaining five are elected by landowners; City officials endorse a board comprised solely of elected representatives (L.A. Times, 1978). None of the three suits against IRWD have been concluded as of this writing, though negotiations are underway (Bowie, 1979). In the interim all three suits have raised difficult questions with regard to public utilities planning. As indicated in previous sections, the IRWD is not empowered to determine zoning, to author housing elements or to implement affordable housing programs. These responsibilities fall within the purview of relevant local planning agencies.as discussed in the Relevant Planning section. Despite this fact, the trend toward associating public utilities with land use. planning efforts appears to be growing. Though most of the jurisdictions within IRWD have undertaken some form of program to address the need for affordable housing, their efforts to date have met with limited success, (with the exception of Santa Ana, which retains an adequate supply of affordable housing within its boundaries). This is due no doubt to. the extreme complexity of the problem; of all major policy issues now under consideration, at all levels of government, affordable housing may well be the most difficult to resolve. If the courts deter- mine that IRWD infrastructure improvements should be held in abeyance pending the -outcome of other agencies relevant affordable housing programs, a new precedent will have been set. How this may effect future activities of the IRWD cannot, at this time, be assessed, although it would appear that in view of the inflationary trends in construction costs, any delay in meeting the water and sewer infra, structure requests of new development would tend to increase the basic cost of owning and maintaining housing, and thus be counter to the objective of.making avail- able low and moderate cost housing. 0 123 PBR LSA 0 POPULATION AND HOUSING PROJECTIONS Existing levels of development and the various land use planning pro- grams affecting lands within the District form the current context for projecting levels of population and therefore service requirements within the District. While planning within the Irvine Ranch Water District boundaries is a primary concern of IRWD, TIC, local municipalities, and other general purpose agencies are engaged 'in population and growth forecasting activities for regions that include the District. Principal among these are The Irvine Company, the City of Irvine, the Orange County Forecast and Analysis Center (FAC), and the Southern California Association of Governments. The following section reviews various demographic projections formulated for the study area, with an emphasis on jurisdictional considerations thereof. The following sections discuss the various projections and and how the District employs these forecasts in devising plans for satisfying service needs that are created by local agency development approvals. The Irvine Ranch Water District. The-IRWD is responsible for the provision of an adequate supply of water and waste treatment and collection services for roughly 72,000 acres in south-central Orange County. Due to the character of its jurisdiction and the agencies it serves, the IRWD draws from the extensive demographic analyses of other agencies to apply to its internal planning efforts. IRWD data, is based initially on development planning data and statis- tics supplied by The Irvine Company, since The Irvine company's programs result in the initiation of nearly all development applications within the District. However, IRWD adjusts these data wherever necessary to remain consistent with general plans adopted by the County of Orange, the City of devel- Irvine, and other cities within its jurisdiction. As a result, the opment phasing data used by IRWD is a thorough compilation of data from all relevant planning agencies within its service boundaries. In all cases, the IRWD amendments reflect the maximum allowable figure in a given range. The IRWD Phasing Development Schedule depicts growth in 6 phases through the year 2010. As illustrated in Figure 18, the schedule indi- cates that near -term development will be concentrated largely in the central portions of the District; in general the timing of development increases with distance from this central area. The timing ,and intensity of development is considered particularly uncertain along the coastal area where projections of the relevant agencies are most discrepant. IRWD C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U-PHASING DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 18 rl=MEASMG TO sm LSA/PBR r—=TO 19as TO 1990 r-r-I TO MS PTO 2000 0 4000 8000 12000 �FEEr TO 2010 Ram %RUM BRUNC7 18 U '• I• • I• '• I• I• 125 PBR_ LSA notes that projections for this area range from no growth (as favored by some private organizations and individuals), through the County approved level of 36,000, to TIC's planned ultimate of approximately 46,000 individuals. For purposes of generating water use projections, IRWD has applied the high end of the range, incorporating TIC plans for the coastal area. Resolution of development intensity within the coastal area must await Coastal Commission approval of the Irvine Local Coastal plan. Unlike the more conceptual. phasing development schedule, IRWD's com- pilation of residential population projections .is depicted in four dis- crete stages (including current levels) through 1990; a figure is also given to represent the ultimate (build out) condition, as presented in Table N. City of Irvine. In 1111, the City adopted a General Plan containing 3 separate land use options ranging from minimum to maximum urbanization within the Study Area. Two years later, the City initiated General Plan Amendment #4 (75-GPA-4) for the purpose of selecting a single land use plan among the three options. Following a number of amendments, deletions and revisions, the City adopted GPA #4 in September of 1977. That plan, which remains basically unchanged to date, (one minor amendment has since been approved regarding a small commercial area in north Irvine, (Gregorius, 1978), was based on the moderate option considered during the City's review process. In 1976, the Orange County Local Agency Formation Commission placed cer- tain portions of the City's General Plan coastal area within the Spheres of Influence of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach. These areas were subse- quently deleted from the City of Irvine's consideration during 75-GPA-4. Including land contained within the approved Sphere of Influence, Irvine's current general plan encompasses an area of about 44,000 acres. Within this area, the City shows a total of 27 designated residential villages projected to develop over five 5-year phases extending past 1995 (City of Irvine, 1977). Tables 0-1 and 0-2 show cumulative growth projec- tions for the City of Irvine. I0 • TABLE N 126 IRWD COMPILATION OF TIC AND LOCAL AGENCIES RESIDENTIAL POPULATION PROJECTION] PBR LSA Ultimate Ultimate Service Area 1978 1982 1985 1990 Population DU Irvine Villages 1,2,3,4,5,6,32 - 0 0 4,612 9,112 48,136 15,173 7 0 0 0 4,664 10,965 4,641 • 8 6,533 15,187 15,780 15,780 15,780 6,408 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 3,746 5,906 5,906 5,906 5,906 2,208 11 14,251 14,251 14,251 14,251 14,251 5,269 12 1,683 4,711 7,195 8,070 8,070 2,958 • 13 14 0 1,610 0 12,088 0 16,808 0 24,233 0 24,233 0 9,750 15 7,266 21,592 21,592 21,952 21,952 8,900 16 0 3,203 6,425 8,525 6,779 2,355 • 17,18,22 0 0 0 0 21,438 7,164 19,37 3,964 3,964 3,964 3,964 3,964• 1,735 • 20 7,016 7,016 7,016 7,016 7,016 2,738 . 21 5,783 10,785 10,890 10,890 10,890 3,875 24 0 4,328 4,328 4,328 4,328 2,001 25,26 0 0 1,100 3,028 15,046 5,144 33 0 0 0 0 3,100 1,480 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 35 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IRVINE SUBTOTAL 51,852 103,031 119,867 141,359 221,494 83,774 Tustin A& B 0 0 0 14,523 19,943 7,497 Tustin C 5,251 5,251 5,251 5,251 5,251 1,965 0 Orange D 0 575 575 1,575 18$31 5,846 Santa Ana E Newport Beach F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Laguna Beach G 0 0 0 0 7,053 2,015 Coastal Area 0 1,000 7,152 21,015 45,855 15,856 UCI 6,280 9,642 15,052 24,878 24,878 11,237 • ETMCAS 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 5,670 N/A SAMCAS 2,130 2,130 2,130 2,130 2,130 N/A OTHER AREAS SUBTOTAL 19,331 24,268 35,830 75,042 129,111 .44,416 TOTAL 71,133 127,299 155,697 216,401 350,605 128,190 • 1 Note that the Villages and areas listed in Table N correspond to the letter/number assignments used on Figure 14. • • • 127 PBR LSA CITY OF IRVINE TABLE 0-1 CUMULATIVE GROWTH PROJECTIONS CUMULATIVE ' OF ULTIMATE AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE • DWELLING DWELLING PHASE POPULATION UNITS POPULATION UNITS I 56% 54% N/A N/A II 72% 70% 3.2% 3.2% III 84% 820 2.4% 2.4% 0 IV 87% 84% .6% 4% V + Unassigned 100% 100% N/A N/A • POPULA TABLE 0-2 PHASE-1 ADDED POPULATIONS ADDED DWELLING UNITS? I To 1980 •47,657 to 126,525 19,265 to 49,167 II 1980 - 1985 18,427 to 40,910 7,773 to 16,747 III 1985 - 1990 10,856 to 32,748 4,312 to 12,191, IV 1990 - 1995 2,683 to 10,054 929 to 3,359 V 1995 + 11,728 to 37,290 5,332 to 12,773 Unassigned 1,826 to 3,236 859 to 1,534 TOTAL• 91,351 to 250,763 38,410 to 95,771 J 1 Phase I includes Village-20; Phase II: Villages 8,11,12,15,16,19,21,24; Phase III: Villages 10,14,25; Phase IV: Villages 2,7,26; Phase V: Villages 3,22; Phase VI: Villages 1,4,5,6,17,18. Note that Villages 9, 27 and 23 are not shown; in those instances where multiple phases are shown, the highest phase is indicated above. Unassigned includes Villages 32 and 33. 2 Both population and dwelling unit projections are shown in ranges. This is due to the fact that general plan designations, which serve as the basis for these projections, are given as ranges. • 1• • 128 U PBR LSA Total gross projected acreage for the various land use categories within the City and its approved Sphere of Influence (City of Irvine, 1977) are presented in Table P below: TABLE P PROJECTED ULTIMATE LAND USE: CITY AND SPHEREI • Residential 19,078 43%49, Commercial 1,953 9%^ Industrial 4,114 11% Agriculture 4,982 6% Circulation 2,500 8% • Institutional 3,564 18% Open Space 7,809 TOTAL 44,000 100% • Total is exclude University California at Irvine campus, freeway acreage and Marine Corps Air Station, E1 Toro. Other Municipal Jurisdictions. Although the City of Irvine is the • single largest Jurisdiction contained in the Irvine Ranch Water District, it comprises only 62% of the District by acreage. Other municipalities served by the District include portions of: - Newport Beach - Laguna Beach • - Tustin - Orange Santa Ana The District also serves portions of unincorporated County land, as shown in Table Q (Residential Population Projection as compiled by IRWD). • Local municipalities (excluding the City of Irvine) currently account for 27% of the total residential population served by Irvine Ranch Water District. At ultimate development, these areas will represent fully one-third of the total residential demand. 129 PBR l5A • Table Q indicates acreage and future population projections for, each of the jurisdictional areas served by Irvine Ranch Water District. TABLE- • JURISDICTIONAL AREAS SERVED BY IRWD (IRWD, 1978) Percent Ultimate Percent of Acreage of Total Population Total Area Within IRWD Acreage Projection Ultimate 0 Irvine 44,515 62% 221,494 63% Tustin 2,201 3% 25,194• 7% Orange 5,622 8% 18,331 5% Santa Ana 377 .5% 0 - Newport 556 .8% 0 ' Laguna 2,395 3% 7,053 2% 0 Otherl 16,472 22% 78,533 22% Total 72,138 100% 350,605 100% II Orange County Forecast and Analysis Center. In July 1976, concomitant 0 with adoption of certain general plan policies based upon the Southeast Orange County Circulation Study (SEOCCS), the Orange County Board of Supervisors requested that a Development Monitoring Program (DMP) be II established. Three major goals were outlined for this program: 1. To permit a timely analysis of the capabilities of essential • services to cope with development demands; 2. To permit a critical comparison of changing population trends and patterns with those projected by SCAG; and s of the air quality status within the SEOCCS 3. To permit an analyse q Y � area in relation to applicable air quality standards Although this task was initially undertaken by the Orange County EMA, in October of 1977 responsibility for its completion was transferred to the County Administrative Office's Forecast and Analysis Center (FAC).. FAC issued the completed program report in June of 1978. 0 i• I• • I0 • I• • I• 130 PBR LSA Extraordinary in both scope and content, the report contains among other items an analysis of the capacity and service capabilities of service systems within the SEOCCS area, including: - water - wastewater - schools (elementary, intermediate and high school) - energy (electricity and natural gas) - flood control - transportation (highways and transit) Population and dwelling unit •counts are matched against the service capa- bilities of the six service systems analyzed within the SEOCCS area. In each case, the data are provided for relatively small geographic study units termed "Community Analysis Areas" (CAA's). The Irvine Ranch Water District incorporates all or a portion of 10 CAA's including: TABLE R CAA's SERVED IN WHOLE OR IN PARL BY IRWD CAA# Location * CAA 29 -Orange Sphere of Influence2 * 42 • Central Tustin (55% of population in IRWD) * 47 North Newport Beach * 48 Airport Commercial 49 Irvine Industrial Complex 50 South Irvine 51 Central Irvine 52 North Irvine 53 East Irvine Industrial 54 MCAS Asterisks denote that only a portion of the CAA is within IRWD- 2 CAA 29 is unpopulated and was not analyzed in the DMP. The following discussion summarizes the DMP findings with regard to population phasing and distribution within IRWD; the reader is referred to the Section on Public Utilities and Services for a review of service system capacities and capabilities. [7 I• 131 PBR LSA According to the Report, of the eight CAA's projected to experience• the greatest population growth through 1987, three (south, central and north Irvine) are within the IRWD service area. By the"same token, these three CAA's are among the 7 CAA's anticipated to experience the fastest rate of growth over that time period. Tables S and T present the DMP population and housing unit projections for all IRWD service areas through 1987. Although the DMP projections vary from SCAG projections in some regional statistical areas, on the whole they are within reasonable agree- ment; this is true of all areas within the IRWD service boundaries with the exception of the coastal strip. Additionally, the DMP projections are consistent with the 1995 population goal of 711,000 within the SEOCCS area, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors in its 1976 action. TABLE S 0 DMP POPULATION PROJECTIONS WITHIN IRWD, 1978 - 1987 Average % CAA July 78 July 80 July 82 July 87 Absolute Change Annual Change 1978-1987 * 42 2,795 2,795 2,795 2,795 0 0 * 47 0 0 0' 0 0 0 * 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 19,400 25,074 33,783 43,256 23,856 13.7% 51 26,964 41,300 54,740 74,070 47,106 19.4% 52 8,889 18,428 18,428 20,877 11,988 15.0% 53 0. 0 0 0 0 0 54 8,534 8,534 8,534 8,534 0 0 IRWD Total 66,582 96,131 118,280 140,998 - 82,950 * Projections for these partial CAA's are proportional to the IRWD service area. [l I• 1• • I• I• [7 [7 132 PBR L5A TABLE T DMP DWELLING UNIT PROJECTIONS WITHIN IRWD, 1978 - 1987 Average % Annual CAA July' 78 July 80 July 82 July 87 Absolute Change Change 1978-1987 * 42 * 47 * 48 50 51 52 53 54 879 0 0 6,736 8,560 3,599 0 1,356 879 0 0 8,414 13,409 4,824 0 1,356 879 0 0 11,261 17,160 4,824 0 1,356 879 0 0 14,276 23,440 5,776 0 1,356 0 0 0 7,540 14,880 2,177 0 0 0 0 0 12.4% 19.3% 6:7% 0 0 IRWD Total 21,130 28,882 35,480 45,727 24,597 * Projections for these partial CAA's are proportional to the IRWD service area. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).. Although SCAG has formulated a variety of policies in its numerous roles, there .are two which have particular bearing on the IRWD; first, to redirect growth toward existing urban centers; and second, to balance jobs with population in the subregional areas. Consistent with these policies, SCAG has pro- jected a sizeable reduction in growth trends for the south Orange County region. The projected trends show the City of Irvine developing roughly along the lines proposed in the City's General Plan; south and southwest of Irvine, however, there are significant cutbacks in growth, of both the housing and employment sectors. SCAG is currently in the process of revis- ing its regional land use element. The Draft SCAG-78 Growth Forecast Policy, when final, will supplement SCAG-76 (as modified in October of 1977) as the basis for SCAG's policies, resource management plans, and decision -making programs. In general, SCAG-78 forecasts are higher than those of SCAG-76 Modified, which in turn was higher than SCAG-76. In Orange County, for•example, SCAG-76 Modified projected a 2000 A.D. popula- tion 54% higher than SCAG-76; SCAG-78 is an additional 3.8% higher than SCAG-76 Modified. 0 • • 133 PBR LSA • The explicit assumptions underlying SCAG-78 have also changed somewhat from those used in previous documents,, including: I.' A Fertility rate of 2.1 live births per woman (down from the rate of 2.5 used in SCAG-76). • 2. A net annual in -migration rate of 150,000 persons into the State including 38,000 (25%) into the SCAG region (up from the annual rate of 100,00 used in SCAG-76). Other assumptions affecting the outcome of the SCAG forecast include an upward shift in age composition; decreasing average household size; and • an increase in the regional labor participation rate. Table U presents the SCAG-78 anticipated growth rates throughout the SCAG region between 1976-2000. Until 'the SCAG-78 sub -regional breakdowns are available, no direct comparison between the IRWD forecasts and SCAG-78 can be made. However, • based on conversations with representatives of SCAG, the following state- ments are possible. SCAG, in developing its SCAG-78 forecast, adopted the Orange County Preferred 1 growth projection .(as approved by the Orange County Board of Supervisors). Within the Irvine area, the Preferred 1 pro- jection incorporates plans submitted by TIC and the relevant cities and jurisdictions (with slight modifications to bring these various plans into • agreement). As a result, the Preferred 1 forecast -- and, by extension, the SCAG-78 policies -- correspond fairly well with those of planning agencies within IRWD; no significant discrepancies are anticipated (Palmer, 1978; Wood, 1978). It should be noted that the County is currently in the process of developing its Preferred Forecast 2. This plan, when complete, will be submitted to SCAG as part of the Draft • SCAG-78 review process. The Preferred 2 forecast is expected to be substantially the same as Preferred 1 with slight modifications on a sub -regional level. These modifications are not anticipated to affect the IRWD Study Area. • 11 0 • • • 134 PBR LSA • TABLE U SCAG-78 GROWTH FORECASTS] Population Housing Employment z z x County 1976 2000 Change 1976 2000 Change 1975 2000 Change Imperial 83,000 129,000 65.4% 26,000 46,000 76.9% 39.000 61,000 56.4% Los Angeles 6.995,000 7,771.000 11.1% 2,717,000 3,180,000 17.0%' 3,345,000 4,163,000 24.6% • ORANGE 1.722,000 2,758,000 60.0% 523,000 1.135.000 82.2% 625.000 1,356,000 117.0% Riverside 532,000 911,000 71.2% 215.000 380,000 76.7% 169,000 340.000 106.0% San Bernardino 696,000 1,151,000 65.4% 286,000 454,000 58.7% 228,000 459,000 101.3% Ventura 446,000 788,000 76.7% 148,000 265.000 79.1% 140,000 288,000 105.71 • TOTAL] 10,474,000 13,508,000 29.0% 4,015,000 5,460,000 36.0% 4,547,000 6,675,000 46.8% 1 Rounded to nearest thousand G • • L 0 I• 1• 1• 1• 1• I! Table from 1976 Factor 135 PBR LSA presents the adopted SCAG-78 forecast for the City of Irvine 2000 A.D. 1976 TABLE V TION AND DWELLING UNITS PROJECTIONS OF IRVINE 1976 - 2000 A.D. 1980 1985 1990 - 1995 2000 Population. 