Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 - C-3655 - Newport Blvd Right Turn Lane onto Hospital RoadCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 7 March 22, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Public Works Department Stephen J. Luy, P.E. 949 - 644 -3311 sluy@city.newport-beach.ca.us SUBJECT: APPROVE THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE NEWPORT BOULEVARD RIGHT TURN LANE ONTO HOSPITAL ROAD - CONTRACT NO. 3655 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane onto Hospital Road. DISCUSSION: The City is proposing to widen Newport Boulevard for a south bound right turn lane and a graded parkway which requires a fill slope into a drainage area on the west side of the roadway (see attached project location map). Staff is processing a permit application with Caltrans for this project. Before Caltrans can finalize the permit, it has required the City to obtain a clearance from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). As 0.06 acres of wetlands -type vegetation growing along the earthen V -ditch will be disrupted, the RWQCB has determined that a MND is required for this project. Staff prepared the attached MND and notified residents within a 300 -foot radius that the MND was available for their review from December 13, 2004 to January 11, 2005. A Notice of Intent was also filed with the County Clerk, County of Orange. The City received no comments on the MND and one letter in support of the project. On February 1, 2005 staff sent the MND to the State Clearinghouse for review of the project by affected agencies, On March 10, 2005 the City received a letter from the State Clearinghouse indicating that the review period had closed March 4, 2005 and no state agency had submitted comments regarding the project. Receipt of this letter indicates that the City has complied with the State Clearinghouse requirements for draft environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The MND states that the City will mitigate the project impact by creating 0.06 acres of wetlands adjacent to the site and re- establishing the native grasses disturbed by the SUBJECT: Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane onto Hospital Road Contract No. 3655 March 22, 2005 Page 2 construction. The City will also remove non - native vegetation and monitor the site for a period of five years. Prepared by: .q L Stephen J. Luy, P. . Project Manager Attachments: Location Map Notice of Intent Letter of Support State Clearinghouse Letter Mitigated Negative Declaration Submitted by: Badum s Director mite l� / V I Lu © , i r O ca it O ix w 1 ,e Rt HOSPITAL ROAD -� C -3655 J - CITY.OF NEWPORT BEACH DRAWN L DATE o- - o PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT APPROVED NEWPORT BOULEVARD RIGHT TURN LANE AT HOSPITAL ROAD DRAWING ND. LOCATION MAP CIV OF NEWPORT BEA 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (949) 644 -3200 NOTICE OF INTENT To ❑ Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 County Clerk, County of Orange FX Public Services Division P.O. Box 238 Santa Ana, CA 92702 From: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (Orange County) Date received for filing at OPR: Name of Project: NEWPORT BOULEVARD RIGHT TURN LANE Project Location: Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road Specific: C -3655 Project Location -City: Newport Beach Project Location - County: Orange Project/ Description: Removal of the existing roadway improvements, traffic signals, landscaping and irrigation; and constructing new roadway improvements including a formal right turn lane, traffic signals striping landscape and irrigation restoration including upgrading a small drainage canal. X Nlitigated Negative Declaration Availability: The project Mitigated Negative Declaration will be available for Public viewing in the Cite of Newport Beach Public Works Department during working hours from December 13, 2004 through January 11, 2005. Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Newport Beach Date of Approval: 12 -7 -04 Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: Public Works Dept. Contact Person: St plten L y Title: Associate Civil Engineer Signature: Tel.No. (949) 644 -3330 Date: 12 -7 -04 r NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: RESIDENTS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR NEWPORT BOULEVARD RIGHT TURN LANE AT HOSPITAL ROAD LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CONTACT: Stephen Luy, Associate Civil Engineer City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach CA 92685 - 8915 PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: DECEMBER 13,2004 — JANUARY 11, 2005 Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act," as amended to date, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project described below. Project Title: Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road Project Location: Northwest Corner of the Intersection of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road Project Description: The project applicant, City of Newport Beach, proposes to construct a right turn lane along South bound Newport BeUle..\ ard, grade a parkway with fill slope, relocate traffic signals, construct sidewalk, reroute a concrete drainage course, and install irrigation and landscaping. The construction will require the mitigation of the loss of 0.06 acres of wetlands type vegetation. The surrounding area contains professional and senior care facilities. Environ mental Analysis: The attached Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project finds there is a less than significant impact with mitigation. As mitigation this project will include an area of 0.18 acres for native vegetation. The City of Newport Beach would like to know the views of agencies and other interested parties as to the scope and content of the environmental information that is germane to each agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Due to the time limits mandated by Stale law, comments on the attached Initial Study will be received from'December 1.3, 2004 through January 11, 2005. Please submit your comments to Stephen Luy at the address shown above. Agencies should provide the name of a contact person with their response. Copies of