Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGrand Canal. • i May 10, 1973 Mr. James W. Anderson Executive Officer California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region 6843 Magnolia Avenue - Suite 4 Riverside, CA 92506 Subject: Grand Canal Dredging Dear Mr. Anderson: Enclosed is a copy of an Environmental Statement - Negative Declaration for the dredging of The Grand Canal in the City of Newport Beach. The City is planning on attending the May 25, 1973 meeting of the Board to be held in the City Council Chambers of San Bernardino. It would be appreciated if we could have the approximate time at which the Board will hear the matter. Very truly yours, Joseph T. Devlin Public Works Director JTD:hh cc: City Manager Vitt, tt, 1c:01.ay cPP )lC • • May, 1973 GRAND CANAL MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1. Location: The Grand Canal is a 100-foot wide man-made waterway in the City of Newport Beach separating Balboa Island from Little Balboa Island. The Canal is 1530 feet in length; extending from North Bay Front to South Bay Front. 2. Project Description: The work consists of the maintenance dredging of sand which has sloughed to the center of the Grand Canal, and the placing of the sand back against the seawalls. No material will be exported from or imported into the area. The total amount of material to be repositioned will not • exceed 3,000 cubic yards. The final depth in the center of the Canal will be minus five feet below mean lower low water. The project is jointly funded by the City of Newport Beach and the County of Orange. Sketches are attached showing a plan view and cross section. 3. Purpose of the Project: The purpose of this project is as follows: a) Raise the level of the sand at the seawall to insure proper structural stability of the seawall. b) Increase the depth of the center of the Canal to allow for greater recreational boating and swimming use. c) Reduce the growth of weeds and the eutrophication of the Canal bottom. 4. Discussion of Environmental Impacts: a) Marine Environment In order to assess the possible environmental impact of the project, a physical survey of the Canal bottom biota was conducted by City Marine Safety personnel; and environmental reports prepared for similar work elsewhere in Newport Bay were reviewed. The results of the Marine Safety Department survey are quoted below: "The existing muddy intertidal zone associated with the bulkheads supports little macroscopic and microscopic marine life. The canal center section has been examined subtidally; it supports a very sparse population of crustaceans and invertebrates within the canal subtidal zone. The only area in which a small population of crustaceans was visible was around the pilings of the bridge crossing the canal. At the south end of the canal, not within Grand Canal Maintent May, 1973 Page 2 the dredging zone, some small eelgrass beds were observed. These beds appear to support some juvenile fish and invertebrates of different species. This area, however, should not be effected by the proposed dredging or fill operation." Two recent projects in the City involving dredging near existing bulk- heads have had environmental reviews conducted in late 1972 by Marine Biological Consultants, Inc. of Costa Mesa. These projects are identi- fied as the Balboa Cove Development, and the Bayshores Marina. The consultant did not identify any significant environmental impacts resulting from the dredging work associated with those projects. Brief mention was made of short term localized siltation and water discoloration. It was concluded that the limited population of bottom dwelling organisms which would be disturbed would be restored within six to nine months after dredging. It is felt the same conclusions are applicable to the Grand Canal dredg- ing project. Our experience in past maintenance dredging projects in the Grand Canal supports this opinion. b) Water Quality There will be some short term water turbidity during the dredging opera- tion. Past experience in dredging the Grand Canal has shown that the proposed hydraulic dredging method, with the discharge spout being kept under water at all times, minimizes water turbidity outside of the project area. c) Recreational Environment The dredging of the Canal will again restore the boating and swimming activities to their previous level. This will provide a recreational benefit. 5. Basis for Negative Declaration: The dredging of the Grand Canal has been reviewed in conjunction with Sections 15081 and 15082 of the State guidelines. Comparison with the criteria set forth in those sections indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental impact. G�OA70S4-7O F/1//54lc`O C4'4.1!/1SG- G1�4a L.G. v/ B/ GoO 2'f•%io.2OX. EX/ST/R/G 544/0 .4=1.9Q0"/.4.' /O rI 1 >/! I .. a O 6D' /DDT _. d/c2,OeO Y///IG1TE /U/J//#B.e.•2. y.4. 'OS TO as ..ofl:C2co ,4744CCo ,as44x//r ,e&'' ria7V s' p.° C. K =_•-- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6'.el /Z/0 CAI 4/41 G CX"0,51S SS C T/01V! DRAWN DATE/k/ 2D. '72? APPROVED 1�ss�T. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR R E NO.\ e cS 4- DRAWING NO. _/41-506.5-"G. • " 9//esr 2 Of= 2 • S42.SO 4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • /✓E,2 T ail Y N \ \� C C. W \x 1> \• C' \Se CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Gm' , 4 if../ o C'.4 X/GI 00EG�c'/� C DRAWN_ DATE it/O✓ eo.'%,a : APPROVED A7aer PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR • RE NO v.b•¢. DRAWING NO. y .SOOpS—/ t,R„l,r roan. C/LtTDNS . NEWPORT SAY