35,393 70,000 120,500 155,000 -171,200 •200,000 Housing 11,471 27,500 49,400 65,800 73,100 81,300 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES SCAG Regional Housing Allocation Model (RHAM). During 1974, SCAG adopted the first RHAM to serve as a guide for Federal funding of afford- able housing programs throughout the SCAG region. Though several modifications to the original text were adopted late in 1975, no revisions have been made to the basic allocation tables since 1975 (SCAG reworked the data used in the model for use in developing its Housing Assistance Plans, but these revisions were not incorporated into the RHAM). Data in the RHAM is presented as a numerical summary of housing demand, supply and need as of 1975, with a 5-year projection to 1980. A major element of the SCAG model was its use of a fair share factor which added a regional component. to the needs analysis. Thus, the model indicated not only demand, supply and need generated within each subregion, but also an added factor to account for each subregion's share of the demand, supply, and need generated within the region as a whole. This factor is based on five criteria 'including availability of employment in the market area, availability of employment in the community, assessed value per capita, sales tax .per capita, and the subregion's income profile in comparison with the region as a whole. I0 • 136 • PBR SSA • Table W presents. the SCAG allocation figures for unincorporated RSA's 39 & 44 in combination with the City of Irvine (Unincorporated RSA's 39 & 44, when combined with the City of Irvine, comprise roughly the area encompas- sed by IRWD). As illustrated, the fair share component is sizeable within the Study Area particularly in the lower ,income ranges. This is due to the fact that the City of Irvine, when assessed according to the five • criteria outlined above, received the highest ranking possible and was assigned a proportionately, large fair share factor (City of Irvine, 1978c). SCAG is currently in the process of revising its RHAM, and is expected to complete this task in July of 1979 (Todd, 1979). The revised model • will incorporate not only real changes in regional demography, but also revisions to the allocation formula. These revisions have come about in part through the efforts of Mr. Robert Bachman, a member of the Southeast Orange County Housing Task Force who developed an alternative housing need assessment methodology during his tenure with that group. • The Bachman Model. Unlike SCAG's RHAM, the -Bachman model is not con- cerned with househo ds earning beyond$20,000 per annum; in addition, it does'not incorporate a fair share factor per se. Instead, the Bachman model circumscribes a 20-mile radius around a given jurisdiction; within this area primary (5-mile radius) and secondary (5-20 mile radius) areas of concern are designated by a grid overlay.' Each -primary area is • responsible for meeting the housing needs of all existing residents plus 25% of housing needs generated by existing and added employment within the primary area. The remaining 75% of job -generated housing is assumed to be met within the secondary area. City of Irvine Staff Method_. A third method to determine affordable • housing need has been developed by the staff of the City of Irvine. The City's model first evaluated the number and distribution of Irvine house— holds paying more than 30% of total income for housing (the level beyond, which a household is considered to be overpaying) and thus estimated current and future employment within the City. Following this, a distri- bution of Irvine employees by income category was determined, using • estimates provided by SCAG and Housing and Community Development (HCD). The City next selected as a guide the SCAG/HCD recommendation that the City provide housing for one out of every 2.08•workers. Applying these factors to current and future employment estimates, the City staff derived its own projections for immediate and prospective affordable housing needs. 0 • • • • • • • • • TABLE W 1975 DEMAND HOUSING NEED ANALYSIS INCOME 1 IIOUSEIIOLDS/CATEGORIES $0-3000 f3000-7000 f 7000-12000 $12000-16000 f16000-22000 $22000-36000 f36000+ TOTAL 2 3 TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 574 899 2517 6097 12733 6267 2024 31111 4 Large Families Elderly 36 979 58 1271 218 738 2385 1399 428 5262 843 1188 1453 751 223 6708 5 HOUSE VALUES 6 f0-5000 f5000-14000 f14000-20000 f20000-27000 f27000-37000 $37000-60000 $60000+ TOTAL 6 RENTS f0-75 S75-165 f165-230 f230-280 f280-365 ' f365 500 f500+ 7 TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 574 899 2517 6097 12733 6267 2024 31111 8 VACANCY ALLOWANCE 0 0 126 305 637 314 101 1483 9 TOTAL HOUSING DE14AND 574 899 2643 - 6402 13370 6581 2125 32594 , SUPPLY 10 EXISTING UNITS 'NEEDING 24 620 1395 3171 6571 13582 7917 33280 11 REPLACE14ENT 16 7 5 0 0 0 - 0 28 12 SOUND or REHAB. UNITS 8 613 1390 3171 6571 13582 7917 33252 NEED 13 EXISTING NEED (Demand/Supply) 566 286 1253 3231 6799 -7001 -5792 -658 14 FAIR SHARE ALLOCATION 949 1730 1265 59 -2556 -1012 -435 0 15 1975 ADJUSTED NEED 1515 2016 2518 3290 4243 -8013 -6227 -658 16 SUITABLE FOR REHAB. 8 128 207 , 0 0 0 0 343 1975-80 PROJECTED ADDITIONAL NEED 17 1980 HOUSING DEMAND 1519 2111 4440 10560 21505 11393 3441 54969 18 1975 SUPPLY 8 613 1390 3171 6571 13582 7917 33252 19 1975-'80 14EED 1511 1498 3059 7389 14934 -219U -4476 21716 20 1975-'80 ADJUSTED NEED 3021 .4371 5276 7549 10767 -4073 -5198 21713 07 r Ln D w V I• 1• 1• I* II I• I! Iw I• I• I0 138 PBR LSA The Irvine Plannin Commission Method. In the months 'since the City sta eve ope t is met o 0 ogy, the Irvine Planning 'Commission has proposed yet another formulation which appears likely to be the one ultimately adopted by the City (Sheldon, 1979).' Using the City's General Plan Land Use Element as a basis for analysis, the Planning Commission estimated what percent of residential land remaining to be developed in the City was shown at densities for which affordable housing would be feasible. Following their General Plan analysis, which indicated that 22% of the land fell in this category, the Planning Commission has recommended a 22% affordable housing goal. The specifics of the plan, including the degree to which assistance funding would be required to meet the stated objective, have not yet been fully worked out though it is expected that a final program will be reviewed and adopted by the Irvine City Council during January 1979. Table housing for the summarizes the needs. Since the City, this method resulting estimates for the City of Irvine's Bachman Model numbers have not yet been derived is not oresented. TABLE X SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES FOR IRVINE'S HOUSING NEEDS MDIATE NEED / OF HOUSEHOLDS IN NEED OF ASSISTANCE ANNUAL GOAL TOINLGOALTS VERY LOW LOW LOWER MODERATE VERY LOW LOW LONER MODERATE CURRENT RESIDENTS 0%-50X 50%-80X o%-80X 8OX-120% 0%-50 50%-80% OX-80X 80%-120% 0X-120S SLAG 1975) �1977) 748 386 1134 1145 75 39 113 114 227 SCAG (1) 1211 21 193 STAFF (25Y 474 457 931 1048 47 46 105 198 STAFF (30% 357 56 413 : 58 36 6 42 6 48 FAIR SNARE OF CURRENT RG0 EEU SCAG (1975) 601 408 1009 65 60 41 101 6 107 SCAG 1977 1008 101 STAFF 908 3754 4662 3022 91 375 466 302 768 PRESPECTIVE NEED •nVr-Yr& ffWCTION1 - SCAG (1975) 1952 1227 3179 169 390 246 636 34 670 SCAG 1977 7545 1509 STAFF 444 1834 2278 1477 89 367 456 295 751 w Lo I• I! I• I6 I• Ir I• r, C 140 PBR LSA - TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AND TRAFFIC The regional circulation needs of the area are primarily served by the Orange County Airport, AMTRAK, the Orange County Transit District and the freeway network. This regional circulation system is supplemented by arterial highways; local streets, equestrian, pedestrian and bicycle trails which provide for local circulation. In addition to describing the service available within the District a brief discussion of the transpor- tation planning program and structure of local agencies is included. While not directly applicable to programs of the District itself, these large scale transportation planning programs could substantially affect land use patterns and timing of development within the District and thus should be kept in mind as the District monitors the general planning and land use programs of the various jurisdictions within the District. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Air Service. Facilities at the Orange County Airport currently serve the air freight and passenger requirements of the service area. During 1977, 2,455 tons of air freight and 2,158,505 passengers were handled at this.airport (SCAG, 1978). The number of passengers served had, -by August 1978, increased by 13% and the projected 1985 demand has been estimated at 6 million passengers per year (L.A. Times, 1978)-. Even the current -demand for air transportation however, exceeds the 250,000 passenger per year design capacity of the existing facilities (Bresnahan, 1978). Rail Service. AMTRAK provides three round trip train passages daily through the service area between Los Angeles and San•Diego (AMTRAK, 1978). The nearest station stops are located in Fullerton, Santa•Ana and San Juan Capistrano. A feasibility study on rail passenger service recently conducted for this travel corridor found that with minor improvements within the existing right-of-way, reliable, frequent • inter -regional passenger transport could be provided. Consequently in February 1978, additional commuter rail service was added and jointly funded by Los Angeles County, Caltrans, and AMTRAK (SCAG, 1978). Freeway Network. The service area is currently served by four freeways. The Santa Ana and San Diego Freeways (Routes 5 and 405) provide north -south mobility whereas the Newport and Laguna Freeways (Routes 55 and 133) provide east -west mobility. Each of these freeways is free flowing for the most part, however, peak hour congestion is observable on all except Route 133. Ramp metering, which is anticipated in the future, will increase the capacities of the congested links and promote improved flow characteristics. • I• I* I* U I♦ I• I• G 141 PBR LSA - Figure 19 illustrates the freeway network and current traffic volumes. - Six, eight and ten lane freeway segments exist in the vicinity. Their respective capacities at level of service C are 100,000 ADT, 125,000 ADT and 155,000 ADT•(Level of service designations are defined in documents contained in the MEA Data Base Library). LOCAL CIRCULATION SYSTEMS Arterial Highways and Local Streets. The service area has a sophisti- cated hierarchy of existing and committed (through zoning) arterial high- ways and local streets. This network connects the freeway links in the area and extends northeast and southwest toward the undeveloped rolling hills.of the Santa Ana Mountains and the coastal foothills. Figure 19 depicts the major streets and their 1977 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes. In all, more than thirteen major arterials, ten primary arterials and eight secondary, arterials exist in the area currently or will be improved per the County and City Circulation Elements. Their capacities at level of service C are 45,000 ADT, 30,000 ADT and 20,000 ADT respectively when constructed to full arterial standards. Local streets are not mapped herein but do exist throughout the area particularly in the residential developments. These streets provide for local circulation and channel many vehicles onto collector streets and commuter streets which, in turn, serve larger arterials and the freeway system. The capacity of local streets is usually within 500 - 1,200 ADT if residential footage is allowed. Congestion occurs at isolated locations during morning and evening peak hours and occasionally at lunch time. Generally ,speaking, arterial links immediately adjacent to freeway interchanges experience delay more so than other segments. Included in this category are MacArthur, Jamboree, Culver, University and Red Hill. Additionally, the left turn movement from Campus Drive onto Culver, which serves the University of California at Irvine, sees delays during the evening rush hour. TRANSIT ROUTES AND PLANS The area is served by the Orange County Transit District (OCTD) which provides fixed route and Park-N-Ride service. The fixed routes generally traverse the area's arterial highways •and serve the University of California at Irvine, Newport Center, the industrial developments and the :7 i0 I '• �f;. y(, tim, 7�i�`;•i,�'r'-i;?i''4., ,;k.�, �',il�. �`., •'",,'t,. ,:., i:'o-"I:.i''':r{.",.'j�,'y�i .r '�.M' , If "f,:: ''2f a:41', 'P}�rl�o �,,..,.. . 'r L�,n• i':•7 �5��.'vi +l-% _��w: ', t,}:`i •i:,'t5 r';,, �`�'q'. t e�}nf`+. 'r+�'•r/=• J'3�'�'•,r _1 h.. ri!'. ,{,,.y ,ti i 4'' •ii `.4; `'r-',f �;` ,�:; 1111 f••, 1^,' ; -:, � , ,r �:,l �, -.. •' rf�'""`f �x `;�v. (f,"i nilR 1,r:, ii•'o'j,:ul, r. Sx :',.,I i•-' �.. r. %%%���... I , 1 a.. t��,j�+'i•Il i+�+'�" '� .�A•'^�y. �+s'••1... ��.",it.rl •,.,j'r ,� Far >,; 'r��,7- �.1'.ft`: T' I ^�-1,•// .c�,' 1�=., ,n t y:rr; }%i".�?;::..x•;-`„�S ... - � _ J• Ott, I• `i#4 .jw�7 �;.�,-,:,Cn ",N - ,.'I„i. .,i'. �'.�r ... 1.��:•'•'>\�:i;�t� -. 'C'�.:rh �'�le.:l'"'�'t.•(I ! r {/{,, _ iYr•�% r', i,, ,";� `3 ;�... ., r'icr'�+y'fi"-.�'^7:._ is 'yyC3411, �lYn ^.�"'i: �.tK�x / .,I M.r:�,�. - _ .ii,`.:i<`. at:,• -•�S drd%•s;'rwinR'a; '. '+r 1 {,v^ 9.f1' 1 V ^,•;1 it • ; t- " ' '-1�ir_` aR 'l Y2 .•laM.3-'.... t !r. �l c -^�y�.✓ e a..•;��,.',io14'ya.Ar.l',�':r:i�{;4.4+r;:-�.{.3'. uga"�i, '"S�F.: J�^:'.t..r Jt ��IUri .t,.r�•;';} �` 1e t', y'„r'-.' r'E�Sjr,{.t� •;�':.I;t�}'�9 R i� t tct'•i •s; 1 tt'tFh .� _•.iJ, �r� f i ,. '--�, c rt• :++?ii BAN'; 'j '(�.. �' •}: r .�.�•� 1".va sa ,:�, I.T,•e - ��•' Yr,3 rtK'+ :;.Y?. .g..;; Sr 1 17 n+, ;y�:• .-. r,, '„r, ' 1 .%'fl+`'`,nij•„ vL ti' �.-':.� ( �f',r'r• F il�:, .\r, , ��-r l..l�.: .4W. I L"' , �'v.'�.•'ris' .�;I 'i'"SMY �, I .k :. �'..�;Ar+v'�"'�.••'},'• _fi7..)',( (,�.��,•.'r r �� ,•�; B '�'�/�yl'J_ '-Q 5,.1N --`_ _ fir, ur �• rjJjt /\`JtS;•Yy%F, I-'7„� '2Y N :=; 1- ,$..r 1 .i `a , I R�..� �',_ �^ � t� . _ Yt �, 0, ,y .i ^r'ryr��, p;.iiAr ��99 N 37 `SYI 9 rr.:'f a' -f•7; '•.'�`: wAt%t;;;. �. ..,�•'•' '•r' '+J '-•.'L4J 215, �` m t I�>^F .`•1 d iJ I 7 ;,� `'2 n P !L7S'' Tyr M 1�`-i _ � A' � 'j... �'�,<P 1:+� ,tr. ' F�" � _ • . S.' .- e""* ,I' a, r,^-',' �.-� i ,C ,'� .w..,.'•�'� I -^^cpi,Aty ' � ✓� s� � �1':1,�'...a`=L: J� 5 .!, I •r i" '= .'13 3! ' ' I-' )g `'� vjc I. . �r 1 21 ! . -'�- r i JA. "/<'i7"f �=:•':�.„'%.UU, { i r ..Ayy���, ry t•'.' .„ ` " ``tir1 ✓ , "� .y 1 1 • r• 3 n . e �.._^.yx7 r`af'rt'f !".��i,��'�;}p e. • :2''„`';'+ j "4.•1r �• ,.., 1, ^L7 .� '••- tJ t:4, C�.?. ,=fYT'y,"7'�T :y7✓,` r'l'dY:;a Ff r, y��'�{'K: .N .� r , r'I .�k?�;r} t�ti'tim•r �v:,l t"I•rc..� _v�- ^ Y. - ,_1 I:�,tP,: " r�,y") .-Y1!'\„�1','�'tic,__ •'rR= r-, t��' M.!r,L, v �_ ..: .+r;. •.',7?v Y7 ;, °h.�: .r: :>:+rt �l'.� .f .. yf`--;•y yP'.�y �3}'�?��',�j n,�"f''t,9,`,�: r:�iiv^� kr� -' � iG e��)...r„ 4+Z ..J i ! . 3 t j•Sr_: ,,.. ,_�v A'�' )i� �' EXISTING GRMLAMIN 19 '•• .... COMMITTED 32•ACT IN LSA/PBR AOf • AVERAGE EXISTING DALv FREEWAYS TRAFFIC ® O Q MAJOR STREETS 9 40008000 12000 FEET 19 1• 1• is I* I• I* I• �• I• I• 143 PBR LSA -- marine bases. The Park-N-Ride routes run along Routes 408, 5 and 55 as well as serving Newport Center, Ford Aeroneutronic, and Fluor Corporation. A full grid -based bus network is not available at present due to the area's relatively low intensity development. The Circulation Element of the Irvine General Plan includes a Public Transit Element which addresses a hierarchy of transit corridors. Regional transit corridors, intra-city advanced transit corridors and secondary inter and intra city transit corridors are included in this General Plan Element -along with four transit stop locations. Non -Automotive Modes. Riding, hiking and bicycle trails exist through- out the area. County and City efforts have led to a formalization of trail system and trail improvement standards for both on -street and off-street linkages. Riding and hiking, trails are located mainly in the Silverado - Modjeska foothill area and within flood control facilities. A proposed route •joins upper Newport Bay to William.R. Mason Regional Park in the County Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. The County Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways and Irvine Bike Route_ exhibit show numerous existing and proposed on- and off- street trails in the vicinity. Many of these trails link to regional trail systems and join established parks. In addition, local bike trails exist within most of the residential developments located in the area. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES SEOCCS and NEOCCS. The Southeast Orange County Circulation Study (SEOCCS) and the Northeast Orange County Circulation Study (NEOCCS) were conducted in an attempt to bring the Circulation Element of the Orange County General Plan into conformance with the Land Use Element. -The 1972 Deletion by the State of the Pacific Coast Freeway and the adoption of a County General Plan Land Use Element in 1973, created land use and circulation policy discrepancies which could not be resolved without regional analyses. The SEOCCS effort, begun in 1974, was the first step in establishing consistency. The NEOCCS effort is an example of the County's continuing study programs to maintain circulation and land use policy consistency. The SEOCCS analysis was conducted at a level of detail sufficient to analyze the regional circulation network consisting of transportation corridors, freeways, major and primary arterial highways. In 1977 County I9 U I• I• I• I• I• • C7 • 144 PBR LSA Circulation Element Amendments, as a direct result of the findings and recommendations of SEOCCS, began establishing county policy regarding the circulation. network in southeast Orange County. The conceptual alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor was one such policy. The NEOCCS analysis has recently been completed and will result in Circulation Element Amendments for northeast Orange County beginning in 1979. A potential addition which would significantly effect the area is the "Eastern Corridor".' This includes a major arterial extending south from Santiago Canyon Road and then dividing into two primary arterials which will. extend to Myford Road and Sand Canyon Avenue. Such a link would provide access to the currently undeveloped Santa Ana mountains and foothills.' litZ and Count Circulation Elements. At present, the Circulation Elements of t e City of Irvine and the County of Orange differ substantially in terms of both functional arterial- designations and arterial alignments. Most of the discrepancies are expected to be resolved through the County Circulation Element Amendment process, which will bring the County plan into conformance with the City Plan except in three instances. First, Culver Drive, between Campus and Bonita Canyon Drive appears as a major arterial on the County plan but a secondary arterial on the City plan. Secondly, Culver Drive between Bonita Canyon Drive and the conceptually proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor which is included in the County network, would be deleted by the City. Lastly, the, Irvine Circulation Element shows Trabuco Road intersecting Irvine Boulevard north of MCAS El Toro. This alignment differs from the County Circulation Element which does not include an intersection with Irvine Boulevard between Jeffrey Road, and Sand Canyon Avenue. San Joa uin Hills Trans ortation Corridor. Through the deletion of the Paci is Coast reeway route in 1973 an the Southeast Orange County Circulation Study, the need for an additional transportation corridor between Interstate 5 and Pacific Coast Highway was established., The San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor was proposed by County Transportation Planners to satisfy this need. An alternative alignment study and environmental documentation as well as extensive public participation efforts have been underway for a year on this project. The environmental impact report is slated for distribution in December 1978 and addresses route selection only. Precise alignment studies will begin once a route is selected early in 1979. These efforts will require up to fifteen months following which funding opportunities and the timing of adjacent development will determine the phasing of corridor construction. E u I• 1• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• 145 PBR LSA The transportation corridor is envisioned as a multimodal• facility - with limited access. At present it has been generally located between the Interstate 5/Avery Parkway interchange in Mission Viejo and the future Corona del Mar Freewdy/Bonita Canyon Drive interchange in Newport Beach. The corridor will be approximately 14 miles long. System Phasing. The orderly phasing of development and corresponding circu ation routes is essential to the provision of efficient and safe transportation. Rising costs and declining revenues however, are making the maintenance of existing systems and the provision of improvements difficult for local agencies. The ultimate build -out of the circulation routes included within City and County General Plans will most likely not occur until after the year 2000 since many of the linkages will be constructed only in conjunction with adjacent land development. City of Irvine Tap Model. The City of Irvine established the Traffic Analysis Program TAP used to evaluate the• four Circulation Element alternatives in the fourth General Plan Amendment of 1977. This model is continually being refined and is being used at present to assess the adopted General Plan Circulation Element. The Traffic Analysis Program projects ultimate traffic volumes throughout the City which are anticipated as a result of the General Plan Land Use Element designations. These volumes are then• compared'to the capacities of the circulation links to assess the compatibility of the land uses and the circulation system proposed. 