the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for public review at the Public Works Department, City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevajd, Newport Beach, California, 92658 — 8915, (949) 644 -3311. Date: November 1Jd, 20P4 Signature: b1 Stephen Luy. Associate Civil Engineer Telephone: (949) 644 -3311 Wo,nca' :dilam;a \dmini5lntive Code. Ti0e 14,tCEQA Guidelines) Seclioni 1SD9?. sb&)a) and 1 i I M. R"ixd)m,e 1992 NEwpoiqLID0 M,EOIWTINTLS 12/10/2004 Mr. Stephen Luy Associate Civil Engineer CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92685 -8915 RFr0IIPD P//un� .mRl 351 iiespital Road, Suite 3^Ii' Newport Beach, CA 92663 (949) 645 -0500 Fax (949) 645 -/729 Re: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPY A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Dear Mr. Luy: We are in receipt of the above - referenced notice on the subject of a "Notice of Preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road ". As our tN%o medical facilities are located just west of this intersection, we would welcome a new right turn lane at Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard. Our tenants and their patients would benefit greatly from the improved intersection. We are very much in favor of this project. Should you require additional information or wish to contact us, you may do so at 949 -645- 0500. Thank you. Sincerely, r -- —T141-10 - 1VC �Y PUR U MEDICAL CENTER ER rid ��',*►�� - %„ � ,,.� -- Madonna Molinari Vice President of Operations MM/D& t,itrfw of 2.dm borah Boler ecutive Engineer STATE OF CALIFORNIA �o Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 0 ""`"��' Arnold Sean Walsh Sch Governor RECEIVEDDirector Governor \larch 7, 2005 Stephen Lay City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Subject: Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road SCH #: 2005021010 Dear Stephen Luy: MAR 1 0 2005 Public Works Department City of Newport Beach The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on March 4, 2005, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the etvironmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, T\`�erts Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812 -3044 TEL(916)446-0613 FAX(916)323-3018 w .opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2005021010 Project Title Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road Lead Agency Newport Beach, City of Type Neg Negative Declaration Description Widening Newport Boulevard for a 4.3 meter south bound right turn lane and a 5.9 meter graded parkway which requires the deep drainage area on the west side to be graded with a fill slope. The project will also include a drianage ditch that contains less than 0.06 acres of wetlands type vegetation growing along the existing concrete v- ditch. Lead Agency Contact Name Stephen Luy Agency City of Newport Beach Phone (949) 644 -3330 Fax email Address 3300 Newport Boulevard PO Box 1768 City Newport Beach State CA Zip 92658 -8915 Project Location County Orange City Newport Beach Region Cross Streets Newport Boulevard / Hospital Road Parcel No. Township 6S Range 10W Section 28 Base SBBM Proximity to: Highways 55,1 Airports None Railways None Waterways Drainage ditch Schools None Land Use State Highway / Major Highway Project Issues Air Quality; Drainage /Absorption; Noise; Toxic /Hazardous; Water Quality; Wetland /Riparian; Wildlife Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 12; Air Resources Board, Transportation Projects; Department of Toxic Substances Control Date Received 02/03/2005 Stag of Review 02/03/2005 End of Review 03/04/2005 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPENDIX G Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane onto Hospital Road 2. Lead agency name and address: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 91-658 -8915 Contact person and phone number: Bob Stein, Principal Civil Engineer, Public Works Department, (949) 644 -3322 4. Project location: South bound right turn lane on Newport Boulevard at Hospital Road. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 6. General plan designation: State Highwn Maior 7. Zoning: N/A 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Widening Newport Boulevard for a 4.3 meter south bound right turn lane and a 5.9 meter graded parkway which requires the deep drainage area on the west side to be graded with a fill slope. The project will also include a drainage ditch that contains less than 0.06 acres of wetlands type vegetation growing along the existing concrete v- ditch. en acheck.,,w- :'/30/98 Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: Surrounding area contains professional and financial buildings. The area immediately adjacent to the proposed construction contains a drainage ditch, roadway, traffic signal lighting, landscaping, irrigation and some native plants species adjacent to the existing concrete v- ditch. The drainage area drains and existing storm drain area over the v ditch to another storm drain area. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) California Regional Water Quality Control Board 401 Water Quality Standards Certification California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Corps of Engineers ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources Air Quality ' Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources Geology /Soils ' Hazards & Hazardous ' Hydrology / Water Quality E] Land Use / Planning Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ' Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation El Transportation/Traffic Utilities / Service Systems I Mandatory Findings of Significance en, cheek. x.1-0- 12/30/98 -2- DETERMINATION: (to be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ' I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATNE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project; nothing further is required. 6tgnature Date Signature Date EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, envcheck.,7a1 -12 %30/98 -1- cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross- referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. S) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance SAMPLE QUESTION Issues: enccheck.\\pi- 1230195 -4- 1. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Potentialh' Less Than Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ❑ Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the reaps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? Less Than No Significant Impact Impact ❑ ❑ ' ❑ ❑ non - agricultural use? ❑ ' b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ n ' `J ❑ ❑ ' b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ n ' `J use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ' environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? Ill. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: em'check.opd- 12�'Of98 -5- b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any O ' ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of El the Cleats Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh. vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ El ' any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife El species or with established native resident or envcheck.,, PJ -1? +30198 -6- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation L ponJ ' El a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute El El ' substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net El rI ❑ ' increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ C� D u ' pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ' substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect,.either D ' directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies. or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any O ' ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of El the Cleats Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh. vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of ❑ El ' any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife El species or with established native resident or envcheck.,, PJ -1? +30198 -6- envcheck.wpd- 12/30/98 -7- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 ' protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted El ❑ El ' Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ' significance of a historical resource as defined in 'I 5064.S9 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ' significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15 064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ' paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ' interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential ❑ ❑ ❑ ' substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault as ' delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ ' iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including ❑ El 11 ' liquefaction? envcheck.wpd- 12/30/98 -7- iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1 S- I -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994). aeating substantial risks to life or property e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. H.AZ --%-RDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS B Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result. would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Potentially Less Than Significant Significant with Impact Mitigation D Incorporation ❑ ' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ envcheck.,,p&!'_30 /99 -8- Less Than No Significant Impact Impact D ' ❑ ' ❑ ' ❑ 1 ❑ 1 ❑ 1 fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact o Impact Mitigation Impact such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer Incorporation e) For a project located within an airport land use ❑ ❑ ❑ ' plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, existing nearby wells would drop to a level within two miles of a public airport or public use which would not support existing land uses or airport, would the project result in a safety hazard planned uses for which permits have been for people residing or working in the project c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern area? a ' 0 of the site or area, including through the 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ' airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically ❑ ❑ ' O interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ ' risk of loss. injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste O El El ' discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or ❑ o a ' interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern O a ' 0 of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? cnychcC NN- 121 .10198 -9- IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? Potentially Less'fhan Less Than No b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, Significant Significant with Significant Impact policy, or regulation of an agency with Impact Mitigation Impact jurisdiction over the project (including, but not Incorporation d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ❑ L ❑ El ' coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted of the site or area, including through the for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an alteration of the course of a stream or river, or environmental effect? substantially increase the rate or amount of c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ surface runoff in a manner which would result in ' conservarion plan or natural community flooding on- or off -site? conservation plan? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would J exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substanrial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Othemise substantially degrade water quality? , ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard ❑ �, LJ area as napped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary- or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place with n a 100 -year flood hazard area ❑ El structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk , of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? L1 Cl ' IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ' b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, L1 ' policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ' conservarion plan or natural community conservation plan? cnv heck.,,N -1 2/30/99 -10- XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: envcheck.wpd- 12!30/98 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a ]mown ❑ ❑ ❑ ' mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ❑ ❑ ❑ ' important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. NOISE B Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise ❑ O ❑ ' levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ ❑ ❑ ' excessive eroundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient L1 ❑ 11 noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in El ❑ ' ❑ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use ❑ ❑ ❑ ' plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private El ❑ ❑ ' airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: envcheck.wpd- 12!30/98 a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X111. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? XIV.RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neiAborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of envcheck .wpd-12 /30/99 Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ lJ X No Impact 1 1 1 ❑ 1 D ❑ -12- lJ X No Impact 1 1 1 ❑ 1 ❑ envcheck.\\rti- 1X.0 /99 -13- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC -- Would the project a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial ❑ f-I LJ El ' in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed. either individually or cumulatively, a ' level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, El El ' includins either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design El ' feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ' 0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ r-7 ' g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ of ' programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS B Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of ' the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new L� ' water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? envcheck.\\rti- 1X.0 /99 -13- XVII. FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade ' ❑ the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ' individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a proiect are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects ' which (till cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? envcheck.\\iti-1 2130199 -14- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation c) Require or result in the construction of new ❑ r� IJ ❑ ' storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to ❑ n LJ ❑ ' serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ L ❑ ' treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project =s projected demand in addition to the provider =s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ ' permitted capacity to accommodate the project =s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes ❑ 1. C� ' ❑ and reeulations related to solid waste? XVII. FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade ' ❑ the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are ❑ ' individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a proiect are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects ' which (till cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? envcheck.\\iti-1 2130199 -14- ATTACHMENT A EXPLANATIONS 1. AESTHETICS 1. a) No Impact. The project will have no adverse effect on the scenic vista, since most of the work will be below the existing street level. I. b) No Impact. The project will not damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway, because there are no scenic resources in the area. 1. c) No Impact. The project will not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings since overall changes due to construction are minimal. 1. d) No Impact. The project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or niglutime views in the area since no reflective materials are to be used in the construction. 11. AGRICLZ.TURE RESOURCES 11. a) No Impact. The Project will not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use. There is no farmland in the area. 11. b) No Impact. The project does not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. This is not an agricultural use area. 11. c) No Impact. The project does not Involve any changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use. This is not an agricultural use area. 111. AIR QUALITY 111. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality plan. Air quality could be impacted by construction equipments or grinding operations. Any pollutants will be from vehicles and they will be strictly regulated as stipulated in section 7 -8.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. 111. b) No Impact. The project does not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. No pollutants will be released on the project. 111. c) No Impact. The project does not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Vehicle emissions shall be regulated and there will be no source for any other emissions. 111. d) No Impact. The project does not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The site does not contain any pollutants. envchecA.or?- 12/30/98 -15- Ill. e) No Impact. The project does not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The site does not contain any pollutants. 1V. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1V. a) No Impact. No special status wildlife were observed on site nor does the site provide suitable habitat for special status species with reported occurrences in the vicinity of the project. No critical habitat exists on site. Therefore. there is no impact. (Ultrasystems Environmental Biological Assessment Report) California Department of Fish and Game has determined that the project does not substantially adversely affect existing fish or wildlife sources. (See the Department of Fish and game letter dated 4/14/04.) IV. b) Less than significant impact with mitigation. Project implementation would result in minor grading and fill activities resulting in the loss of primarily non -native vegetation . The proposed project would impact approximately 0.06 acres of stream channels, including 0.02 acres of cattails. This small patch of cattails provides little habitat value, therefore this impact would be considered less than significant (Ultrasystems Environmental Biological Assessment Report). Section XVII a) describes the proposed mitigation for the loss of cattails. The loss of vegetation o ould result in the loss of habitat that provides nesting and foraging opportunities for common neighborhood birds. However, similar habitat occurs adjacent to the project site and only avian species were observed, all of which are common and opportunistic. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than sianificanu. 1V. c) No Impact. The project does not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemaI pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The Corps of Engineers has determined that the project falls under their jurisdiction under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. However the proposed project complies with terms and conditions of the Corps Nationwide Permit 39: Residential, Commercial, and institutional Developments. Since the project impacts only 0.06 acres of non - wetland waters, less that the 0.10 acres of water of the U.S., the Corp has indicated that a Pre - Construction Notification would not be required. The Corp has stipulated the project can proceed provided the City receives required certification from the State Water Resources Control Board per Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Water Quality Certification and a post construction notification is submitted to the Corps. IV. d) Less than significant impact. The project does not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No impacts to wildlife movement are expected as a result of project implementation. The proposed project lies in the midst of urban development and major thoroughfares. Noise levels will increase during excavation activities that could disrupt foraging and nesting activities for local avian species. However. very few wildlife species were observed on or in the immediate vicinity of the project; therefore this impact would be considered to be less than significant. There are no resident or migratory fish and provisions have been taken for migratory birds by requiring the construction be performed between July 16i° and March 14th. IV. e) No Impact. The project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. There are no biological resources, such as trees within the bulk of the area. IV. f) No Impact. The project does not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communir< Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. V. CULTL "R4L RESOURCES V. a) No Impact. The project does not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064,5. A report submitted by our consultant Ultra Systems Environmental indicates that there are no ]nistoricl: resources in the area. envcheck ,T,E -:' 30.!98 -16- V. b) No Impact. The project does not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to `15064.5. A report submitted by our consultant Ultra Systems Environmental indicates that there are no archeological resources in the area. V c) No Impact. The project does not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. A report submitted by our consultant Ultra Systems Environmental indicates that there are no paleontological resources on site. V d) No Impact. The project does not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. This project does not include any excavations of native materials. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS VI a) No Impact. The project does not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) No Impact. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. No known fault within project limits. ii) No Impact. Strong seismic ground shaking. No known fault within project limits iii) No Impact. Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction. The ground water table is not known to be sufficiently high to contribute to liquefaction within the project limits. iv) No Impact. Landslides. The area does not have sufficient slopes or differences in elevations to contribute to a landslide. Any fill material will be benched into the existing slope, compacted and landscaped. VI b) No Impact. The project does not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Areas disturbed during construction will be protected by erosion control measures as required by the construction documents. Most of the area within the project limits has improvements or landscaping that would eliminate any loss of topsoil. VI c) No Impact. The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. The soil within the project limits is very stable and has never exhibited any of the aforementioned problems. Previous excavation for maintenance related work has shown the soil to be a sandy loam with virtually no clay content. Experience by our maintenance crews have shown such soils lend themselves to excellent compaction with virtually no expansion. VI d) No Impact. The project is not located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994). The soil within the project limits has not exhibited any substantive expansive qualities and will yield good compaction. VI e) No Impact. The project has soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. All waste waters will be contained in separate waste water drain system and carried off site and not allowed to enter the soils within the project limits. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS VII a) No Impact. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials will not be used on this project. envchcck.,N- 12/30/98 -17- VII b) No Impact. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Hazardous materials will not be used on this project. VII c) No Impact. The project will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Hazardous materials will not be used on this project. VII d) No Impact. The project is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. VII e) No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan. VII f) No Impact. The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. VII g) Less Than Significant Impact. Temporary traffic control measures will occasionally shut down one lane of south bound traffic. In an emergency all lanes will be reopened. The project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. VII h) No Impact. The project does not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. There are not wildlands within the project limits. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY VIII a) No Impact. The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. No water will be discharged from the site during construction. Erosion control measures will be in place .while landscape material in growing on slope areas. VIII b) No Impact. The project will not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted). The project does not access or make use of ground waters in any way. VIII c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site. The project will include the addition of a short section of storm drain pipe and the relocation of a concrete "V" trench resulting in an insignificant change to the existing drainage pattern. No erosion or migration of silt will occur due to the minor changes in the drainage course. VIII d) No Impact. The project does not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site. The project is limited to the confines of the original drainage channel and would not appreciably increase the amount of surface runoff. work on the drainage facilities amounts to a minor relocation of existing facilities, so the drainage pattern is unaffected. VIII e) No Impact. The project does not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. No substantial additional runoff waters will be generated by the improvements. en, ch tk.,T -J- 12/30/98 -18- VIII 0 Less Than significant Impact. The project will not substantially degrade water quality. Possible adverse impacts from construction activities will be eliminated by implementation of NPDES measures as required by the specifications. VIII g) No Impact. The project will not place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. VII I h) No Impact. The project will not place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows. No flood flow will be impeded or the drainage course will be insignificantly modified. VIII i) No Impact. The project does not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The project does not increase the volume of water or retain any significant amounts of water that could pose a threat. VIII j) No Impact. The project would not facilitate inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. All slopes would be stabilized by vegetation; no vegetation free earthen embanlanents would be on site. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING IX a) No Impact. The project would not physically divide an established community, since it is only a modification of the existing facilities. IX b) No Impact. The project will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No affected agencies has indicated any conflict by the project with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. IX c) No Impact. The project does not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The City has obtained a biological assessment report for the project from Ultrasystems Environmental which indicates that the area does not support any species that may be part of a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. X. MINERAL. RESOURCES X a) No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. No mineral resources are known to be on site. X b) No Impact. The project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally - imporiant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. No such sites are in the project limits. XI. NOISE XI a) No Impact. The project will not exposure anyone to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Noise levels on City construction projects are monitored and construction hours are strictly enforced. XI b) No Impact. The project will not expose anyone to generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels. The project inspector will monitor this project for excessive vibration/noise. This standard construction is not expected to generate excessive amounts of groundbome vibration'noise. XI c) No Impact. The project will not cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project viciniry above levels existing without the project. The project is of limited duration and does not involve the mvchcck.o } ai -:'- /30/98 -19- installation of any devices that would generate noise XI. d) Less than significant impact. During construction, noise levels, will increase moderately over the ambient noise levels associated with highway traffic on Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road due to the operation of standard construction equipment. City will restrict working hours from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. XI e) No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan or, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels XI f) No Impact. The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. X11. POPULATION AND HOUSING X11 a) No Impact. This project will not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. The construction will facilitate the movement of traffic along existing segments of the roadway only. XI] b) No Impact. The project will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No housing will be affected. X11 c) No Impact. The project does not displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No structures are affected and no one will be displaced from their homes as a result of this project. XIH. PUBLIC SERVICES X111 a) No Impact. The project will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services such as police, fire, schools, parks, etc. The project will have no adverse physical impacts and will facilitate access to Hoag Hospital. XIV. RECREATION XIV a) No Impact. The project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. There are no park facilities in the immediate area of the project. XIV b) No Impact. The project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC XV a) No Impact. The project will not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The project will facilitate the movement of vehicles making a right turn onto Hospital Road from southbound Newport Boulevard: no feeder roadway will be enlarged. XV b) No Impact. The project will not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, the level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. XV c) No Impact. The project will not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. emcheck.opi- 12/30198 -20- XV d) No Impact. The project will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. In fact the project should minimize congestion and maximize the radius of the curb return, facilitating the flow of traffic. XV e) No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate emergency access. All construction will occur at the side of the road and the contractor will maintain at least one of the two lanes open to traffic at all times. XV i) No Impact. The project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. No parking is currently allowed in the proposed construction area. XV g) No Impact. The project does not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation methods. The project includes construction of a new concrete sidewalk and contains provision for a greater roadway width to include a bike lane. XV 1. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS XVI a) No Impact. The project does not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. No wastewater treatment will be required of this project. XVI b) No Impact. The project will not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. XVI c) No Impact. The project will not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. The project only requires a modification of existing facilities. XVI d) No Impact. The project has sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing city facilities and no new or expanded entitlements needed. XVI e) No Impact. The project will not require any wastewater treatment. XVI f) No Impact. The project is served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the projects solid waste disposal needs. The bulk of all material from the project, asphalt, concrete, and conduit will be recycled at various facilities. XVI g) Less Than Significant Impact. The project complies with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The project specifications stipulate that `Non- reinforced concrete and asphalt wastes generated from the job site shall be disposed of at a facility that crushes such materials for reuse. Excess soil and other recyclable solid wastes shall not be disposed of at a sanitary landfill. The contractor shall maintain monthly tonnage records of total solid waste generated and solid wastes disposed of at a sanitary landfill. The Contractor shall report said tonnage monthly to the Engineer on a form provided by the engineer and provide appropriate confirmation documentati on from the recycling facility." XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE XVII. a) Less than significant impact with mitigation. The City will create 0.06 acres of wetlands adjacent to the site and re- establish the native grasses disturbed by the construction. The City will also remove non - native vegetation and monitor the site for a period of five years. The re- establishment of the native grasses will mitigate the impact of the existing 0.06 acres disturbed during construction. The proposed project is not likely to adversely affect any special status plant or wildlife species. The project area does not contain any special status plan species. No special states wildlife species were observed on site, nor does the site provide habitat suitable for special status species. Grading shall be clearly marked on site during construction and vegetation removal and a biological monitor shall be present during all activities involved in removal of wetland or riparian vegetation or excavation en, check.oly9 -: _30/98 -21- adjacent to waters of the U.S. to ensure that impacts to wetland and riparian habitat do not exceed the limits of grading. All construction slopes shall be permanently stabilized to prevent post- construction erosion and the discharge of silt. XVII b) The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. XVII c) The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. RELATED DOCUMENTS Attached are related documents from the following agencies and City consultant. • Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board Permit Application • Department of Fish and Game Correspondence • Department of the Army Correspondence • Biological Assessment Report by Ultrasystems Environmental • Archaeological and Paleontological Evaluation Report and Mitigation Plan envcheck.,T,,! -1'- ,30/98 -22- ' *Please refer to "Section 401 Water Quality Standards Certification Fee Schedule" to determine fee. �r 1 " California Regional Water iity Control Board Santa Ana Region Office Address: Phone: (909) 782 -4130 3737 Main 5 treet, 5 uite 500 Fax: (909) 781 -628E; Riverside, CA 92501 -3348 htip://www.swycb.ca-Rov/r\%,ocif� 401 Coordinator: Adam F ischer (909) 320 -6363 Instructions: Provide all information on the form that applies to your project. Filling out this form is rot required; a cover letter that includes this information is acceptable (including all the information descri'0-: / in this form will expedite the processing of your request). An electronic copy of this form in Word972c:' or PDF is available at the following website: www.swrcb,ca.2ov/rwacb8/btnd/401.htmi. Attach additio: . sheets as necessary. An incomplete application will delay the processing or receipt of the 401 certification. F_ APPLICANT I -- Name Robert Stein r -- Title Principal Civil Engineer I Company City of Newport Beach Address 3300 Newport Boulevard Ir_ City /State /Zip Code Newport Beach CA 92658 I Telephone Number (949) 644 -3322 I -r Fax Number (949) 644 -3308 _.i E -mail Address rstein(rDcity newport- beach.ca.us r AGENT (consultant)* ,) I Name Ron Brost r 3 � ? • ^' Title Consultant .., .