0 I• 1• 14 I• 1• U 146 PBR LSA AIR RESOURCES Climate and Air Quality conditions within the IRWD are outlined in the following chapter. In essence ambient air quality standards are estab- lished by Federal and State agencies. Enforcement is accomplished through State Air Resources Board review of development projects in the EIR process and as permit applications are received. Generally, development projects that relate to the population growth within IRWD would be scrutinized by applicable reviewing authorities before IRWD involvement occurs. Exceptions would occur in the case of major facilities of the• District such as treatment plants which would be subject to direct ARB review and, if federal funds are involved, federal review for conformance to federal policies. CLIMATE SETTING Monitoring Resources. A variety of monitoring resources are available within the IR41D service area. Climatic records from several sites date back over a period of decades with the result that a long-term baseline can be well defined. However, the small population of the area, until recently, has not justified the establishment of an air quality monitoring station in Irvine. Thus, air quality information must be inferred from a limited number of stations surrounding Irvine. Climatic data on temperature and precipitation, and to a lesser degree prevailing winds, are available from a number of resources in support of agriculture and flying operations as identified in Figure 20. These data are supplemented by several rain gauge observation points maintained by the IRWD at some of its reservoirs. In terms of areal coverage, climatic homogeneity, and length of record, the climatic data resources are adequate for most interpretive application within the Irvine Ranch Water District. The cost of maintaining an air quality station in Irvine is beyond the current means and budget of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). Already they recognize that the rapid growth of Irvine air quality data are available from monitoring stations in Costa Mesa (Harbor Boulevard), El Toro (El Toro Avenue), Anaheim (Harbor Boulevard), and Laguna Beach (Broadway), but none duplicates Irvine's unique meteorological and air pollution source distributions. Whereas meteorological parameters are somewhat homogeneous over much of the area, air quality is very complex with numerous microscale gradients that do not allow for ready interpolation between data points. I• 10 4• pip DVA".. f°- � `\ . a - .:%r ' • •,: I* I• I• I• G C • Ll ffm Climatic Means and Extremes. The climate of the Irvine area is con -- trolled mainly by the presence of a semi -permanent subtropical high-pres- sure cell off the Southern California coast. Local determinents include the position of Irvine relative to the ocean, and characteristics of the surrounding terrain. The high pressure cell and prevailing sea breeze limit precipitation to the cooler months of the year and result in fair skies, moderate temperatures, fresh breezes, and the ubiquitous temperature inversions that cause Southern California's, infamous air quality problems. Temperatures on the Tustin Plain average around 62°F, with a normal range of 20 degrees between the daily minimum and maximum. The average temperature in January is 530F and in July about 71°F. The proximity of Irvine to the ocean is reflected in the fact that the average temperature closely parallels the mean water temperature off the Southern California coast and that there are few extremes (either hot or cold) of temperature. Figure 21 for the El Toro MCAS shows the small seasonal oscillations and relative infrequency temperatures above 100°F or below 32°F. Precipitation is governed by the blocking action of the subtropical high-pressure cell. that keeps out almost all rainfall until the high finally weakens and moves farther south in late October or November. The "rainy" season- runs from November to April, but rainfall is light and results from five or six storms per month that move as far south as . Southern California. Precipitation records from the Irvine Ranch headquarters, shown in Figure 22 demonstrate the seasonal pattern quite well; they also point out that monthly extremes in one year often exceed the annual total in another. Because of the relatively flat terrain on the Tustin Plain, total precipitation tends to be relatively uniform throughout the IRWD area. The one parameter showing some diversity across the area is the wind - field. Prevailing southwesterly winds in the coastal portions of Irvine are often deflected into a westerly or northwesterly component as the winds reach the Lomas de Santiago. As the winds diverge across the Tustin Plain, they slow down somewhat as well, such that inland areas are not ventilated as well as the coast is during the day. This not only allows for greater pollution stagnation, the shift toward the northwest trans- ports pollutants from northwest Orange County and Los Angeles into the area. As a result, the inland areas typically have considerably worse air quality than the coastal environs. During winter, however, inland loca- tions develop a stronger offshore wind component than do the coastal C7 I• is C u I• • 7 0 FIGURE 21 149' MEANS AND EXTREMES OF THE EL TORO MCAS MONTHLY TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION PBR LSA Yl3i] 1.00 ' ABSOLUTE „•••• •,,.••' •••...........•••. 'MAXIMUM �. .. 80 ----- ---- n MEAN MAXIMUM 60 r ••.......... —.� �' ♦ MONTHLY MEAN H...... �`• `��♦ `MEAN �.... . _ ...................... MINIMUM 40 -"" • ABSOLUTE .••••..................�•' • MINIMUM 20 J F M A M J J S 0 'N D MONTH OF YEAR 1• I• 1• 1• I• is • • • [: FIGURE 22 150 IRVINE RANCH HEADQUARTERS MONTHLY MEAN We e at _ _�4.-- --(- C:��-T+. of :• � -: ME- ' %.�'• J i� UI �"'-. -:'.��-WET^_ : TIC-1===s-` ._ •$;: `, .�---y `-__-1.• (n- - I -4_ .I`._ '•t'�. - ,�1 -ice �. �^ •.-4i. ;: • F•_• Z•.yFr ff - yyy}� y. _ _ '-�i--'..+li �-� Wit'-' -': - -}ma-}y�--�-���--- Sam -_ 14 ••-�r_ .. Ltl ••I •• i_--------fit_ ci—� ^•' F... 1. -Fes_ .-- . -- °"°: •.`G:~�''•.`.c: :•"t]: r• f • S3H�NT PBR LSA G Z 0 [n 7 . o � 1• I• I• G • • 151 PBR LSA areas. Pollutants emitted near the ground, especially carbon monoxide and, the oxides of nitrogen from automobiles, thus stagnate near the coast with the result that inland areas often enjoy better wintertime air quality than the coastal region. Since storms lose their intensity as they move into the relatively southerly latitude of Irvine, .south, extreme wind speeds .are quite low. In only three•years of the last 27 have the winds at El Toro reached 60 mph, usually under strongly funneled winds during offshore Santa Ana conditions. Although a tropical storm off Baja California may someday come this, far north ors a small tornado form to create potentially higher winds, there is litter probability of excessive winds creating significant damage within the District. - A final consideration in characterizing regional climate is the inversion frequency leading to restricted pollutant dispersion. Two types of inversions are important in Southern California. One type forms when air in the high-pressure center off the coast sinks and warms. As this warm air mass is undercut by a shallow layer of marine air near the coastline, a "marine/subsidence" inversion forms. This inversion allows for localized mixing, but traps all emissions within a shallow layer near the ground. As each source adds additional pollutants and the entire layer "cooks" under• ample sunlight, the downwind photochemical oxidant problem (ozone) results. A second inversion type forms when the air comes in contact with the cool ground on clear nights with light winds. This "radiation" inversion causes poor localized dispersion near major low-level sources, and as this polluted mass drifts toward the coast under light offshore winds, elevated pollution levels result near the ocean. Although no extensive inversion structure measurements have been made around Irvine, a compilation of data from other coastal stations shown in Figure 23 clearly shows the diurnal and•seasonal oscillations of the two inversion types. Surface -based inversions reach a maximum on winter morn- ings, with about 70 percent of all mornings susceptible to high pollution levels. Conversely, summer afternoons are the peak period for regional "smog" problems; over 80 percent of all summer days experience capping inversion problems. Without baseline air quality data in Irvine, it is not precisely known how the dispersion information relates to local air quality, but it is safe to say that continued growth will have an adverse effect on downwind ozone air quality and will also cause air quality degradation within Irvine itself during stable radiation inversion conditions. • 10 1• I• �0 • U: FIGURE 23 IA 152 DISTRI man ►e 1�O Nil ►eee0♦ ♦aaooA . � eeeei♦ ♦eeeee� 4 s ►ee00oeeeo� MOUNNOR i ieieeeieiee� ieieieiesei� ►2e�e�e�e�eS IFM A r. ♦eeeeeeeeee♦♦� �peeepepepeeeeeaeoeaeaeaea� �eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee� S[x ��S'7.9��� � ,�.,.,.. �, !�e���p�p��p�p�p�p�pe�p�e a is � ��pepppee �eeeeeee� '�. 7 t�'+�'2<i,33"" +�}��"... �eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ..l Ii7�Deeeeeee0�•ee� +k�� ' �iie�e�eie�p�•oe0p0e�e0e�e�p�p�0� ION �peppppppepppppeeppppeppeppepe6►� �eeep�p�e�esO�pee���e�p�p�pwp�p�►.a Y. O M 00 I" ko � d' N N O O r 33N3b2 n000 30 Aowmb3l 1J PBR LSA cm w V) O' N d 6 N O O W O H Z 3 00 J � ¢ � J N 0 I• I• [] I• I• I0 I• 153 AIR QUALITY SETTING PBR LSA Despite the lack of site -specific data and considerable variability across Orange County, one may infer some general characteristics of Irvine air quality. Tables Y and Z for 1976 and 1977 show that ozone and particu- lates are a regional problem, while high, carbon monoxide and nitrogen diox- ide levels tend to be highly localized near large concentrations of traffic. Ozone levels increase from the coast inland with a minimum in Costa Mesa and a maximum in Santa Ana Canyon as much of the Orange County pollutant burden is advected into Riverside County. The turning of the southwesterlies into west or northwest winds is also reflected in elevated ozone levels at El Toro and San Juan Capistrano as polluted air is funneled down Saddleback Valley. The coastal'areas of Irvine are probably relatively "clean," but air quality probably degrades rapidly across central Irvine with values in north Irvine quite similar to the El Toro station. Since traffic concentrations in Irvine are not yet quite as high as in northwest Orange County, primary vehicular pollutant' levels are likely to still be below standards. If high-speed traffic flow is not maintained, pollution "hot spots" can develop near roadways in which CO or NOx air quality becomes seriously degraded. Except' for the regional ozone levels in central and north Irvine, and to a lesser extent regional particulate levels, the air quality of the IRWD service area is relatively good. In order to preserve a healthy level- of air quality, it•is important that growth not exceed the level of emission reduction necessary to maintain that safe level of air quality. If Irvine is to avoid the air quality problems which typify Los Angeles, then air quality must be an integral concern of planning and coordinated growth management. The question of growth is critical in determining any future pollution trends. The land use assumptions reflected in local agency general plans, the existing rate of growth, and the laws currently in effect could result in exceedances of applicable air quality standards beyond the 1982 and 1987 deadlines established by the Clean Air Act •Amendments of 1977. Reactive pollutant (ozone) levels are similarly high beyond 1987 because ozone forms from a combination of reactive hydrocarbons and the oxides of nitrogen, neither of which is forecast to'decrease rapidly enough to bring the area into compliance. 1• I• I• �J �9 �0 �0 �0 154 PBR LSA . TABLE Y DAYS ON WilCN SELECTED AIR QUALITY STANDARDS WERE EXCE N - b— LA SANTA AM LOS COSTA EL LAGUNA { SAN OUAN STANDARD HABRA CANYON ANAHEIN ALIV41TOS MESA TORO BEACH CAPISTRANO Federal Oxidant Standard .08ppm-1 fir 89 134 68 66 17 55 --- 47 State Oxidant Standard .IOppm-1 fir 67 118 54 53 10 43 --- 39 Federal Carbem Monoxide Standard 35ppm-1 Hr 2 --- 0 --- 0 --- 0 --- Federal Carbon Monoxide Standard 9ppm 8 firs 71 --- 60 --- 58 --- 4 --- State Nitrogen Dioxide Standard .25ppa l Nr 4 --- 9 --- B --- --- --- } '! State Particulatq Matter Standard 100ug/m3-24 firs 66% 48% 56% 63%' 28% 33% 277, 38% Federal Secondary Particulate Standard 150ug/ -24 firs 26% 13% 23% 27% 3% 6% 5% 8% Federal Primary _ Particulate Standard 260ug/03-24 firs 0% 0% 0% 2% OX 0% 0% 0% .i --- Not monitored at this station I*. I• is I• 10 is �0 �0 �4 155 PBR LSA TABLE Z ' DAYS ON WHICH SELECTED AIR QUALITY STANDARDS H RE E O D N N G COUN - 9 , 1MINRRY DATA I.A. SANTA A101 LOS COSTA EL LAGUNA SAN JUAN HABRA CANYON ANAHEIM ALAMITOS MESA TORO BEACH CAPISTRANO STATE STANDARDS OZONE 1 !lour - .10ppw 73 99 40 39 31 43 -- 57 CARBON MONOXIDE 12 flours - IOppn 17 --- 12 --- 5 --- '0 0 SULFUR DIOXIDE ' 24 Hours - .05ppr 0 0 0• 0 0 0 --- --- NITROGEN DIOXIDE I Hour - .25ppw 10 --- 9 --- 0 --- --- --- TICULATES *1 2Hourss- 100u9/nr3 24 Hours 37 31 34 32 13 18 6 13 SULFATE 1 24 Hours*- 25ug/m3 3 1 3 4 3 2 1 2 LEAD •'2 Monthly - 1.5ug/143 6 6 7 6 5 2 2 •0 FEDERAL STANDARDS OZONE 1 Hour - .08ppw 94 115 46 52 38 55 --- 76 CARBON MONOXIDE ' 8 [fours - 9ppw 49 --- 32 --- 20 --- 0 0 �1 out of about 60 observations/year .•2 out of 12 months/year --- not monitored at this station If I• C 1• 1• If I• I• I• 156 PBR LSA APPLICABLE LAWS AND PLANNING_ POLICIES Air quality regulation is beginning to play a role as a part of the comprehensive planning process for land development. Recently, enabling - legislation mandated the implementation of air quality plans to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards within ten years. -The preferred vehicle for standards attainment required by this legislation is techno- logical advances and integrated development planning processes that take into account environmentally sensitive parameters affected by regional growth. Air quality planning regulations derive from federal legislation, however, the ultimate planning authority rests with the local planning agencies. In the case of the District, SCAG develops Air Quality management plans which are reviewed and approved by local agencies such as the cities and counties. The AQMP for the South Coast Air Basin,•within which the•District is located, has been the subject of public hearings and will probably, be accepted in 1979. Applicable federal, state and local laws and plans are summarized as follows: Federal Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 (Public Law 91-604) established the statuatory requirements for attaining and main- taining ambient air quality standards for six species of air pollutants. These standards were promulgated by the Director of the Environmental Protection Agency with a compliance date of no later than 1977. Its main limitation was that those agencies that developed air quality plans were not in a position to implement them or to enforce compliance. To remedy these deficiencies, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 (Public Law 95-95) required a regional plan for attaining standards by 1982 (or 1987 for several "problem" pollutants). This plan must "evidence public, local government and state legislative involvement and consulta- tion..." (Section 172.(a)(9).). The Amendments require legal and adminis- trative mechanisms that compel agencies to "adopt, implement and enforce" suitable control measures as part of a local and interagency planning process. Lewis Air Quality Ma�nag�ement Act. In recognizing the failure of air pollution to adhere to policica boundaries and in anticipation of the air quality management requirements established at the federal level, the State legislature enacted the Lewis Air Quality Management Act of '1976 (Section 404000 et. seg. of the Health and Safety Code). It established the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) covering Orange and portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAG). The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) were charged with developing a comprehen- sive Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The plan requires "cooperation and participation of the counties and cities" within the SCAQMD. C: 1• I• 1• I• I• I• I• U, 157 PBR LSA South Coast Basin Air Quality Management Plan. The AQMP submitted for public review and comment i5 October, 1978, represents a new approach toward achieving cleaner air. It brings together in a comprehensive clean air master plan air quality regulatory agencies as well as land use and transportation planning agencies and local governments. .The plan con- siders the legal, administrative, economic and technical 'aspects of air pollution control. Most importantly, it has been developed in conjunction with transportation, water quality and regional development plans. ,While presently relying on largely unproven technology to meet the air quality standards by 1987, it may become necessary to institute land use controls (eg. growth restrictions) in the early 1980's if the technology does not develop sufficiently to meet the AQMP timetables. If growth limitations are enforced in lieu of technological improvements to meet AQMP objectives by 1982/86*then growth control measurements could cause SCAG and local goverments to revise population projections downward and eventually revise general plans to permit less development than now permitted by general plans. Alternately, the threat of 'reduced population could stimulate major changes in transportation technology that could drastically affect the pattern of development in the District in the long term. I0 1• 1• 19 I* U Ic I• 158 PBR LSA NOISE Public recognition of noise as a type of pollution has increased dramatically. during the past 15 years. During the same time, ambient noise levels within the Irvine Ranch Water District have increased as a result of urbanization processes. As present, there are areas within the District that are exposed to noise levels deemed to be unacceptable by the local government .noise acceptability criteria. As urban development continues, the ambient noise level in portions of the District will increase. It is likely that the amount of residential land impacted by unacceptable levels of noise will also increase. SETTING The major sources of noise that affect the IRWD are the Marine Corps Air Stations at El Toro and Tustin (formerly Santa Ana), the Orange County Airport, the network of freeways and arterial highways, and the Santa Fe Railroad. There are numerous minor sources of noise, such as construction activities, day -to: -day activity in developed areas, and noise of equipment operation. These sources are usually localized in their impact and require case -by -case analysis. Therefore, they will not be analyzed in this Assessment. Airports. Aircraft operations at the one civil and two military airports create noise impacts on adjacent land. Jet aircraft operating out of the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) E1 Toro and Orange County Airport are the major sources of noise. Helicopters operating from the Marine Corps Air Station Tustin, and propeller aircraft operating from all three facilities generate less noise and impact less land. Land exposed to high levels of noise (greater than 60 CNEL) from aircraft overflight is also usually exposed.to potential crash hazards from overflight (Community Noise Equivalent Level - CNEL, and other nose terminology are defined in documents contained in the MEA Data Base Library). Crash hazard zones have not been defined for Orange County Airport; crash hazard zones for E1 Toro MCAS are indicated in Figure 24. MCAS E1 Toro. This is the largest Marine air installation in the western United States (R. Dixon Speas Associates, 1976). Jet aircraft are the major source of noise from the Base. There are several conflicting studies concerning noise generated by MCAS E1 Toro. Various studies of noise produced by Base operations include "CNEL Contours for MCAS El Toro" U e AIRCRAFT NOISE & MASH HAZARDS 24 O65 C.N.E.L. W EXTREME CRASH HAZARD LSA/PBR ..'LE CRASH RICH NOISE IMPACT %". ::11:1 IAMODERATE A ISE UPACT :c", TED CRASH HAZARD HIGH NOISE IMPACT Z:L:::TED CRASH MAIRRO MODERATE NOISE IMPACT OVIRININAL CRASH HAZARD NIGH NOISE IMPACT 10111THIMAL CRASH NRZARD MODERATE NOISE IMPACT FEET — Stmoni calisma"161 UNIT Sd : SDI! TEM 24 1• V 1• 1• I• 1• C r U I• I.o PBR LSA Beranek and Newman, Inc., July 1972), "Air Installation Compatible Use - Zone Study (AICUZ) MCAS E1 Toro" (R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc., March, 1976), and "An Update of the Noise Contours for El Toro Marine Corps Air Station" (Ultrasystems, Inc., May, 1976). These studies were based on different levels of operation at the.base, used different assumptions on aircraft noise; and reached different conclusions on the location of CNEL contours. The BBN study levels of operation associated with the Vietnam war era and is considered outdated. Areas of incompatible land use were defined in the AICUZ study. Exist- ing areas of imcompatible use include portions of the Orange County Race- way that are in the high crash hazard zone, portions of Rossmoor Leisure World that are inside the 65 CNEL contour, and Lion Country Safari which is within the 65 CNEL contour. Orange County Airport. Portions 'of the IRWD are impacted by noise in excess of 65 CNEL even though the airport is not within the IRWD boundary. CNEL contours from -Orange County Airport -are indicated in Figure 17. Residential land uses within the 65 CNEL contour are compatible with that noise level. Outside'the IRWD, there are areas that are impacted by levels of noise deemed to be unacceptable by State and local government acceptability criteria. The State has legislated that acceptable noise criteria for airport noise in residential areas are 70 CNEL until December 31, 1985 and 65 CNEL thereafter. Orange County Airport does not meet the current 70 CNEL criterion and operates under a variance granted by the California Division of Aeronautics: Seven noise monitoring stations have been placed around the airport to monitor the effectiveness of its noise abatement program. This program has not been successful in reducing noise to meet the existing 70 CNEL criteria. . Orange County Airport is currently operating in excess of its design capacity. In order to prevent further overuse, the two commercial air carriers are limited to 38.3 average daily departures. Despite the fact that the airport is operating beyond its design capacity, it is not fulfilling existing demand. A 23 percent increase in jet operations would be necessary to meet existing demand (Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, 1978). On the other hand, in order to meet the 1986 noise criterion of 65 CNEL established by the State, commercial jet operations would have to be reduced to an average of 8.5 departures per day and all traffic by business jets would.have to be eliminated. I0 I• I• 1• I• 1• 1• li l0 161 PBR LSA The conflicting requirements for more service and less noise have resulted in several planning studies and legal, actions to resolve the conflicts. The County of Orange is expected to commission a master plan for the airport in 1979 which may resolve some -of the existing problems that affect the airport and adjacent land. Whatever future- improvements do occur at the airport, it seems likely that the noise impact from Orange County airport on lands within -the IRWD wiT1 eventually- decrease. Strategies for accomplishing this decrease include extending runways, altering the approach pattern to the airport, establishing a preferential runway program, retrofitting air carrier jet engines with sound absorption materials, and improved aircraft (Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, 1978). MCAS H Tustin. An AICUZ study for MCAS(H) Tustin was completed by R. Dixon —Sp eas ssociates, Inc. in March, 1976. This study found 9 acres of existing residential use inside the 75 CNEL contour and 325 acres between the 65 and 75 CNEL contours. There is also a 5-acre parcel of undeveloped, residentially -zoned land outside the base in the high -hazard crash zone. The AICUZ also defined 24 acres in Walnut Village and 10 acres along the west edge of Barranca Road as potential conflict areas due to their location beneath helicopter approach corridors. In addition to analyzing the existing setting, the AICUZ recommended operational and design changes for the base to reduce the areas of conflict. If these changes are fully implemented, areas of existing conflict would be reduced to 40 acres of residential development adjacent to Moulton Parkway in the City of Tustin (inside the 65 CNEL contour) and 8 acres of existing industrial development adjacent ,to Barranca Road (inside the 65 CNEL contour). Subsequent to the 1976 AICUZ study, additional noise exposure studies of MCAS Tustin helicopter operations have been concluded by the Environmen- tal Support Office of Naval Air Station North Island. These studies, which partially redefine the extent of 65 CNEL noise Exposure for MCAS Tustin indicate that based on current level of operation, noise level in excess of 65 CNEL are generally contained within base boundaries. Existing Freeway and Arterial Highways. CNEL contours generated from traffic on the major freeways and arterial highways are indicated in Figure 25. Construction of berms and walls along portions of the freeways and highways has reduced the impact of highway noise on residential development. C • • 9 • • f a , • ; 'f , It, ``� 41� . f' ,e ,�? r .air, ��• ;'', V `s'.,r,^ ,y��' 1.t r. ,�'•'•),_!j}( tT ti -� �.,, .' •t, 1: E �ith4l0 { 1ti�R 4{ 10-9 `y*, y..•tt. A { .{{ _ 1ty IR'1 .t,w✓mot• 1 t /•,";n-" ••.1.,*bA fir' i . ^ I-:s VTfiI t i�� ��,�}�/„�:•.,,_ :.``LL' ` J i ' ,w :`- -} ` `�a ' W, t, '\•:M1 �lbiiYl 'x% ,`pp• ,.J.n� A t,'.I' ' 'i. Jjn: EXISTING HIGHWAY NOISE 25 CNEL CONTOURS LSA/PBR ® 00 MOE o n mum p o 25 1• I• 1• I• C C 163 PBR LSA Santa Fe Railroad. Residential and freight traffic along the railroad line expose a Jacent land to high noise levels. This land includes existing residential development. A 65 CNEL contour'for railway noise was indicated in the City of Irvine`s original General Plan. The revised General Plan does not contain an indication of noise contours for the railroad. Inasmuch as increased commuter rail service has been added on this railroad line since the original General Plan was prepared, it is likely that the CNEL contour shown for the railroad is further from the tracks than shown. APPLICABLE LAWS AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES Various levels of government with jurisdiction over noise exposures within the District have adopted different standards for determining land uses compatible with noise, which are usually expressed as CNEL contours. In general, these laws and policies are aimed at protecting residential user from excessive noise exposure. State of California. The State has enacted legislation requiring that residential structures (other than detached single-family dwellings) be located within an annual CNEL contour of 60 dB generated by an existing or adopted airport, freeway, expressway, parkway, major street thoroughfare, railroad, or rapid transit line are required to have an acoustical analysis showing that the structure has been designed to limit intruding noise to an annual (interior) CNEL of 45 dB (State of California, Admin- istrative Code, Title 25). 'The state has also established noise standards for civil airports as discussed in the previous section on Orange County, Airport. The State has also established maximum noise standards for industrial workers as part of the California Administrative Code. ' Specific projects proposed by Irvine Ranch Water District would have to comply with these standards which are summarized as follows: Total Exposure Time Per Day, Hours • Sound Level dBA B 90 6 92 4 95 3 97 2 100 1 1/2 102 1 105 1/2 110 1/4 or less 115 I• • • 164 PBR LSA • The entire text of the OSHA noise standard is contained in the Irvine. Ranch Water District MEA Data Base. The City of Irvine, the major local government within the IRWD, has adopted the following standards as part of their Noise Ordinance: • (a) The following' noise standards, unless otherwise specifically indicated, shall apply to all residential property: NOISE STANDARDS • Noise Level Time Period 55 dB(A) 7:00 a.m. 10:00 P.M. 50 dB(A) 10:00 P.M. • 7:00 a.m. In the event the alleged offensive noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech, music, or any combination thereof, each of the above noise levels shall be reduced by five,(5) dB(A). (b) It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the unincorporated area of the County to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, when the foregoing causes • the noise level, when measured on any other residential property, either incorporated or unincorporated, to exceed:, (1) The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; or (2) The noise standard plus five (5) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour; or (3) The noise standard plus ten (10) dB(A) for a • cumulative period of more than five (%) minutes in any hour; or 0 • • 165 PBR LSA • (4) The noise standard plus fifteen (15) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one (1) minute in any hour; or (5) The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB(A) for any period of time. • (c) In the event the ambient noise level exceeds any of the first four (4) noise limit categories above, the cumulative period applicable to said category shall be increased to reflect said ambient noise level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under said • category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level. Exterior noise levels are commonly controlled by use of setbacks, berms, walls, and other solid barriers. These control measures are effective against noise generated at ground level, but do not affect aircraft noise. • Cit of Irvine. The City requires that plans for new residential deve opment in areas within a 60 CNEL contour include discussions of noise impact control, such as setbacks, walls, and acoustic windows. The City does not give credit for open -space areas in developments 'within 65 CNEL contours. except when shielded from noise sources by appropriate barriers... • County of Orange. The County relies on several strategies for con- trolling noise. First, the County has also adopted the standards cited above for the City of Irvine. The County Health Officer must review any residential development proposed in areas with 65 CNEL or higher. The County has also studied noise control measures ,associated with truck • routes and operations at Orange County Airport. The County .has depicted existing (as of .October, 1975) and ultimate traffic noise contours for the County and has established a Noise Referral Zone for the area within the 60 CNEL contour. Land use changes proposed within the Noise Referral Zone are referred to the appropriate County • agency for evaluation and review. According to the ultimate noise contour map in Figure 26, a major portion of the IRWD is within the Noise Referral Zone. City of Tustin. The City of Tustin has jurisdiction over pockets of both industrial and residential land in the IRWD. The City Noise • Element establishes a maximum standard of 70 CNEL in industrial areas, and C % 4j , Ef-1 IZ [ULTIMATE HIGHWAY NOISE 26 1 ULTIMATE C N E L CONTOURS* LSA/PBR (& 8 F Q 4000 8000 12000 �FEET I'm I• 1• IA I• • I• I• I• 167 PBR LSA sets residential standards at 60 CNEL during the day and 55 CNEL at night. Helicopter noise from MCAS (H) Tustin exceeds the standards for some of Tustin's residential land in the IRWD. City of Santa Ana The City of Santa Ana prohibits noise in excess of 70•CNEL in industrial areas. Although the City has not adopted a Noise Ordinance, various portions of its Municipal Code set maximum standards for specific uses (eg. Kennith). City of New orp_ t Beach. The City of Newport Beach has adopted a noise ordinance which relates to the generation of noise by proposed land uses. The General Plan noise element establishes 60 and 65 CNEL noise exposure limits for traffic and aircraft noise exposure. The City views aircraft noise from potentially increased operation levels at Orange County Airport as an adverse impact on the City. City of Laguna Beach. The City of Laguna Beach has not adopted specific policies concerning noise exposure. C 1• I• * I• 1• I• I0 FM UTILITIES AND CONSERVATION Lands within the IRWD are within the service areas of many public service and utility agencies. For the purpose of this report, only those services that directly bear on the IRWD or would be critical in meeting growth provided for by local agency general plans are considered. SETTING Water Supply. The IRWD operates a fully integrated water resources system including water supply, wastewater collection, and disposal and reuse systems. The District reported, as of June 1977, 11,600 domestic, 28 agricultural, 340 commercial, and 465 industrial connections. The existing water distribution system is shown in Figure- 27. During the period from July 1976 to June 1977, the average daily consumption was 16.9 million gallons for domestic use, 19.1 million gallons for agricultural use, 1.5 million gallons for commercial use, and 3.4 million gallons for industrial use. System design capacity is 42.1•million gallons per day for domestic use. Storage capacity for treated water exists in the San Joaquin Reservoir. There are isolated pockets within IRWD's 105-square mile service area that have special water -service arrangements. These include the Marine Corps•Air Stations at E1 Toro and Tustin. Although IRWD is responsible for delivering water to master distribution points, the Marine Corps handles the actual distribution within each Air Station. There are also areas close to the City of Laguna Beach that are serviced by the Laguna Beach County Water District (LBCWD). Agreements exist between The Irvine Company, IRWD, and LBCWD to ensure that areas that may be annexed by the City of Laguna in the future will be serviced by LBCWD. IRWD currently has capacity to receive 61 cfs (44,160 acre-feet per year) of treated water for domestic needs from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD): To supplement this supply, IRWD owns and operates two wells within the City of Tustin which can provide an additional 8 cfs (5,800 acre-feet per year). By the year 2010, it is expected that the District will use 119 cfs (86,000 acre-feet per year) on an average annual basis. Peak monthly demands were determined to be 1.5 times the average annual demand, or 178 cfs, and peak daily demands were estimated at 1.7 times the average annual flow, resulting in a 202 cfs peak daily demand by the year 2010 (Culp, Wesner, Culp, 1978). IRWD is exploring ways of increasing its supply of treated domestic water by 140 cfs to meet the projected demand. I0 1• I* V tj L is _ _ r a 1 j-1 �� i �'1`ND .4�rfl.. _ :.' a: , 'v � .�C` i . ,,I ��.+•�- ..� ,�^,i'. ,'. + -'v••3.i is °'Y� � .1 �". �I - ee-jam :! trj, .� -:A 6e . ,�'>'� �, v-.,'mow. I 'f 4- i,- +� *r•i�Y'';'I.� '�+ i.(., �°� •1,. ° '.. i.:,.. �i%"„ _ i-,�, a Irk, ,��V��Y � • ,. ,, Fti Fi ,r+'. •.(; � 14 I_ ,I'� - C-.14 ,1-1_.2�' 4- �•} D�A,A.Jjr, � 1'4•.i •i'v: °�.,1 .. �,� j •y,.;�`� •7 '' ;�ru• ,. :`\�%`rl, Y �'s_ tom, .I . \7R�t7, n �'y', ' ;:' ..at.'.�• �,:•a.�_, . •-s ... Fn>,. Ir,•�I� 1i +�s:i le: C ,r., fv- _,i `'v }Tr;%,:N� r,1 i��,' `•• ' '�{r'.w:: � -i-1 '%r''z.5!'-i%%rr-�k'_r, :1_`t '' -. � tcA I, :�,., ,•ti -.�A !` i.1'< 1 -�, �' t� t��. ! �—�� r �• •• �� �n-i, •- •' y �r,•, t_I.-.n�rvn �l^'�•; 1 -. iy' `f �,d'' I is ,'+ 0 �;;,, ;.._%� `.h, - .}•'-, Ilr,(�':1" j`':�- ,a, . , ;'C�'','P. t. � � F',-.. _•,� i+x^::-!i'n: a ,v N ., ;/b,i �/'. vY, :,, , i' as ,. '�'�- ` '. � f• ,5"S 1?�-. •' j- `'yr .^;� , ;'tory,,t,', ol{ .� I', i-y's•?;., v r,�' , f : ,..'c':.,V ,( q'S�'i 44i LI � Ir �,",f p {- 1_., ), `J _'(:,. - � �,ygq.,t_::.'`'" •l i�..#'�' ;i:-� f� � a `�;I(gr' "ro ..-• `rt �:i, .1,'�W)),)� �r.`��� .', iv�r<•�Y''iri.: :`'i 9 `. y': )r;.1 .�P'Iv �� ._.•..e kt WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 27 --r•Wxtmremnimtlas —a�000:wx�l.rnd� ® Nblcavw 11wu . sla.o., O vmwwasl«eaere� LSA/PBR ® ® 0 4000 8000 12000 FEET' 0 27 1• I• 1• [J 1• I* 170 PBR l5A In 1978, IRWD received more than 90 percent of its treated domestic - water supply from MWD. Storage is limited, which results in peaking from the MWD supply system. In recent years, as the MWD system approaced capacity, the staff of MWD recommended certain peaking charges be applied to the rate structure as an incentive for agencies to develop their own storage and other supplies.. These charges were intended to reduce peaking from the MWD system, so that MWD could operate on a uniform high level of flow into the coastal plain of Southern California. The Metropolitan Water District receives water from both the Colorado River Aqueduct and the State Water Project. By blending the high -quality State Project water with the Colorado River water, the overall water quality of the delivery water is improved. In future years, as the central Arizona Project is developed, MWD will have less Colorado River water and will depend more on State Project water to meet the needs of its member agencies. IRWD receives its MWD water through two feeder lines. East Orange County Feeder No. 2 (EOCF-2), which originates at the Diemer Filtration Plant, is currently the largest source of water to the Irvine Ranch Water District. It provides treated domestic water at several turnouts to IRWD. The second feeder, called the Orange County Feeder (OCF), originates at the Weymouth Memorial Softening and Filtration Plant in La Verne. These two feeders are interconnected at several locations. IRWD currently owns and operated two wells located outside the District boundary within the City of Tustin. These two wells furnish water to the North Irvine area that has been developed under the proceed- ings of Assessment District 75-1. Both of these wells were rehabilitated during 1977 to provide domestic water to the North Irvine area. Each well is now capable of producing 1,800 gallons per minute (4 cfs) on a sus- tained basis. Water from these lines is pumped through the Frances Mutual Transmission line for use in the distribution system in North Irvine. As a result of the MWD recommendations on peaking charges, IRWD commissioned a Conjunctive Use Study, which was completed in April 1978.by Lowry and Associates. The Conjunctive Use Study considered seven alternatives using various combinations of water sources to meet the 140 cfs estimated addi- tional requirements of IRWD for treated domestic water by the year 2005. The water sources associated with the alternatives included: 1) water imported through existing MWD facilities, 2) existing wells in Tustin, 3) new wells (the proposed proi-ect), 4) seasonal storage provided by reser- voirs, and 5) water imported through MWD facilities and the new Diemer Intertie. I• I• I• I• 1• 0 I• [l n u 171 The results of the Conjunctive Use Study indicate that IRWD should contract for 60 cfs capacity in the Diemer Intertie project and develop 80 cfs from wells in the main Orange County groundwater basin. If the wells cannot be developed, an additional amount of up to 80 cfs capacity should be purchased in the Diemer Intertie. the study further indicates that developing a groundwater supply is not only more economical than purchasing additional imported water from MWD, but also will add to the establishment of a more balanced and reliable water supply system. Diemer Intertie. At one time, the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOCT studied the possibility of constructing a water treatment plant in the vicinity of Peters Canyon Reservoir. However, it was recently determined that it was more economical to construct a new pipeline to the existing Diemer Treatment Plant. This pipeline is known as the Diemer Intertie. It will be built as a joint project of MWDOC and several other local water agencies, including IRWD. IRWD is presently committed to 60 cfs capacity in the Diemer Intertie. However, IRWD had the engineer of the Diemer Intertie design the pipeline for both a 60 cfs and 140 cfs IRWD capacity. The alternative design of 140 cfs for IRWD will only be used if development of groundwater resources in accordance with the District's Conjunctive Use Study proves to be a non -viable alternative. On January 22, 1979, the IRWD Board of Directors approved the purchase of 60 cfs in the Diemer Intertie. The Diemer Intertie will carry, a treated blend of State and Colorado River water from the Diemer Filtration Plant to the Santiago Aqueduct Commission (SAC) line near Irvine Lake., IRWD has acquired additional capacity in the Santiago Aqueduct Commission (SAC) line to deliver 40 cfs of Diemer water from the Irvine Lake area to the main portion of the District. New Well Field. The Tustin Wells are currently the only existing source of groundwater owned and operated by IRWD. The Conjunctive Use Study investigated the possibilities of developing a large well field in the main Orange County basin to serve IRWD during peak periods and reduce peaking from the MWD system. Because a majority of the area within IRWD lies within the boundary of the Orange County Water District (OCWD), IRWD has the same right as all other areas and entities within OCWD to extract water from the main groundwater basin of the Orange County coastal plain. Not all the territory within IRWD is within OCWD, but total inclusion is not necessary because water from MWD can serve these other areas. Both the State and MWD strongly support the concept that ,imported water should be brought to Southern California during surplus periods for storage in local groundwater basins for use in subsequent droughts. .7 1• 1• I• I* 1• I• L 172 PBR LSA The proposed project is intended to produce an annual average of 20,000 acre-feet of water for use in the area of IRWD that is within the OCWD boundary. The actual production of water will vary from year to year depending on demands, available supplies, and other conditions. All the water produced by -the new wells would be used within the boundaries of the OCWD. It is anticipated that most of the water will be extracted during peak demand summer months, thus avoiding peaking off the MWD system. Water Conservation. IRWD has been promulgati.ng water conservation, within its jurisdiction for over two years. IRWD has a recommended drought -resistant plant list (obtained from Sunset Magazine) and numerous informational brochures. As of January 1, 1978, IRWD's rules and regulations will require low -flush -volume toilets in all new developments. The most innovative water conservation technique that the district currently implements is the extensive reuse of treated sewage effluent. The effluent generated from IRWD sewage treatment facilities is used for irrigation of agricultural lands, open space, parks, and golf courses. Individual yards and landscaped areas are still irrigated with potable water since economics do not normally allow use of effluent. For purposes of projecting ultimate domestic water use, the IRWD uses a figure of 120 gallons per capita per day. Actual water use at this time ,may be slightly higher, however, it is anticipated that water conservation requirements for new dwellings and voluntary conservation in existing ' development will result in the ultimate projected per capita use. According to IRWD, there are certain problems which may occur if domestic interior water use is reduced to a significant degree. The concentration' of sewage effluent is generally related to treatment plant operating costs. A change in the nature of sewage effluent could have a financial impact on the District. In addition, based on the concentration of sewage effluent and imported water and industrial wastes, the District sees a need to give greater consideration to total dissolved solids and their effect on reclaimed water. Irrigation of landscaping accounts for 90 percent of all exterior water use. Other uses involve cleaning patios, cars, and swimming pools. Water consumption for irrigation can be reduced by encouraging the use of drought -resistant plants, requiring the use of water -conserving irrigation systems such as drip irrigation, and by maximizing the use of outdoor living spaces while minimizing the lawns) by integrating decks, natural site design. Decks in particular ci without the need for irrigation. need for landscaping (particularly rock, and other features into project n serve the same function as a lawn te,. I I• [7 1• 1• 1• [l [: I• 173 PBR LSA Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation. IRWD collects wastewater within its service area and treats it at the Michelson Reclamation Plant-. The existing sewerline system is shown in Figure 28. The District provides tertiary treatment with an activated sludge plus filtration process. Reclaimed effluent is used for extensive agricultural and greenbelt irrigation, and sludge is spread on the agricultural land. Average flow, as measured by the District, is estimated to be 70 gallons per person per day. The Michelson plant has recently been expanded to allow an average daily flow of 15 million gallons by 1983. The District had 13,000 dwelling units connected to its system as of March 1978. An estimated 2,300 new units will be added by March 1979. There are future commitments to serve 24,000 additional units. Treated effluent is pumped to the rattlesnake Reservoir, which 'has a capacity of 1,440 acre-feet. Most reclaimed water is used for commercial agriculture. The distribution system for reclaimed water is shown in Figure 28. As urban development within the District continues, the existing capacity of the Michelson Plant will be exceeded. The Development Monitoring Program (1978) has estimated that sewage flow will exceed existing capacity by one million gallons per day in 1987. The amount of treated effluent available for disposal will also eventually exceed demand. IRWD will have to develop additional disposal options, such as an ocean outfall, discharge into the Santa Ana River or San Diego Creek, industrial use, or recharge of the groundwater system. Newport -Irvine Waste Management Planning Agency. IRWD is one of 11 members of this agency, which was forme for the specific purpose of conducting 208 water quality studies for Newport Bay and its watershed. Written communication from the agency indicates that there are three items which may affect future operations of IRWD. They are: 1. Possible siting of a desilting basin for San Diego Creek in the duck ponds located between the current plant site and Campus Drive. If developed, this would impact future expansion of the plant and would probably eliminate use of this site as an overflow reservoir. 2. Possible prohibition of discharge of treated effluent into Upper Newport Bay. 3. Possible requirement for the use of drip irrigation to reduce the flow of agricultural return waters, thus reducing the demand for reclaimed effluent. C [j rl I* [7 • 110 t b. i X;,.. .1', ,' �• ?R,: ,'1'! .:` - tie ,`�A �.0 % J:.n 1.,, ,) �. "�yt; A..l _,,,. ., �', ,• s'd .n ,'}:•'•° � i %%t. _' .slip •, y'•,.`J„it„+ �rl,l '-='der 4,#•.; r1.i(e;i :,,."- •"�,•�. .1=' •,,y .'•,�`-.,�" ,.:�. ��, •`/�'' ",r,"'" . yi• t Y `'A .,l 4 ''t +l , ,' v i , : M. �^• � i } `r2♦y `ykz ,y P,'.: �t isy.�-0Y'' �t6.. S.;J �,r,+? i Se1,: �.L ., �i, }i Atit , 1,:,' `' .L4-tl.�'+,`,la�• t�k�e f,°;1::N• °: +N\ �'i�'::1�'�. {. �' �:.. � .`. YJ51 ,r iq•. f`L.' '•: _-.f'.".,*��a�w, li`�i -, + .t;",S.pY,•As p, �•+I AJC Ay .AX*Y. ,. ,�r^+,�i, •''I+��, •r) 1 +•�51�'}.'�`.t t-. r•'J ... ,. .y ;\(J {f•,�; La y� �••• • ,r l `)�' �' ,-�, t} ' � 'tip .,., -,• '`��., = • + �, ; t, t,. ;�� .i.A e "': _,n^i+4j -i � ^+ 5 1 � _i: + s Y 4cs�° �•'�„ei {',1 - j , l r' % ♦ . � , " ::'�^ .•,tom; .Y • •tiy '•_ v ,1 - _y ,1�... ?)�.::: � .,,, } a�+n vial h�.• .}GF=y��., `kt �,{'r.'C:�'a: '91 •`R �' �- _ ��l^ .'�4",+•� ,i l+l`:,i �'_ .'"'. 5'1�\•.�i 5 5� ��A 1i•�= '.;ya nJo.S t �` •�' ,d ,5�,�•`�a- - ,l: ;t, '':. D,.S� a-r'n.'h"r ,,.,,,)J`"Z. lll` �,n"ii��l'1 ti •s, gi'i�jjlI' :� 4 � .}„". y.•„ ��' "t �Tr•-'Iit` •<' i�j++• rrh' Ir t''t+•., ..k '^i V•4i {�'++F¢lV '- `i e=''S-',3 i; �'"�..' .. .,;•, /: y, �)J�: t., .Hi.;.-+' i,': ;yA,p�. `t,.� "� t ,2•1� R.« •• k�*` itt. Si �A, 7'_,1,. 'bpi •.. .y ;ti: k•:J 'li s'.�\ { � ' � W"_- :Se't�n f.j„,, ' s•,s: i,� Q t .. �.s�.°; k i v, II h &�i:; .- �h. 'f=,:rF r�` '>'' ,�i�'i+r'il.;:•", ,,+ ,' ;e n, �`# L`t,' ,', `;j:.r'rl v:s5..! I'lw i.t f�r� it �•. �r� ,5�. is , �'r'�' `•1 +•'i ..l'.i '+ � Y",a t.}, ���5 .. �'ti�i'�'ri 10 51'i�� w'Ja .r,+. Yw'i`, � �'j:" • � .1"'. .a(' � .•' � .. � /' `r i . 9%'... '_ SEWER SYSTEM 28 LSA/PBR .,.�.E„ylyp IRW0.LM. FEET �Pmpwsd L0.W0.LMe ••^•,•Eyyyq OlhxlM. • PuroEWM • 9awpe Tnetmnnl Plant � �(�[y� p(�(y� M LJLf�LJ'Z"`•O NAM M d d o DRUSN 28 i0 is [; 175 PBR LSA Electricity. Electrical power in the IRWD area is supplied by Sout ern a i ornia Edison. The electrical distribution. system is shown in Figures 29 and 30. The major source of electrical demand by the District is for pumping water. It takes roughly 3,300 KWH .(kilowatt hours) to import an acre-foot of water from the State Water Project, 2,000 KWH for Colorado River water, and 1,720 KWH to extract one acre-foot from the groundwater basin (Lowry and Associates, August 1978). Natural Gas. Natural gas is supplied to the IRWD area by the Southern California Gas Company. The system of gas mains is shown in Figure 31. The IRWD itself.is not a major consumer of natural gas. I0 0 :W �.�r �'^'�+4 ti`�'•i'.� �j: A{ 1i •#;5)�'4- :^i��•'� i.t :,�; e%wY'�ri fig `� d ^r.^r x,. �� 2 L.'S.\•:w::.{, '�# i �''., �l >. 4.{.ik �l �•''Y':\i Sr�'r.r{l, •� ,'1': �\\i .{ �,�;v1��d,. �� ra�Y �� F %rl?�A ri f 6:' �' } r . � �'/;i i`1' ^1r'• �.-•'.��,. • 1 �.. � G 1.:r- }' v tf+n'•y,''. Y�.. .�,4�i �'r, '�4' `i, #; --.v1'�'�r'^-'`r.�' it �� � t,« °, �. �, \:. f,r'.♦♦, yi�� �6'�: f'i' i-.rl^4:•=3# '�.1: ,,t:,t.,d{I'L, it ... a: - '•+.. ""!! 1''��.r i.' � •-•-, a: •i"" �., �, !'t t:•C.\t Wit". ... Fr „i'� 'a•^ {: Ja•: !(' f pA, ; i.�i•,i.: .C, $�is�i,.• :. ,d"r+' `pv: i. 7.:1'`''" +:a+°�d y. #;,�;ti.'''' k i1 _1t�_'t °' •I.I.tiY, •', $'f r.,p:: f�.: .r"• '+1's„ !-� if - i'• D 'yr e.�'r,e, r Y ye,•S' �a_t i c'3,;e�:1 ,.�. r4 ,r'�'�:���i: Fe.,' q'it'y`"a `e:: �° `' )r •�,i� 'S • � _ ,.•%yl": 1:2.. \ 'a i - .", 't•: p .�•I, +a , •n� , t#try �..,. ,fit 1L;.�/:� t „� r .;? . : �,!.t.- ,F ry.' ;" '•`'r . �,•. ""%tip '. :.�„ :�. �' I . f .,,, .• ', i v�7 { L'.� � � ...'.�. r'' � ^—r=�F�, V ,j rt t' y :' �,� r, :' i 1 . 1+? ;r V: =i �� S44S4_ 11.. r. _. �_ .. �. .. - _ , .'F.a:��rf-IE=��` . _ .. :, �' ;a�� �#�-}•I 0 " tl ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (66 & 226 kv) 30 Edison 66 & 220kv LSA/PBR .-----.ou l"eaM —RopaN 99M —s,ewp YmM ® � ❑ • Subl pmpce.tl d sueeduon Q 4(W 8y�(� o T.'-.—������ FEET RMW WAVE 0 30 • • • • 'i%'i ^' r; ":::='Sggyt,'• ,j` :ya;', , , t ,l. �, ,r d - t..,'._ : !» }•�»,,,'i�;. {t'.'ac;' { , a i;-°-,�,: ij �`; +:�'„'i.:v;'�'«-"1�t-'S', ��. •'♦C ,'•,• S, .' 4•,I'p, is !.i .m t�:.y^�'.'�, •+11v� .t.rr � �.�, "t�.�i{-ail Li ', k`*.,., i y '/'i y, � -', �, - , L� 4.'" f t - ,', w (' �'' jl•1,' . y1 ''Cr.-,.jiy 4y'.Yi' •= ,. n;r 1 � 'yi y "t S„ ., i },ltr..,sxi:%" 1, _ _ - t •x , a', i,.1` lY { �f y T• a. ; ,�� ';t9,� • \{ }�Ff:w01: s.�..r i..,.�...,:�. .. i2\11JL., I `,,p-'. l•a'r':�.141i I. I {�• t { t-'< � k�I ,.y r � "'t'i ,. �--���}-� •w.;r. - ., ,lUna 5.. • an..,.lx» ,s'°"v- .aeuuMky ..}... �._ s}... .PiK -''`�;}I I � 99 i , ;, I � •i..6, ..✓/'.;t,�'�,i.. ° /r f�-••+�. .1�p',k :�7�-71'r°j'��,i�•`•I�y.. •�,�.......i..,....".....`"... •^. "_ ;_ ^�iP,y` �y, . v�• ��r •I . YV I •.i :�r ,::v,3J -.. rfi a,,:, k'w' ,'.-. ,-�;ittj:, �la.'�1„li:•�v�`,'• ��7, `.k! .. ' � •, t •u •S•w,1M.i. R GY,;:f ?dn1�,•{ SW". \j\`� '`2:' '�_ `x i� ::"aw"\.t 'L.:;k, r •4J1.:1 `'�:�i�'� •'.�' �' ��"'y*;',".. '„j.'. �� rY',`j .,•`' �`�'�,J'D � a,a '-'Rii'� }» '( '�''' t�.•!si., � :'+di ''- � r; .'; f. �1'``�.`-ri ��y .`;,:; %i',-,1 '•, •tis i� S�,'�� �,-1 �:i\.,i `•.,�.,, ti,t. ,. ,'.'..r ;,1 .fir,'. ,�. ,., r-.., r • I r�'+h.'f ;�,1•t �tG �"-'''�"[S" _'` y, Yn F_,� .; `,�r'� ;.� ,if: .� � ri'r,'I � - .' u/� .t'}�;yD'�,'.'1ar'`" 1' ;L 7... :-,�p'-. ''�i',�.! •' ; (r{ ;�, .t�� _ ,. c�'�lr)r r!,.�` ' j t`'' i; ," a�1: � 9:'' tir L;�' 1 i - ; -� � !. (. ' r.: �• i. '.� '..}t• • •,:- '` n�;t� vi{: .:+..:. .�,� �,'��. }Y�. `yr' y � •r ( i _ .. fJ'Y:,,�ti ,'' r,ki,;!�' w �!t!'. 1L�,.°' '.:,F.f- •. X:Gti:.�J`ri.'!a:i'diis,e C, __sr .'"7,•-,.,,_� GAS MAINS 31 NATURAL OAS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM SSA/pBR —aaw..an•rw_ xon •••••••..Wrew.manion • n.cw.w 8000 72000 FEET 31 I• 1• C 1• 1• 1• 1• C 179 DEVELOPMENT MONITORING PROGRAM PBR LSA As discussed in the section on Population and Housing Projections, the Orange County Development Monitoring Program (DMP) contains an analysis of the capacity and service capabilities of service systems within the SEOCCS area. This analysis was based on the following assumptions: 1. projected growth, . 2. probable future improvements as indicated by service providers, 3. certain identified levels of service, and 4. the various identified demands per household or person . Data are provided for relatively small geographic study units termed "community analysis areas" (CAA's). The IRWD incorporates all or a portion of 10 CAA's. The analysis includes "system impact designations," or "balance" signals which indicate the particular systems' capacity to serve the projected growth within the CAA. These designations are described below: G = Green CLEARLY ACCEPTABLE The system is totally adequate at this point in time. It is not a limiting factor to residential development. Y = Yellow NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE The system is adequate to meet projected residential growth in the CAA. There may be additional commercial, industrial, or other activity that could impact the system's capacity to main- tain acceptable levels of service within portions of the CAA. 0 = Orange CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE The system has marginal ability to adequately service projected growth. There are areas within the CAA where the system is inadequate to handle additional development. Exceptional care and study should be given to proposed development. Specific limiting conditions, required actions, or commitments may be required of either the development or the system prior to approval. C I• 1• I• 1• I• [7 I• I• I• PBR LSA . R = Red CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE The system's ability to meet service demands within the entire CAA is seriously questioned. Development should not occur until specific mitigating actions are applied to alleviate the deficiency. It should be noted that these designations are not absolute statements regarding availability of service systems within each CAA. Rather, they are indicators that point out areas and degrees of concern resulting from anticipated development trends within each CAA. Table AA shows the results of this analysis for water wastewater, schools and energy systems within the IRWD. As shown in Table AA, several service systems may not have the capacity to serve projected growth. There will be adequate capacity in the IRWD wastewater system to accommodate the anticipated growth in 1980 and 1982. However, in 1987 the demand in some CAA's cannot be met by the existing treatment system and presently funded future expansion. There is an additional expansion proposed in the District's master plan. However, to date, the bonds to finance that construction have not yet been approved. The Irvine Unified School District has indicated that no funds are available for additional classroom facilities and unless such funds become available, a significant shortage in student space will occur in several of the CAA's. According to Southern California Edison, electric power supply for the area can be increased by expanding existing substations capacity and by rebuilding existing transmission lines to increase their capacity. Power can also be shifted from area to area so that it may be used where it is most needed. It is anticipated that additional generating capacity and substations will 'be needed in the future. The permit process for such facilities is often complex and time consuming. The Southern California Gas Company has adequate facility capacity to serve the anticipated demand in future years. However, the availability of natural gas supplies in future years is questionable and it is possible that there may be some curtailment of commercial and industrial users. • [7 I• �i TABLE AA DMP SYSTEM IMPACT DESIGNATIONS 181 PBR LSA COMMUNITY ANALYSIS AREA E42 Central Tustin SYSTEM 1978 1980 1982 1987 WATER G G G C WASTEWATER G G G C ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IIITEP14EDIATE HIGH SCHOOL G G G G G G G G G G , G G ELECTRICITY ENERGY NATURAL GAS G G G G G G G G COMMUNITY ANALYSIS AREA 0 47 North Newport Beach SYSTEM 1978 1980 1982 1987 WATER G G G G WASTEWATER G G G G ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INTERMEDIATE HIGH SCHOOL G G Y 0 c G Y Y G G G G ELECTRICITY ENERGY NATURAL GAS G G G G c 0 0 R. G = Green: Clearly acceptable Y = Yellow: Normally acceptable 0 = Orange: Conditionally acceptable R = Red: Clearly unacceptable C7 1• 11 I* I* u, V: 182 TABLE AA JCONVD) DMP SYSTEM IMPACT DESIGNATIONS CM4UNITY ANALYSIS AREA 848 Airport Commercial SYSTEM 1978 1980 1982 1987 WATER G G G G WASTEWATER G G G G ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 1NTEMNEDIATE ' f11GW SLIIOOL G G G G G G G G G G G G PBR LSA 1• 1• I* I• I* 10 �0 n �0 TABLE AA (CONT'D) 183 DMP SYSTEM IMPACT DESIGNATIONS COMMUNITY ANALYSIS AREA #50 South Irvine SYSTEM 1978 1980 1982 1937 WATER G G G G WASTEWATER G G G O ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INTERMEDIATE HIGH SCHOOL G G 0 R G G G Y G G Y R • ELECTRICITY ENERGY NATURAL GAS G Y O G G O R R CCt4WIIITY ANALYSIS AREA 551 Central Irvine SYSTEM 1978 1 1980 1982 1987 WATER G G G G PBR LSA . [7 • TABLE AA (CONT'D) 184 DMP SYSTEM IMPACT DESIGNATIONS 1 ♦ CMHuN I• I• 71 RATE WAST scliol ENERI cmt HA1 VAS SCN ENE PBR LSA I• 10 TABLE AA (CONT'D) L DMP SYSTEM IMPACT DESIGNATIONS 185 COMMUNITY ANALYSIS AREA E54 MCAS SYSTDI 1978 1990 1982 1987 HATER G G G G WASTEWATER G G G G ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS INTERMEDIATE HIGH SCHOOL G G c G G G G G G G G G ELECTRICITY ENERGY NATURAL GAS G G G G G -- Y Y O G o Green: Clearly acceptable Y = Yellow: Normally acceptable 0 - Orange:, Conditionally acceptable R a Red: Clearly unacceptable PBR LSA Is 10 1• I• 1• I* 1• r7 C I0 PBR' LSA BIBLIOGRAPHY Aircraft Environmental Support Office, Naval Air Support Facility, 1977. Noise Monitoring MCAS(H) Santa Ana, California, North Island, CA. Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County, 1975. Airport Environs Land Use Plan. Santa Ana, CA. Air Resources Board - Technical Services Division, 1971-1976. California Air Quality Data, Sacramento, CA. Amco Engineers, Inc., 1964. Soil Engineering Report, University Park,, Phase I, Los Angeles, CA. Anderson, Catherine, 1969. The North Bay #1 Site (ORA-193), in The . Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 2., Santa Arbib, R. "The blue list for 1978.", In; American Birds, 31 (6): 1087-1096, 1977. Archaeological Planning Collaborative, 1978. Archaeological Record Search and Reconnaissance Investigation - Aqua Chinon Flood Control Improvement Project., for The Irvine Company, Newport Beach, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1967. Archaeological Survey, North Irvine, for S&S Construction, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1971. Letter Concerning ORA-147, to The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972a. Scientific Resource LosTrancos and Moro Canyon., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972b. of a Scientific Interpretive Center , ----- ..---, ne m Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972c. Archaeolo ical Surveyof The Village of Valley View Development., for James A. Ro erts, Assoc., Costa Mesa, CA. I0 I• 1• I• C U I• I• V '• 187 Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972d, An archaeological/ Statement of the Irvine Sand and Gravel 'Pro PBR LSA cal Creek, for Reynolds and Assoc., Costa mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972e. Scientific Resources Los Trancos and Moro Canyon., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1972f. Scientific Resources Report on Pr000sed Realiqnment of PCH in Moro and Los Trancos Canyons, for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973a. Archaeological Re ort of Test Excavations at Site Ora - 373 (Walnut Village - Irvine)., for The Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research; Inc., 1973b. A Discussion of Scientific C Resources in Relation to the North Irvine Precise Land Use Plan., Environmental Analysis Foundation, Costa Mesa, CA. ine 1 Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973c. Scientific Resources Survey of the Turtle Rock Planned Community, for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa., CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973d. Archaeological & Paelontological Survev of The Irvine Industrial Complex - East, for James A. Roberts and Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc.,-1973e. Archaeological & Paleontologica Survey of The Irvine Industrial Complex - East, for James A. Roberts Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973f. Corres ondence Re ardin Coyote Canyon Borr ' Site, (Portions of Blocks 97-129 Irvine subdivision)., for Environmental Analysis Foundation, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973g. Scientific Resources Survey of Central Village A (Woodbridge), for James A. Roberts Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973h. Scientific Resources Survey of The Quail Hill Planning Area., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1973i. Archaeological Report on Irvine Industrial Complex - Tustin, for Owen Menard and Assoc., Costa Mesa, CA. u [7 C 1* r: I• I• I• I• U I• PBR LSA - Archaeological Research, Inc., 1974a. Test Excavations for Ora-111 (Rancho San Joaquin - Irvine)., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1974b, Jasmine Creek (Newport Beach) Report, of Test Excavations Ora-146., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1974c. Records Search and Field Reconnais- sance of the Proposed Right -of -Way forte Extension of Michelson rive, for Environmental Feasibility Studies, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1975a. Report of Excavation at Ca-Ora-111, Locus II., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1975b. Letter Concerning Ora-230, to Jones . & Stokes Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976a. Test Level Investigations Conducted at Archaeological Sites Ora - 196 and Ora - 197., for the Irvine Ranch Water District, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976b. Test Investigation of Ora-119, Locus C, and a Report on a Rock Feature in Locus A., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976c. Test Investigation at Ora-119, Locus B, (Irvine Town Center)., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976d. Archaeological Investigations of Sites Ora-376 and Ora-377., for Christ College Irvine, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976e. Archaeological Survey of Tract 8397, for Classic Development Corporation, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976f. Defining the Southern Perimeter of Ora-575., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976g. Letter Report on Results of Archaeo- logical Survey, Interim Flood Control Improvements for San Diego Creek, for Larry Seeman, Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976h :] imi ces, Costa Mesa, of Cultural • • FM PBR LSA Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976i. Records Search and Archaeological ' • Survey of The Park Re_dhill Parcel, for Irvine Industrial Complex, osta Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976j. Reinterment of Burial., to The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. • Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976k. Carbon-14 Dating Report.' for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc. 19761. Systematic Confirmation Resurvey of University Town Center., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. • Archaeological Research,* Inc., 1976m. Recommendations Regarding Site Ora-575., for The Irvine Company and Ultra Systems, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976n. Archaeological record Search and Field Survey of Proposed Saddleback Community College North Campus., for Larry Seeman Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. • Archaeological Research, Inc.,.1976o. Report on Archaeological Survey of The Proposed San Joaquin Recreation Center, for Larry Seeman Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1976p. Archaeological Survey, North • Irvine, for Woodward Companies and Classic Development Group, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977a. Newporter North Archaeology Draft Report on Limited Testing., for WESTEC'Services, Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. • Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977b. Excavations of the Spyglass Hill Sites, CA-Ora-202 and Ca-Ora-203, for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977c. Archaeological Resources of The Coyote Canyon Disposal Station., for The Environmental Management • Agency, County of Orange, Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977d. Report of the Intensive Archaeo- logical Survey of the Irvine Coastal Region Priority Parcel #1., for The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. • 11 I• 1• li I• I• I• 190 PBR LSA Archaeological Research, Inc., 1977e. Archaeolo ical Records Search and Field Surve of Proposed Saddleback Community o ege ort ampus, or Larry Seeman Assoc., Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Research, Inc., 1978. Test Level Investigations Conducted at Ora-228 Turtle Rock, Irvine., for Broadmore Howes, Inc., Costa Mesa, CA. Archaeological Resources Management, Corp., 1978a. Archaeological and Paleontological Survey for IIC - West., for the City of Irvine, Garden Grove,•CA. Archaeological Resources Management Corp., 1978b. Record Search and Field Survey of SAC Parallel (Reaches 2-6), for Phillips Brandt Re is , Garden Grove, CA. Archaeological Resource Management Corp., 1978c. Miti ation Measures (4-14) Santiago Aqueduct, Parallel Reaches 2-6, for P it ips Bran t K@UU Il{R, UQI ucm u1 v..., ... .. Archaeological Resources Management, Corp., 1978d. Report of Archaeologi- cal Resources Located in Village 14, for Larry Seeman Assoc., Garden Grove, CA. Archaeological Resource Management Corp., 1978e. Report of a Record Search of the Proposed Equestrian Center., for Larry Seeman Assoc., Garden Grove, CA. Aschmann, H., 1976. Man's impact on the southern California ,flora. In, Plant Communities of Southern California, Batting, J. (ed), California Native Plant Society, Special Publication No. 2. Bergen, F.W., ed., 1971. Geologic Guidebook, N Clemente, Orange County, CA.: Pacific Section r VVI.V v,.l rv, •�. • Boughey, A.S., 1968. A Checklist of Orange County Flowering Plants, Musuem of Systematic Biology, UCI, Research Serves No. 1., Irvine, CA. Boyle, Patrick, 1978. 'Study Approved on Remodeling Airport" in Los Angeles Times, edition of November.l, 1978. Bruff, S.C., 1946. The Paleontology of The Pleistocene Molluscan raui The Newport Bay Area California: Univ. California Dept., Geol. Bull., Vol. 27, p. 213-240. 1• 1• 1• I* I* 19 I• 191 Bucknam, Bonnie M., 1974. The Los and Compilation of Archaeologica State University, Long Beach, CA Burt, W.H., and R,.P. Grossenheider, 1976 Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA. PBR LSA Basin and V A Field Guide to the Mammals, Bury, B.R., 1975, "Conservation of non -game wildlife in California: A model programme." Biol. Conserv. 7:199-210. Business Week Magazine, 1977. "More than a Suburb, Less than a City", issue of September 5, 1977. California Native Plant Society, 1978. The California Native Plant Society Bulletin, November - December 1978 Issue. Camp, Dresser, McKee, Inc., 1972. Study of Environmental Quality of Newport Bay., presented to the Board of Supervisors. Orange County, 1972, Walnut Creek, CA..' Center for Planning Research, 1977. Final EIR, Irvine High/Heritage Park, Newport Beach, CA. Chapman, Phillips, Brandt, Reddick, 1974. Draft EIR, Village 14 (New Culver) General Plan Amendment, Irvine, CA. Chapman, Phillips, Brandt, Reddick, 1975. Final EIR, Rancho San Joaquin Planned Community, Irvine, CA. Chase, Paul G., 1969. Biolo Orange County, Calif., in Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 2, Chase, Paul G., 1974. Red Settlement Patterns, in Quarterly, Vol. 10, Nos. c c Coast Arcnaeoio , Santa Ana, stal i Cheatham, N.H. and J.R. Haller, 1976. An annotated list of California habitat types. In, Terrestrial Vegetation of California, Major, J. and M.G. Barbour (eds), Wiley Interscience. Christiansen and Associates, 1971. Master Plan of Drainage for Laguna Canyon, San Juan Capistrano, CA. I0 1• I• [] I• �0 Ei I• 192 PBR LSA Christiansen, E.R., 1977. Trace Metals in Urban Runoff and Their Influence on Phvtoolankton Growth in the Receiving Waters. PL.D. ssertation, UU , Irvine, CA. City of Irvine, No Date. Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps, Revisions to FIA Flood Hazard Boundary Maps dated 7112111. National Flood Insurance Program. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C. City of Irvine, various dates. General Plan, including Elements: Housing, Noise, Seismic, Safety., Irvine, CA. _ City of Irvine, 1975. Ordinance No. 136. "An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Irvine Pertaining to the Control of Noise." City of Irvine, 1977. Final EIR Park-Redhill Parcel -Map, Irvine, CA. City of Irvine, 1978a. Development of City'b_y Land Use -Type, Irvine, CA. City of Irvine, 1978b. Draft EIR Irvine Industrial Complex West, Irvine, CA. City of Irvine, 1978c. GPA-5, Technical Appendix, Irvine, CA. City of Laguna Beach, No Date. Hydrologic Constraints Data (map), Laguna Beach, CA. City of Laguna Beach, Various dates. General Plan, including Elements: Noise, Seismic and Public Safety, Laguna Beach, CA. City of Newport Beach, Various dates. General Plan, including Elements: Noise, Public Safety, Land Use, Newport Beach, CA. City of Newport Beach, No date. Municipal Code,,Chanter 10.28, Noise. City of Newport Beach, 1976. FIA Flood Hazard Boundary Mpas. U.S.' Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C. City of Orange, 1978. General Plan, Seismic Safety Element, Orange, CA. City of Santa Ana, Various dates. General Plan, including Elements: Noise, Safety, Land Use, Santa Ana, CA. City of Tustin, Various Dates. General Plan, including Elements: Noise, Safety, Seismic Safety, Land Use. 0 I• 1• 1• if IF [: I• I• • I• 193 PBR LSA City of Tustin, 1963. Ordinance No. 239 (City Noise Ordinance), Citx.of Tustin, 1975. Environmental Assessment, MCAS Santa Ana, Tustin, Cityof Tustin, 1976. Final EIR Irvine-Myford Annexation No. 81, Tustin, CA. City of Tustin, 1978. Tustin Flood Plain (map), Tustin, CA. City of Tustin, 1978. Draft EIR-EIS Moulton Parkway - Irvin_e Center Driye, Tustin, CA. Clean Water Consultants, Don Owens and Associates, and Lowry and Associates,'1974. Project Report for Anaheim Forebay Water Reclamation Facility, Santa Ana, CA. Cooper, J.D., and Sundberg, F.A., 1976. Paleontological Assessment of Peters Canyon Reservoir Regional Park Stud Area, for EMA Advance Panning Division, County Of Orange, Fui erton, CA. Cooper, J.D., and Sundberg, F.A., 1976. Paleontoloqical Localities, Silverado-Modjeska Planning Area, Orange County, CA., for EMA, Advance Planning Division, County of Orange, Fullerton, CA. Cooper, J.D., 1977. Paleontologic Assessment of Parcel 4 Rancho de los Alisos, Orange County, CA or Phillips Brandt Re is Fu erton, Cooper, J.D., 1977. Paleontologic Assessment of Glenn Ranch, Orange County, California, for Phillips Brandt Reddick, Fullerton, CA. Cooper, J.D., and Sundberg, F.A., 1977. Paleontolo is Assessment of Aliso Creek Planning Corridor Planning Units 2 and Orange County, California, for EMA Advance Planning Division, County of Orange, Fullerton, CA. Cooper, J.D., 1977. Paleontologic Assessment of Property Near Cooks Corner, Orange County, for Haworth, Anderson, Lafer, Fullerton, CA Cooper, J.D., 1978. Archaeological, Paleontological_, and Historical Report on the Proposed Bee and Round Canyons Landfill Disposal St_a Orange County, CA., by SRS, Inc., for Lockman & Associates/Toups Corporation, Fullerton, CA. Cooper, J.D., 1978. Paleontologic Assessment of Coal Canyon Study A Santa Ana Canyon Area, Orange County, CA., for the Epic Group, Fullerton, CA. I0 Is I* is I• 10 1• U is 194 PBR LSA Cooper, J.D., 1978. Paleontologic Assessment of the Hicks Canyon Area, for SRS, Inc., Fuller of n, Cooper, J.D., 1978. Paleontolo is Assessment of The WhitingRanch Oran County, CA., for Phi ips Brandt Reddick, Fullerton, CA. Cooper, J.D., 1978. Paleontologic Assessment for City of Costa Mesa, in Scientific/cultural-Re-sources of City of Costa Mesa, Orange County, ` California, Archaeological Associates report to City of Costa Mesa, Fullerton, CA. Corps of Engineers, 1969. Flood Plain Information Report In Laguna Canyon, Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers, 1972. Flood Plain Information Report for San D- Creek and Peter's Canyon Wash, Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers, June 1973. Flood Plain Information, Lower Creek, Orange County_, California, Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers, 1973. Survey Report for Flood Control: La Canyon, Orange County, CA., Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers, 1974. Flood P1ain.Information: Tributarie San Diego Creek, Orange County, California, Washington, D.C. Corps of Engineers, 1974. Flood Plain Information Report for U Canyon Wash, Washington, D.C. anti Cottrell, M., 1975. Test Excavations at IAN-702, Los Angeles, CA., Costa Mesa, CA. County of Orange, No Date. Comprehensive Zoning Code, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, No Date. Preliminary Flood Control Rate Maps, Revision to FIA Flood Hazard Boundary Maps dated 1 0 75. National Flood Insurance Program. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Various dates. .General Plan, including Elements: Noise, Safety, Circulation, Master Plan of Arterial Highways, Scenic Highways, Land Use, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Recreation - Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails, Master Plan of County wide Bideways, Santa Ana, CA. 0 Is I• I• I• I• It C 0 I• 195 PBR LSA County of Orange, 1969. Historical Landmarks of Orange _C_ount . Orange County Planning Department, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, 1973. Slope Stability Report, Santa Ana, CA., County of Orange, 1973. Ordinance No. 2700. County of Orange, 1977a. A Report on Cultural/Scientific Resources for County of Orange. Cultural/Scientific Resources Policy Task Force, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, 1977b. Resolution of the Board of Supervisors (Nos. 77-866 and 77-991), Environmental Management Agency, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, 1978a. Final EIR, Peters Canyon Regional Park, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, 1978b. "Final Input to the SCAG-78 Growth Forecast Development Process", Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1976. Draft EIR 187, . Southeast Orange Count Circulation Study, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1976. Hydrology Report San Joaquin Channel Facility N. F14, Entire Drainage System, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1977. Prog of Way Acquisition, Engineering, Construction of Public Work Control, Water Conservation, and Local Drainage, FY 1977-78. CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1978. Loca Program, County of Orange - Irvine Coastal Property (Planni Draft, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1978. Surface Water Sampling Schedule and Location. Water Resources Section. Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, 1978. Peters Canyon Reservoir Regional Park Boundary Study, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Flood Control District, 1973.An Investigation of F1 Control Alternatives in Laguna Canyon, California, Santa Ana, CA. I0 1• I* 10 1• 1• 1• �0 I! I! 196 PBR LSA County of Orange Flood Control District, 1975. Flood Control Alternative in Laguna Canyon, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Forecast and Analysis Center, 1978. Development Monitoring Program, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, General Services Agency - Special Services, 1978. Abatement Program Quarterly Reports for the Periods April 1, through June 30 1976, and January 1 978 through March 31, 1978, Ana, CA. County of Orange, Health Department and Flood Control District, 1974. Bacterial Pollution in Upper Newport Bay: Sources and Control Meas pervisors, County of Orange, Health Agency, 1977. Study of 'Newport Bay - Data Package. Memorandum to the Environmental Management Agency, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Office of Emergency Services, 1978. Evacuation Plan for Areas Below Dams, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange, Planning Department, 1972. Orange County Progress Report, 1972, Santa Ana, CA. County of Orange Road Department, No Date. Log of Test Bor Drive from University Drive to Carlson Avenue, Santa Ana, Culp, Wesner, Culp, 1975. Facilities, Santa Ana, GSi Culp, Wesner, Culp; 1975. Final EIR Irvine Lake Pipeline and Future Treatment Facilities, Santa Ana, CA. Culp, Wesner, Culp, 1978. Final EIR Conjunctive Use Water Wells and Pipeline, Santa Ana, CA. Daily Pilot, 1978. "Lawsuits Filed Against IRWD Projects", in edition of April 11, 1978. Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall, 1978. Final EIR, Orange County Airport Alternative Futures, Los Anggles,.CA. 0 I• 1• I* 10 I• I0 C I• 197 PBR LSA Daughterty, S.J., M.P. Wehner, and M.G. Schroth, 1974. Coliform Bacteria in Upper Newport Bay and its Watershed during 1972 anfield investigations, Orange County Health Department Report, August, 1973. Supplement, Santa Ana, CA.. Department of Commerce, No Date. Climatography of the United States, No. 11-4, California, Washington, D.C. Department of Fish and Game, 1966, California Fish and Wildlife Plan, Sacramento, CA. Department of Fish and Game Planning Team, 1973. Coastal County Fish and .Game Wildlife Resources and Their Utilization. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. Department of Fish and Game, 1976. -At The Crossroads, A Report on California's Endangered and Rare Fish and Wildlife. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.. Department of Fish and Game, 1977. Status Designations of California Animals, State of California, The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. Department of Fish and Game, 1977. Fish and Game Code, Department of General Services, Documents and Publications Section, Sacramento, CA. Department of Housing and Urban Development, No Date. Orange Count Flood Control Insurance Study, Preliminary (with maps), Was ington, D.C. Department of the Interior, 1973. Threatened Wildlife of the United States, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wild ife, Washington, D.C. Department of the Interior, 1976. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 50 Wildlife and Fisheries, Washington, D.C. Division of Mines and Geology, 1976a. Active Fault Mapping and Evaluation Program Special Publication 47. Sacramento, CA. Division of Mines and Geology, 1976b. Geology and Engineer_i_ng Geologic Asnects of the Laouna Beach Ouandrangle, range County, California. Special Report V. Sacramento, CA. Dixon, Keith A., 1970. A Brief Report of Radiocarbon and pital Site), in The Pacific Coast Arcnaeoiogicat Soc . 6, No. 4, Santa Ana, CA. l C • 198 PBR LSA ' EDAW, Inc., 1976. San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Management Study, Newport Beach, CA. E.L. Pearson and Associates, 1969. Master Plan of Drainage for the E1 Modena - Irvine Area, Newport Beach, CA. England and Nelson, 1976a, Coyote Canyon Sanitary Landfill Replacement Site Biologist's Report. Orange County, Environmental Management Agency, Riverside, CA. England and Nelson, 1976b. Peters Canyon Reservoir Regional Park Boundary Study Biological Assessment., County of Orange, Environmental Management Agency, Riverside, CA. Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1973. Draft EIR,Orangetree Village, Newport Beach, CA, Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1973. Final EIR, North Irvine Precise Land Use Plan, Newport Beach, CA. Environmental Analysis Foundation, 1975. Final EIR Christ College Irvine, Newport Beach, CA.' Environmental Feasibility Studies, Inc., 1973. Final EIR, Village of Turtle Rock, Los Angeles, CA. Environmental Feasibility Studies, Inc., 1975. Final EIR, Michelson Drive Extension, Los Angeles, CA. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975, Compilation of Federal _State and • Local Laws Controlling Nonpoint Pollutants, EPA-440/9-75- 011, Washington, D.C.- Envista, Inc., 1974. Final EIR Irvine Industrial Complex East, Anaheim, CA. • Envista, Int., 1976. Final EIR Phase One, Irvine Industrial Complex - East, Anaheim, CA. Evans, Goffman, & McCormick, 1973. Re ort of Geotechnical Investi ation Alignment of Proposed Dan Diego Creek Channe Improvements F05 between Culver Drive and East of Jeffrey Road, Santa Ana, CA. • Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1974. Preliminar Re ort of Geotechnical Investigation Phase I, Proposed Irvine Industria Comp ex Site, Santa Ana, CA. • I• C FA [7 C 1• A �• I0 I� 199 PBR LSA Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1977. Report of Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation Enclave IV, Phase Turt e Rock Village, Santa Ana, CA Evans, Goffman & McCormick, 1978. Report of Geotechnical Site Reconnais- sance, Village 14, City of Irvine, Santa Ana, CA. ' Fay, R. 0., 1972. Southern California's Deteriorating Marine Environment, Center for California Public Affairs, Claremont, CA. Federal Law, 1906. The Antiquity Act of 1966, (Public Law 59-209, 34 stat. 225; 16 U.S.C. 3 - 33 , Washington, D.C. Federal Law, 1935. The Historic Sites Act of 1935, (Public Law 74-292, 49 stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 6 -4 , Washington, D.C. Federal Law, 1960. The Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960, (Public Law 86-523, 74 stat. 220; 16 U.S.C. 469-469c), Washington, D.C. Federal Law, 1966. The Historic Preservation Act of 1966, (Public Law 89-665, 80 stat. 975; 16 U.S.C. 470), Washington, D. C. Federal Law, 1969. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Executive Order 11593 (Public Law 209), Washington, D. C. Federal Law, 1974. The National Archaeological/Historical Preservation Act of 1974, (Public Law 93- 91, 88 stat. 114; 16 U.S.C. 469-a-1 et seq.), Washington, D. C. Fife, 0. L., 1973. Lower Tertiar Silverado and Santia o'Formations of the Santa Ana Mountains egion Orange County, Calif.: NAGT, SCGS, Field trip guidebook to northern Peninsular Ranges. Forest Service 1978. Trabuco Planning Unit, Final Environmental Statement, Washington, D. C. Frey, H. W., R. F. Hein, and J. L. Spruill, 1970. Report on The Natural Resources of UDDer Newoort Bay and Recommendations Concerning The Bay s Development, caliTornia uepartment oT n sn ana name, Luabtai VW6I allub Series No. 1, Sacramento, CA. Friis, L. J., 1965. Orange County Through Four Centuries, Pioneer Press, Santa Ana, CA. 0 I• 19 U C 19 I• V I• 200 G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1974. Preliminary Soil and Geol Investigation for Sewage Treatment Plant xpansion Irvine, CA. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1976a. Geologic and Soil Feasib Investigation Enclave IV, Turtle Rock Village, Irvine, CA. G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1976b. Soil and Foundation Investiga- tion Sycamore Creek Park Enclave II Turt e Rock i age, Santa Ana, CA G. A. Nicoll and Associates, Inc., 1977. Rough Grading Report Enclave II - Turtle Rock Village, Santa Ana, CA. Geo-Labs-California, Inc., 1971. Report of Reconnaissance Enginee�rin Geologic and Soils Engineering Investigation for Public Law�66 San. Diego Creek Watershed Project, Santa Ana, CA. Geological Survey, 1969. Evaluation of Water Quality Monitoring in the Orange County Water District, Open File Report, Washington, D. C. Geological Survey, 1973. Geohydrology and Artificial Recharge Potential of the Irvine Area, Orange County, California, Washington, D. C. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1971a. Preliminary Geotechnical Investi- gation. Proposed 13-acre Apartment Complex Site Adjacent to San Diego .een, uweu nnu, w,. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1971b. Preliminary Geotechnical Foun tion Investigation Park West Units III -A and III-B, Santa Ana, CA. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., 1978. Geotechnical Investigation, PrnnnsPd Irvine Eauestrian Center. San Diego Creek and Campus Drive Golz, D., 1976. "'Eocene Artiodactyla of Southern California," in Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Bulletin 26. Gruen Associates, Inc., 1978. Preliminary Draft EIR and Project Report, San Joaouin Hills Transportation Corridor Study, Los Angeles, CA. Hardy, R. A., 1970. The Marine Environment in U er New ort and Sunset s Orange County, Ca ifornia. MRR Ref. No. 70-10, California Dep ment of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA. Haworth and Anderson, 1973. Final EIR, Campus Drive Extension, Laguna Beach, CA. G I• 1• I10 [7 1• If I! I0 I• 201 PBR LSA Haworth Anderson, 1974. Final EIR Turtle Rock Enclave I, Laguna Beach, CA. Hood, L. (editor), 1975. Inventory of California Natural Areas, California Natural Areas Coordinating council, Sonora, CA. Holcomb, T., 1975. Archaeological Impact Evaluation, Park Place, Orange County, Ca., Prepared for Center for tanning and Research, Archaeologi- cal Research Unit, University of California - Riverside, Riverside, CA. H. V. Lawmaster & Co., Inc., 1968. Preliminary Foundation Soils Investi- gation Proposed Upper University Park Culver Drive and San Diego Freeway, Stanton, CA. Ingle, J. C., Jr., 1962. Paleoecologic, Sedimentary, and Structural Historyof the Late Tertiar Capistrano Emba ment California: unpub- ished M.S. thesis; USC, Los Angeles, CA. Interstate Electronics Corporation, 1976. A Hydraulic Study of Newport Bay, Los Angeles, CA. Irvine Ranch Water District, 1975. Detailed Reclaimed Water Plan for Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. Irvine Ranch Water District, 1978., Total Water Management, Irvine, CA. Irvine World News, 1978. "City Files Lawsuit over Water Bonds", edition of May 18, 1978. James A. Roberts Associates, Inc .> 1972. Final EIR, Projects within the Village of Valley View, Carmichael, CA. James A. Roberts Associates, Inc., 1973. Draft EIR, University Town Center, Carmichael, CA. James E. Slosson and Associates, 1973. Summary of Geologic Conditions, San Joaquin Hills Coastal Area, Sherman Oaks, CA. Jennings, Halderman and Hood, 1972. San Joaquin Hills Master Plan of Drainage, prepared for the Orange County Flood Control District, Santa Ana, CA. J. Harlin Glenn and Associates, 1976. Operations Manual for the Woodbridge Lakes, Orange, CA. u I• Is 1s 1• IF, 1• Is I9 202 PBR LSA Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc., 1974. Preliminary Bio1 and Management Recommendations, Irvine Coastal Project P CA. Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc., 1975. Irvine Coastal_P , Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc., 1976. Draft EIR, Irvine Coastal Community General Plan Amendment, Santa Ana, CA. , Kanakoff, G. P., and Emerson, W. K., 1959. Late Pleistocene Invertebrates of the Newport Bay Area, California: Los Angeles County Museum, Contri- butions in Science No. 31, p. 1-47. • Keith and Associates, 1970. Master Plan of Drainage for the Irvine Ranch - Bryan Area, Santa Ana, CA. Kennedy, M. P., 1973. Stratigraphy of the San Diego Embayment, California, Ph.D Dissertation, University of California, Riverside, CA. King, 1973. An Archaeological Investigation of the University To Project, for James A. Ro erts and Associates, Inc., Santa Rosa, Koerper, H., 1974a. Pottery Sherds Investigation, OPA-119, MS. University of California, Riverside, CA. Koerper, H., 1974b. Summary of ORA-119 Investigations of.Koerper and Drover in 1973. Communication to A.R.I. Koerper, H., 1975. ORA-119 Progress Report, MS. University of California, Riverside, CA.' Lane, J. A., 1976. A Birder's Guide to Southern California, L & P Press, Denver, CA. Langenwalter, Paul E., 1974. Cultural Resources Evaluation of the San Onofre - Santiago 220 RV Transmission Line Corridor, for VTN Consoli- dated, Inc. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1975. Initial Environmental Study, East Irvine Auto Center, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976a. Final Colleae District. Northern Area Operations e seiection i C I• I* is 19 C I• 203 PBR LSA Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976b. Initial Study San Joaquin Commer- - cial Recreation Center, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1976c. Initial Study, Turtle Rock IV, Area B, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1977a. Initial Study, Village of Wood- bridge - Northeast Quadrant, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1977b. Initial Study Irvine Center, Phase I CUDP, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1977c. Water Conservation up fnr New nevelooments of The Irvine Company, Newport Beach, Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978a. Initial Study Westgate Village, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978b. Initial Study, Village of Wood-. bridge Southwest Quadrant, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978c. Draft Initial Study, Irvine.Egues- trian Center, Newport Beach, CA. Larry -Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978d. Initial Study, University Town Center Residential Area CUDT, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978e. Draft EIS Pro osed Construction of Alton/Santa Ana Freeway I-5 Interchan a and mo ification to Irvine tenter Drive/San Diego Freeway I-405 Interchange, Prepared for CALTRANS, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978f. Initial Study, Turtle Rock V, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1978g. Initial Study Turtle Rock Enclave III, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1979a. Initial Study Village of Quail Hill, Newport Beach, CA. Larry Seeman Associates, Inc., 1979b. Draft Channel Improvements Santa Ana Freeway Drive, Newport Beach, CA. • • 204 • PBR LSA • LeRoy Crandall and Associates, 1972. Foundation Investigation for the Proposed Fluor Corporation Facility, Los Angeles, CA. Leighton and Associates, 1975. Geotechnical Investigation of Tentative Tract 9085 Turtle Rock (Enclave four), Irvine, CA. Leighton and Associates, 1976. Geotechnical Evaluation and Impact Assess- ment of Potential Northern Area College Sites (1.2. & 5Y Saddleback Community College District, Irvine, CA. Leighton and Associates, 1978. Geotechnical Investigation of Enclave 3. Village of Turtle Rock, Irvine, CA. Leonard, Nelson N. III, 1975. Archaeological Resources of Rancho _San Joaquin, for Chapman, Phillips Brandt Reddick and Associates, Inc., Los Angeles, CA. Loel, W., and Corey, W. H., 1932. The Vaqueros Formation, Lower Miocene of California:. I. Paleontology: University of California, Dept. Geol. Sci. Bull., V.22, No. 3, p.31-410. Los Angeles Times, 1978. "Irvine Facing Another Suit.over Housing" in edition of October 11, 1978. Los Angeles Times,' 1978. "Irvine will sue Water District" in edition of May 11, 1978. Lowry and Associates, 1972. Water Resources Master Plan for Irvine Ranch Water District, Prepared for Irvine Ranch Water District, Santa Ana, CA. Lowry and Associates, 1975. Preliminary Draft of facilities Plan for Irvine Ranch Water District, Chapters 1-7, Santa Ana, CA. Lowry and Associates, 1976. �drology of Rattlesnake Canyon and Hicks Canyon, prepared for The Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. Lowry and Associates, 1977. Conceptual Design of By-pass Diversion Facilities for Sand Canyon Reservoir, prepared for The Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. Lowry and Associates, 1978a. Conjunctive Use Study, prepared for Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. Lowry and Associates, 1978b. Draft Irrigation Water Supply, Storage, and Disposal System Plan for the Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. 40 I* 10 IM 1• I• Ia I0 I• I0 205 Lowry and Associates, 1978c. Draft Domestic Water Supper Storage and Distribution System Plan, for Irvine Ranch Water District, Irvine, CA. Lowry Engineering -Science, 1971. A Preliminary Investigation of the Feasibility of Providing Works of Improvement within San Diego Creek n a, banza Ana, Magalousis, Nicholas M., 1977. Archaeological Survey of Pelican Ridge Area, for A.R.I. and The Irvine Company, Costa Mesa, CA. Marsh, G., 1973. Wildlife and Habitat Inventory Irvine General Planninc Program, Irvine, A. Massey, B. W., 1977. A Census of the Breedin Population of the BeIdin ' Savannah Sparrow in Ca ifornia, Ca lfornia Department of Fis an GaR JYVI YIII YIIVV, Vol. Meadows, Don, 1975. Irvine - A City on Rancho San J_oaguin, The First National Bank of Orange County, Costa Mesa, CA. Merriam, C. W., 1941. Fossil turritellas from the Pacific Coast Region of North America: University of California, Dept. Geol. Sci. Bull., v. 26, No. 1, p. 1-214. Miller, W. E., 1971. Pleistocene Vertebrates of the Los Angeles Basin and Vicinity exclusive of Rancho La Brea), Bulletin, Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, Science, No. 10. Montano, Pacifico, 1972a. Engineering Geology of the Marsh Area and Vicinity, Newport Beach, CA. Montano, Pacifico, 1972b. Land Development Feasibility Report on Turtle Rock, Newport Beach, CA. Montano, Pacifico, 1973. Land Development Feasibility Report on Quail Hills Covering the Engineering Properties of Soils and Bedrock and Engineering Geology, Newport Beach, CA. Montano, Pacifico, 1974. Reconnaissance P9vestigation of the Engineering_ �f +hn Qi+n Snilc and Redrnrk Ronita Canvon Joint Moore and Taber, 1968. Preliminary S G I• 1• is I* I• I• I• PBR L5A Moreland, J. A., et al, 1969. A Study of Deep Aguifers Underlying Coastal Orange County, California, U.S.G.S. Open File Report, Washington, D. C. Morton, P. K., and Miller, R.V., 1973. Geo-Environmental Maps of Orange County, California, CDMG Preliminary Report 15, Sacramento, CA. Mostafa, M. Gamal, 1975. A Study of the Impact of Planned Development of the Irvine Coastal Area Upon the Natural Sediment Processes, prepared Tor The Irvine Company, Newport Beach, CA. Municipal Water District of Southern California, 1976. Annual Report, Los Angeles, CA. Munz, P., 1974. A Flora of Southern California, University of California' Press, Berkeley, Ca. Naval Weather Service, 1969. Worldwide Airfield Summaries - E1 Toro MCAS, Santa Ana MCAS (H) and Orange County Airport, Asheville, N.C. Orange County Water District, 1977. The Annual Report, Santa Ana, CA.. Orange County Water District, 1978. Engineers Report on Groundwater Conditions. Water Supply and Basrn Uti izatlon, 1976-1977, Fountain Valley, GA. Orange County Water District, 1978 CA. The Annual Report, Fountain Valley, Owen Menard and Associates, 1977. Draft EIR Irvine Industrial Complex - Tustin, Claremont, CA. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society, 1975. Woodbridge Observer Survey Project Report on Following Heavy Grading, for The Irvine Company, Santa Ana, CA. Pacific Soils Engineering, 1974. Preliminary Soil EPortionngineering and Geologic Investigation, Study Phase I Northern of the Village of Woodbridge, Irvine, CA. Pacific Soils Geologic Ir neering, Inc. 1gation, Sout Irvine, CA. Palmer, L. L., 1973. Chemical Water O , 1976. Preliminary rn Portion of the ionship of Winter Run-off to t Phytoplankton Population of Project, UCI, Irvine, CA. 1• 1• I* I* 1• 1• 1• I� I! I• 207 -PBR LSA Palmer, L. L., and Blair, J. G., 1973. A Summary of Previous.Studies on the Water Quality of Newport Bay, Student Project, UCI, Irvine, CA. Peterson, R. T., 1941. A Field Guide to Western Birds; Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Ma. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1975. Final EIS Regional Wastewater Tnnni+manf qv -;tam- Aliso Water Management_ Agency, Newport Beach, CA. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1977. Irvine Park Faunal Inventory, Peridian Group, Irvine, CA. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1977. Final EIR Diemer Filtration Plant - Santiago Aqueduct, Newport Beach, CA. Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1978. Final EIR Santiago Aqueduct Parallel Reaches 2-6, Newport Beach, CA. Ploessel et.al., 1972. Seismic Environment of the southern LalITornia Coastline I: Palos Verdes to Dana Point, preprint Dallas, Texas. Poland, J. F. et.al., 1956. Groundwater Geology of the Coastal Zone Long canfa Ana Area. California. U.S.G.S. Water Supply Paper 1109, Poland, J. F. et.al., 1959. Hydrology of the Long Beach -Santa Ana Area, California, U.S.G.S. Water Supply Paper 1461, Washington, D.C. Popenoe, W. P., 1937. "Upper Cretaceous Mollusca from Southern California", in Journal of Paleontology, V. 11., No. 5, pages 45-49, 379-402. Popenoe, W. P., 1942. "Upper Cretaceous Formations and Faunas of Southern California", in American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, V. 26, No. 2, p. 162-187. Popenoe, W. P., 1954. "Mesozoic Formations and Faunas, Southern California", Chapter III, Historical Geology, pages 15.21: C.D.M.G. Bulletin 170. Porter, O'Brien and Armstrong, 1964. Foundation Engineering Investigation of Marsh Area Blocks 58 and 59 Irvine Subdivision, Newport Beach, CA. Powell, R. W. (editor), 1974. Inventor of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California, Ca ifornia Native Plant Society Special Pub ication No. I. I• 1• 1• 1• 1• 1• 10 I• Ia I• • M PBR LSA Public Antiquities Salvage Team, 1973.- Report of Archaeological Survey of the Rancho San Joaquin East Property, for James A. Roberts Association, Inc., Fullerton, CA. Qualimetrics, Inc., 1974. Final EIR Village of Woodbridge, North Hollywood, CA. Quinton-Redgate, 1977. Final EIR City of Irvine General Plan Amend- ment No. 4, Long Beach, CA. RBF, 1973. Master Plan of Drainage for the East Irvine Area, Irvine, CA: R. Dixon Speas and Associates, Inc., 1976a. Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study MCAS E1 Toro, prepared for Western Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Los Angeles, CA. R. Dixon Speas and Associates, Inc., 1976b. Air Installation Compatible Naval Use Zone Study MCAS [H] Santa Ana, prepared for Western Division, Facilities Engineering Command, Los Angeles, CA. Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, 1978. List of Point Source Waste Dischargers (as of-10/2/78), Riverside, CA. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1973.' Final EIR Santiago Sand and Gravel Extraction, Newport Beach, CA. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1974. Draft EIR, Coyote Canyon Borrow Site, Newport Beach, CA. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1975. Eucalyptus Tree Conservation Program, for The Irvine Company, Irvine, CA. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1977. Environmental Evaluation, Bonita Canyon Borrow Site, Newport Beach, CA. Reynolds Environmental Group, 1978. Santiago College, Newport Beach, CA. Rice G., 1976. Center, Costa Environmental Assessment, Rancho 111. Locus B, Univers Richard Terry and Associates, 1972.* Draft EIR Rattlesnake Land Out_fall, Tustin, CA. It 1• I9 U I• I• I• I0 • 209 PBR LSA Richard Terry and Associates, 1973. Final EIR Improvement District No. 3, IRWD Inceptor Sewer Project, Tustin, CA. Rick Environmental Consultants, 1976. Archaeological Investigations at the World Medical Foundation Site, for The Irvine Company, San Diego, CA. Sands, A. (editor), 1977. Riparian Forests in California, Institute of Ecology, Publication No. 15. Schoellhamer, J.E. et.al., 1954. Geologic map of the Northern Santa Ana Mountains, Scale 1:24,000, U.S.G.S. Oil and Gas Investigation Map, OM-154. Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc., 1976. Corres ondenceConcerning ORA-130, to The Irvine Co., Costa Mesa, CT. Scientific Resource Surveys, Inc., 1978. Archaeological/Paleontolo and Historical Report on the Proposed Bee and Round Canyon ProJec for Lockman and Associates/Toups Corporation; Santa Ana, CA. SERNCO, Inc., 1973. Draft EIR, Douglas -Crow Irvine Development Project, Denver, CO. Smith, E.J., Jr. and T.H. Johnson, 1974. The Marine Life Refuges and Reserves of California, California Department of of Fish and Game, Marine Resources Information Bulletin No. 1, 1974, Sacramento, CA. State of California, No Date., California Administrative Code, Title 14, State Division of Beaches and Parks. Section 4307 - Archaeological Features, Section 4309 - Special Permits. ., State of California, No Date., California Health and Safety Code, Sections 8100 and 7052. State of California, No Date-., Public Resources Code; Section 5097.53. State of California, No Date., Public Resources Code; California Environ- mental Quality Act. Section 2100 et seq. State of California, No Date. California Penal Code, Title 14, Part I (State of California) Section 622 1/2. Section 19 - Punishment for Misdemeanor. State of California, No Date. California Public Resources Code; Section 5097.5 and (Section added by stats. 1965 c . 136, pp.]). 1• 11 1• I• 1• I• I• 0 210 PBR - LSA State of California, 1972. California Administrative Code Title 8 Article 15. "Standards. for Occupationa Noise Exposure. State of California, Coastal Zone Conservation Commissions, 1975. California Coastal Plan, Sacramento, CA. State of California, Coastal Commission, 1977. Interpretative Guidelines, Sacramento, CA. State of California, Department of Health, 1970. Water Quality Investi- gation: Newport Bay, Orange County, Sacramento, CA. State of California, No Date. Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, article 4, Section 1092, "Noise Insulation Standards." State of California, Department of Water Resources, 1967. Progress Report Geology of the Coastal Plain of Orange County. Sacramento, CA. State of California, Department of Water Resources, 1975. California's Groundwater: Bulletin No. 118. Sacramento, CA. State of California, Department of Water Resources, 1975. Sea Water Intrusion in California, Bulletin No. 63-5., Sacramento, CA. State of California, Department of Water Resources, January 1978. Winds in California, Technical Bulletin 185, Sacramento, CA. State of California, Water Resources Control Board, 1975. Water Quality Control Plan Report - Santa Ana River Basin (8), Vol. I'and II, Sacramento, CA. State of California, Water Resources'Control Board, 1975. Comprehensive Water Quality Control Report, San Diego Basin(9). Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Diego Region, Sacramento, CA. Society for California Archaeology, 1976. The California Directory of Archaeological Consultants, Institute for Cultural Resources, Cal. State Stanislaus! Soil Conservation Service, 1976. Soil Survey of Orange and Western P of Riverside Counties, California, An Interim Report, Washington, C Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineers, Inc., 1968. A Reconnaissance Investigation of Soil and Geologic Conditions, San Joaquin Hills_Coa Area, f I0 A 10 C 1• 1• I• I• I0 I• 211 PBR LSA South Coast Air Quality Management District, 1976. Annual Report Air Quality and Meteorology, E1 Monte, CA. South Coast Air Quality Management District, 1977. Summary of Air Quality in the South Coast Air Basin, E&P 78-1, El Monte, CA. South Coast Field Station, 1976. Annual Report, 1975-1976. Santa Ana, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 2 - Assessment of Surface Water Quality Problems in NIWA Area - Final Report. Prepared Ty Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey for NIWA, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 4, Final Report: Non -point related Marine Water Quality Problems in Newport Bay, Prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston, and Bailey, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 5 - Surface Runoff Wasteload Assessment in NIWA Area, Final Report. Prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey for NIWA, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 6 - Final Re ort Assessment of Other Non -Point Sources in NIWA Area, prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston and'Bai ey, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Government's, 1977. Task 7 - Assessment of Groundwater Quality Problems in Orange County/Assessment of Surface Water Quality Problems in Orange County., Prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey for the Orange County EMA, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 7-Compila- tion of'Additional Groundwater_ and Surface Water Quality Problems in the NIWA Area, Los Angeles, wi. Southern California Association of Governments, 1977. Task 10 - Surface Runoff Wasteland Assessment Orange County Area, Final Report. Prepare by Pomeroy, Johnston and Bailey for the Orange County EMA, Los Angeles. Southern California•Association of Governments, 1978a. Task 2-1B Final Re or t: Desi n and Evaluation of Candidate Mana ement Strategies Subtask I - Further Ha itat Restoration andDredging Operations, Subtas 5 - San Die q Creek Watershed Sediment Management Plan, Prepared by Pomeroy, Johnston and Bai ey, Los Angeles, CA. '9 A �• I• I• I• I• C C 212 PBR LSA Southern California Association of Governments, 1978b. Task 2-2, Develop- ment of Continuing Planning and Action Program, Prepared by UCI Water Resources Laboratory, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1978c. Task 2 Subtask 5A - Debris Basin/Flood Retarding Facilities Sites 5 and 6, Hiccs Canyon, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1978d. NIWA 208 Draft Plan Element Report, for SCAG, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1978e. Regional Transpor- tation Plan, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments, 1978f. Draft SCAG-78 Growth Forecast Policy, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Association of Governments and South Coast Air Quality Management District, 1978. Draft Air Quality Management Plan, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, 1973. The Ec_olo9. the Southern California Bight: Implications for Water Quality K lent., Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Edison Company, 1973. EIR Ellis -Santiago 220 KV Transmission Facility, Los Angeles, CA. Southern California Testing Laboratory, 1976. Report of Geotechnical Investiqation, Proposed San Joaquin_ Recreation Center; Irvine, CA. Squires, R.L., and Fritsche, A.E., 1978. Miocene Macrofauna along Sespe Creek Ventura County, California, in Pac. Sec, SEPM Pac Coast Paleogeog. Field Guide, No. 3. Stebbins, R.C., 1966, A Fie Houghton Mifflin Co., Bos Sullwold, H.H., 1940. O.C., CA., unpublis Angeles, CA. Sundberg, F.A., 1975. a Paleontolog Reptiles and Amphibians of a Portion of the San Joaquin H hesis, University of California, lz Shale (Late Cretaceous) of Sil n, Vol.2', No.'3, p.31-39. 9 1• 1• 1*' 1• I9 C I• • Sundberg, F. m 1978. In Santa Ana N aleontology. 213 ins M the PBR LSA ale Sundberg, F.A., and Cooper, J.D., 1978. "Late Cretaceous Depositional Environments, Northern Santa Ana Mountains, Southern California", in Mesazoic Paleogeography of the Western United States: SEPM Pacific Section, Paleogeography Smyposium II, pages 535-546. The Irvine Company, 1970. Preliminary Drainage Study Coastal Shelf Area, Prepared by Shurman-Simpson, Newport Beach, CA. The Irvine Company, 1976. Approved Policies for the Irvine Coastal Area, Newport Beach, CA. The Irvine Company, 1976. Communications to Native California Indian rnmmimity rnnrprnina Indian Buria Sites, to John King, Newport Beach, The Irvine Company, 1978. Land Use Information System, Newport Beach, CA. The Irvine Company, 1978. Long Range Development Strategy, Newport Beach, CA. .Thompson, S.D., 1977, A Survey of T Newport Bay Ecological Reserve, C Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Irvine, CA. errestrial Vertebrates of The e County California, Departme versity of California, Irvine, Thorne, R.F., 1976. The vascular plant communities of California. In, Plant Communities of Southern California, Latting, J. (ed.), California Native Plant Society, Special Publication, No. 2. Toups Incorporated, 1973a. A Master Plan of Drainage for the Central Irvine Ranch Area, Santa Ana, CA. Toups Incorporated, 1973b. San Joaquin Marsh Water Quality Investigation. Santa Ana, CA. Toups Associates, 1978. Draft EIR Bee/Round Canyon Landfill Site, Santa' Ana, CA. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1975. Draft EIR Village of Quail Hil'1 Planned Community, Newport Beach, CA. 7 1• I• I• El I• • I6 L 214 Ultrasystems, Inc., 1976a. Draft EIR Irvine Railroad Grade Separation Project, Irvine, CA. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1976b. An Update of the Noise Contours for E1 Toro Marine Corps Air Station, prepared for Orange County Board of Sul visors, Newport Beach, CA. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1977. Final EIR, Cowan Ranch, Irvine, CA. Ultrasystems, Inc., 1978. Final EIR Western World Borrow Site, Irvine, CA. Urban Land Institute, 1974. Irvine the Genesis of a New Community, Washington, D.C., U.S. Navy, 1973. Summary of Meteorological Observations SMOS E1 Tor MCAS and Santa Ana MCAS H. , Asheville, N.C. Van Lehn, Edie, ed., 1975. Water.on the Irvi Irvine Ranch Water District. The Irvine Ra Vedder, J.G., et al, 1957. Geolgoic Map of the S Juan Ca istrano Area Orange Count Californi, tions Map O.M. 193, Washington, D.C. Vedder, J.G., 1970. Geologic Guide Anaeles Basin: Orange County, CA - .S.G.S.), Washington, - A History of the r District, Irvine, lls - , ga- astern Rim of the Los nn - San ,InAnnin Hills - VTN, Inc., 1969. Master Plan of Drainage for the Irvine Ranch - vaiencia Area, Irvine, CA. VTN, Inc., 1971, Master Plan of Drainage for Unincorporated West Orange County Area, Irvine, CA. VTN, Inc., 1972. San Diego Creek Sediment Yield Study. Prepared for Orange County Flood Control District, Orange County, California, Irvine, CA. VTN, Inc., 1973. Draft EIR, Smoketree Townhomes, Irvine, CA. VTN, Inc., 1974. Final EIR San Onofre to Santiago Substation 220 KV Transmission Line, Irvine, CA. I0 10 �• • [A I• 215 PBR LSA Wallace, W.J., 1955. "A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Archaeology." Southwest Journal of Anthropology 11:214-230. Republished in "The California Indians,' R.F. Heiner and M.A. Whipple (eds), University of California Press pp 186-201. Warren, C.N., 1968. "Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaption on the Southern California Coast" in Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, C.I. Williams, ed., Contributions in Anthropology. Vol. 1, No. 3, Paleo-Indian Institute, Eastern New Mexico University, Portales, N.M. Water Resource Engineers, 1973. New Bay Recommended Water Quality Management Plan, presented to t>le Santa Ana Watershed Planning Agency, Riverside, CA., Walnut Creek, CA. • Weather Bureau, 1965. Meteorological Summari Trans ort and Dis ersion Over Southern Cali 54, Washington, D.C. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1974., Final•EIR, Irvine Center, Tustin, CA. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1975. Test Trenching at San Joaquin Golf Course (site ORA-111) Phase II., for The Irvine Company, Tustin, CA. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1975. Test Evacuations at San Joaquin Golf.Course (site ORA-111) Phase I., for The Irvine Company, Tustin, CA. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1976a. Draft EIR Village of Turtle Rock, Enclave IV, Area A, Tustin, CA. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1976b. Final EIR, Village of Woodbridge, Northwest Quadrant, Tustin, CA. WESTEC Services, Inc., 1978. Draft EIR Bonita Canyon Drive Extension, Tustin, CA. Willdan Associates, 1975. Drainage System Evaluation for the Irvine Coastal Area, Anaheim, CA. Williamson and Schmid, 1972. Master Plan of Drainage for Irvine Indus- trial Area, Irvine, CA. Wilsey and Ham, 1975. )Urban Encroachment on The San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve: The abatement of impacts, prepared for the University of California, Irvine, Pasadena, CA. '0 1♦ I• A I0 I• 216 PBR LSA Woodside/Kubota & Associates, Inc., 1976. Draft EIR, Improvement District_ 75-1, IRWD, Newport Beach, CA. Woodward -Clyde Consultants,'1978. Review and Soils and Geology Report 250 Acre Irvine To ge, Woodward, Clyde, Sherard and Associates, 1965. Soil Investigation Pr000sed University Park Subdivision, Tract Nos. 5788. 5921 and , Woodward, Clyde, Sherard and Associates, 1966. Report on Soil Investiga- tion of the Proposed Lutheran College Site, Orange, CA. Woodward -MacNeil and.Associates, 1973. Seismic Safety Study for the City of Irvine, Orange, CA. Yerkes, Robert F., 1957. Volcanic Rocks of the E1 Modeno Area, Orange County, California. Geological Survey Professional Paper, 272-L, Washington, D.C. Yerkes, R.F., et.al., 1965. Geology of the Los Angeles Basin - an Introduction, U.S.G.S. Professional Paper, 420-A, 57p.' Yeo, Ron, 1975. Final EIR Turtle Rock, Enclave II and Open Space, Corona del Mar, CA. [7 I• I• C 217 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED Alexander Bowie, Attorney at Law City of Irvine City of Newport Beach City of Santa Ana City of Tustin County of Orange Environmental Management Agency General Services Administration Irvine Ranch Water District Lowry and Associates Orange County Airport Commission Orange County Transportation Commission Paleontological Consultants Southern California Association of Governments The Irvine Company "The Fading American Dream", Seminar AMTRAK Intercity Rail Passenger Service, Information Line PBR LSA Alexander Bowie John Harris Pam Sheldon Jim Gregorius Craig Bluell Fred Talarico Robert Sundstrom Maryann Chamberlain 'Ralph White Rock Miller John Fulton Ingrid Heinline Rod DuBois Mike Swann Robert Bresnahan Ted Butters John Cooper Rod Raschke L.G. Barnes Gordon Palmer Charles Todd Robin Wood Pike Oliver Ken Agid Harold Protas • i• '0 CITY OF NEWPORT' BEACH March 20, 1979 Irvine Ranch Water District c/o William J. Soto, Jr. P. 0. Box D-I, 4201 Campus Drive Irvine, California 92660 SUBJECT: Draft Master Environmental Assessment - Irvine Ranch Water District, Orange County, California Gentlemen: The City of Newport Beach appreciates this opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Master Environmental Assessment - Irvine Ranch Water District, Orange County, California. The City offers for your consideration the following comments on the Draft report: Page 2-(3) 53-56 Where there is the possfbility that a project will effect the water quality of Newport Bay, either through increased sedimentation or the addition of higher levels of nutrients, the City of Newport Beach, with jurisdiction by law, may request that standards exceeding those adopted by NIIJA be met. Page 4-(6) Page 103 It has been the practice of the City of Newport Beach to have a certified archaeologist present during grading or any related activity at any site where the discovery of archaeological resources is possible. Pages 6-(17) Page 8 "Incorporation by Reference" is an acceptable method of reducing data collection when such data is taken from a previously certified _ E.I.R. However, other impacts specifically associated with a particular project such as growth inducement, air and noise pollution, public services and utilities, and traffic impacts, must be addressed separately for each project. Page 9 Table A: The presentation of material in this table would lead to a con- clusion.that for several elements of adopted local agency General Plan that com- lete environmental analysis has not been accomplished. Realizing this was not the intent this table could be modified to more clearly define purpose and the notes on page 11 incorporated into the table in a more explanatory manner. Page ]2 EIR-Reference Table: The table is inaccurate as to the City of Newport Beach. Accurate information can be obtained by contacting the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. Page 21 Geology/Soils Index: A reference to the Public Safety Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and preliminary studies prepared for the City as back- ground for said element, would be appropriate. Page 39 "Seismic Response Areas": Information for properties within the City of Newport Beach is available from the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 Irvine Ranch Water Di Oct - Page 2. 0 Page 40 Paragraph 4: The Public Safety Element does establish public policy for development. The wording of this paragraph may be misleading. Pace 50 "Flood Hazards": Information on flood hazards is available for properties with the City of Newport Beach from the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department and Community Development Department. (Public Safety Element, Army Corp Engineer's Studios, and Dam Inundation Studies). Page 52 Dam Inundation: Information on Dam Inundation and risk mitigation is available from the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department and Orange County Office of Emergency Services for all 14 dams and reservoirs of potential risk. Page 53 Paragraph 2: Comments dealing with the 208 plan should be reviewed as to accuracy and City/local agency positions should be indicated. Page 59 "Table 6": The City of Newport Beach has "jurisdiction by Law" in respect to permit authority. This applys to Surface Water, ground water, Flooding, Water quality and Dam Inundation. Pages 61-91: The description and identification of the biotic resources is extensive but it is clear that unless a proposed action effects or alters any lake or stream bed (page 90-21), there is no provision for the protection or preservation of any of the other plant and/or animal habitats. Additionally, the potential for Orange County Turkish Bugging on properties.viith",the City of Newport Beach and adjacent localities should be discussed. Page 79 "Significant and Sensitive Habitats": The linkages between Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve and San Joaquin Marsh should be considered as well as areas where Orange County Turkish Rugging is/might be present. Pages 105-114 Relevant Planning Programs: This section does not adequately address relevant local planning programs (i.e. City of Newport Beach/City of Laguna Beach). The adopted sphere of influences for local jurisdictions should be indicated, adopted local development policies for undeveloped lands should be cited, relevant private planning programs (i.e. The Irvine Company, Laguna Green- belt, Federal Study on a National Urban Park, etc.). Adopted Circulation system should be indicated.Orange County Transit District and Orange County Airport and other similar agencies should be mentioned. Specifically the adopted land use exhibit, page 112, is incorrect, bluff top policies are missing and all discussion of grading codes as missing. Page 118 Paragraph 2: Please define term "built -out." Page 0"Existing Development": Exhibit should indicate time frame for Master Environmental Assessment use. Page 121: As the supply of gasoline decreases and the cost per gallon increases, commuting to and from the Irvine area will become an increasing burden on the low. to moderate income worker. This will increase the need for housing within the affordable range in the immediate vicinity, or the rapid expansion and improvement in the mass transit system within the area. The availability of affordable housing in Santa Ana may be adequate today, but with the trends toward rapid expansion, this availability may be dwindling. Along with the inclusion of SCAG's forecasted Irvine Ranch Water Dieict - Page 3. growth of jobs, a breakdown of the anticipated annual income from each category of jobs should be identified. It is unreasonable to assume that of the 29,000 + jobs increasing annually, that even a slight majority will be able to afford housing in the $100,000 price range. SCAG's forecast also casts some doubt on the ability of the 700 lower priced housing units to provide any noticeable relief in this area. It might also be unreasonable to assume that those households earning enough to afford the $100,000 + housing in the area will use rapid transit (buses). This will also result in additional strains on already existing shortage of fossil fuels, both for domestic use and industrial uses. Page 123 Paragraph 3: The initial development planning data used by IRWD should probably first be gathered from local jurisdictions with authority to grant such development and then evaluated in reverse of stated process. Page 122 "Phasing Development Schedule": The exhibit is not accurate, both within the City of Newport Beach and its adopted sphere of influence. It is im- portant to note that a significant portion of the growth and development indicated on this exhibit as existing to 1985, a six year time frame is with the City or its adopted sphere of influence and no development phasing plans for this area which are in part required have been approved by the City. Page 140 Paragraph 2: The accuracy of this paragraph should be verr`fied. Page 140-145: A discussion of committed circulation is needed. Further, pro- vision of a approved (local agency) projected circulation system should be included similar to the attempt on Land Use, page 112 is needed. A mention of the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance is needed. Page 157 "AQMP": Section should be updated to indicate SCAG and SCAQMD approvals of AQMP approximately 1/79) and local jurisdictions positions on -same. Page 164. Noise Standards: Recent studies conducted by the University of California at Irvine have shown that noise standards in the City of Irvine are exceeded in many residential areas. Page 165: When discussing noise impact control, it is important to realize that the use of acoustic windows requires them to be closed to be efficient. Page 167 Paragraph 2: The City of Newport Beach does not have an adopted Noise Ordinance. Page 168. Water Supply: The total average daily consumption during the period from July 1976, to June 1977 was 40.9 million oallons. System capacity is claimed to be 42.1 million gallons for domestic use. How does the system accommodate the other users? How will the system accommodate future expansion if the proposed bond issue is defeated? How will the IRWD demand when the Colorado River water supply diminishes? Page 172. Water Conservation: Anticipating voluntary water conservation may be overly optimistic, especially when voluntary conservation of gasoline and natural gas has shown to be a failure. Page 173. Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation: Should include a discussion of possible development within the coastal areas. ~ Irvine Ranch Water Dsitct - Page 4. • Page 174. "Sewer System": A casual review of existing sewer lines and proposed lines would appear to show a discrepancy with existing and planned growth and development (1979-1985). Clarification is needed. The City of Newport Beach looks forward to working with your staff and consultants in the preparation of this document. It is hoped that our comments are helpful to you in your review and reevaluation. Sincerely, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, DIRECTO By , Fred Talafico Environmental Coordinator FT/dt cc: Larry Seeman and Associates, Inc. 4 0 w�J 041YE IW\CII N'�1ER II�IAIIT IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT P.O. Box D-I • 4201 Campus Drive • Irvine, Calif- 92716 • (714) 833.1223 September 13, 1978 5111 i7 SQ G��P SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT i "d, MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Gentlemen: The Board of Directors of the Irvine Ranch Water District, at its August 28, 1978 meeting, authorized a program to prepare a Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) for the District. Section 15069.6 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, which is advisory in nature, encourages the preparation of MEAs, but does not prescribe the content, format, or procedures to be used in the develop- ment of such documents. The District's primary aim in preparing an MEA is to develop an inventory, or data base, of the environmental character- istics of the District which can be used to generate input parameters in the planning and design of future facilities. The MEA is also intended to provide information that can be used in initial studies and as a cen- tral source of current information that can be used or referenced in pre- paring individual EIRs and Negative Declarations that may be required for specific projects at'a later date. In order to elicit input from affected agencies and interest groups early in the MEA development process, this "Notice of Preparation" has been com- pleted. While normally utilized in formally notifying responsible agen- cies of the preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration, this means of communicating with you, as responsible agencies or interested individuals, was chosen as the best means of formally soliciting your input to our MEA work program. The MEA will address the entire jurisdiction of the Irvine Ranch Water Dis- trict as shown in Exhibit I. The MEA will deal only with the definition of the environmental setting and identification of potential environmental constraints for future programs and facilities of the District; the MEA does not deal with any specific project or facilities program. It is requested that, as you review and respond to this Notice of Prepara- tion, you specifically note any special interests your agency has with respect to its operations within the IRWD (e.g., permit requirements, September 13, 1978 Page 2 project review requirements, etc.) and any data sources (e.g., technical reports, maps of environmental features, etc.) that may be of interest to the District as it formulates the MEA inventory and data base. To further assist you in identifying material that may be of interest to us, and organizing your response, a form identifying topical areas of concern that the MEA will focus on is attached. Please return the completed form with your response. Your response should be received no later than 45 days from receipt of this notice. Mr. Larry Seeman (714-640-6363), who is the consulting program director for the MEA program, will be in touch with you in a few days to respond to any questions you may have. S i ncerkl y, Wi iam Jw Jr. Assistant G eral Manag r WJS:mab Attachments • EXHIBIT I • L OWRY B ASSOCIATES Rvlry{,°axLX wqp DRpKi IOvuOAI IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT """° CITIES WITHIN I.R.W.D. BOUNDARIES >tt asoms� .• LEGEND OF CITIES EJORANGE CO • wbeurox • IRVINE jj i1tpU�1R a LAGUNA lN1 0 1• EACH `rn a ® °.W°w A°L °Mlvco 'A YOIQ NAIIN!,zol 8 TUSTIN ,AsaiAtiGN z • t /� 'Y. `�Y 5 SANTA • e ANA NI AN Al C J rz An LL° / o j NEWPORT h� BEACH !AlIANLA Z�f e 4 i ` D.tLA °AND CANYON lnuvm° vl/ N 0 / 1 �_ \\ti] cwrus .>: DA \ \\ IONRA CNMAOA \ MN MAOUIN (V�.M... �O !°tqC toafl wp EXHIBIT A-3 TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE IRVINE RANCH WATER DISTRICT FEBRUARY 1977-393