� �� Company W.G Zimmerman Engineering Inc. / r rJ, Address 801 Pacific Coast Highway City/State /Zip Code Seal Beach, CA 90740 Telephone Number (562) 254 -0082 Ext. 17 te Fax Number (562) 594 -8549 ,. E -mail Address rlbmstRwgze.com *Complete only if applicable FILING FEE* rr_ fi4 - Amount Previous( Paid, $500.00 Additional: $1,435.00 Is it attached'? _X des X no ' *Please refer to "Section 401 Water Quality Standards Certification Fee Schedule" to determine fee. �r 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (a,6 "Instructions for Filling Out the Water Quality .standards Certification Application" for types of information needed). Also, please refer to "Contents of a Complete Section 401 Certification Application" for any clarification on items required. Project Title: Newport Boulevard Right turn Lane onto Hospital Road Purpose /Goal: Widen Newport Boulevard south -bound right turn lane and construct a 5.9 meter graded park.cay- Project Activities: Widening Newport Boulevard for a 4.3 meter south bound right turn lane and a 5.9 meter graded parkway which requires the deep drainage area on the west side to be graded with a fill Is ope. Is the fill /excavation or dredge activity for which 401 certification is sought part of a larger plan of development? yes X no Proposed Schedule for fill /excavation or dredging activity (ies) (start-up, duration, and completion dates): _Stan November 1, 2004 approximately 60 working days Completion February 9, 2005. If till excavation or dredge activity is plan of development, proposed schedule for that larger development (start -up, duration, and completion dates): Project location (If fill/excavation or dredge activity is part of a plan of development, a map of suitable quality and detail of the entire project site should be included): City or Area Newport Beach County Orange Lon_itude /Latitude 117° 55' 41" W/ 330 37' 32" N To.mship /Range /Section/QuadrangleT6S R10W_Sec.28 Total size of area to be impacted by fill /excavation or dredge activity 0.06 acres 187 linear feet (if appropriate) Total size of entire project area (including larger plan of development, where applicable) RECEIVING WATER* Name of Affected Water body(ies) and type(s) of receiving water body(ies) The project site is a deep drainage ditch_ that contains_ less that 0.06 acres of wetlands type vegetation growing alon,• a concrete V ditch. Is receiving water(s) within the San Jacinto Watershed? yes X no Major Tributary(ies) None FILL /EXCAVATED* AREA Indicate in ACRES and LINEAR FEET (where appropriate) the proposed waters of the United States to be impacted, and identify the impact(s) as permanent and/or temporary for each water body type listed below: Welland 0 acres of permanent 0 acres of temporary impact 0 _ linear feet of permanent 0 linear feet of temporary impact Riparian 0 acres of permanent 0 acres of temporary impact 0_ linear feet of permanent _0 linear feet of temporary impact Streambed .06 acres of permanent _0 acres of temporary impact 187 linear feet of permanent _O linear feet of temporary impact Lake 0, acres of permanent _0 acres of temporary impact 0 linear feet of permanent 0 linear feet of temporary impact Ocean ,0 acres of permanent, 0 acres of temporary impact 0 linear feet of permanent 0 linear feet of temporary impact Indicate type(s) of material proposed to be discharged in waters of the United States: The flow quantity and quality will not change from the existing condition. The discharge is not contaminated. Discharge may contain very low concentrations of suspended sediments. DREDGE VOLUME Indicate in CUBIC YARDS the proposed waters of the United States to be impacted. 0 cubic yards Indicate type(s) of material proposed to be discharged in waters of the United States: N;A Note: Dredging generally includes removing sediment in deeper water to increase the depth. Impacts to beneficial uses are best described by the volume ojsed ment discharged Dredging typically occurs to jaciluate navigation andjor aggregate extraction in marine waters. +� 3 FEDERAL PERMIT File No-(s) (if known) No. 200401128 -WJC Individual - list Corps control number Nationwide — list permit number Does the project require any other Federal Application(s), Notification(s) or Correspondence? - yes (attach copy(ies)) _X no (attach detailed explanation) CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) Indicate CEQA document (submit final or draft copy if available *) and Lead Agency: Notice of Exemption Has the document been certified/approved, or has a Notice of Exemption been filed? No If yes. date of approval/filing: If no, expected approval/filing date: _911104 If exempt, list section that applies (cite code) and explain exemption: Section 15301, Class 1 (c) * Note: ample time must be provided to the Regional Board to properly review a final copy of valid CEQA documentation before certification can occur. THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES Please list the expected impacts and species Is the project within the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat fee area? yes X no Is a Section 7 or 10 Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service necessary? _ yes X no Has the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Sen-ice issued a Biological Opinion? yes X no If yes, list date Opinion was issued F 4 I IULN rVKIMYAC IJ ?VYAILK VUAIAl I S1APIUAKUS Please identify the pollutants that may be associated with the proposed development. Describe the short- and long -term water quality impacts on the receiving waters and downstream waters that may result from discharee of these pollutants. Please list any beneficial uses (as defined in the Basin Plan) of the receiving water(s) and downstream water(s) that may be lost or impacted through project implementation. What are the proposed mitigation measures to limit impacts on water quality standards in receiving water(s) and also downstream water(s)? List the avoidance or alternative measures considered (if described in CEQA document, please reference page number). Please indicate if no such measures were considered. Project will be conducted under the NPDES SWPPP General Permit. Standard BMP's NN,ill be implemented. FILL /EXCAVATION AND DREDGE MITIGATION (Indicate in ACRES and LINEAR FEET (where appropriate) the total quantity of waters of the United States proposed to be created, restored, enhanced and/or preserved for purposes of providing compensatory mitigation and indicate the water body type). Water Body Type Created Restored Enhanced Preserved Streanrbed 0.06 Acres Other proposed compensatory mitigation related to fill/excavation and dredge activities (e.g., mitigation banks) (omit if not applicable): Horn many acres of proposed mitigation area are considered waters of the United States? 0.06 Acres Location of compensatory mitigation site(s) (attach map of suitable quality and detail): City or Area CRV of Newport Beach County Orange Loneimde /Latitude_1170 55'41" WL330 37' 32" N Township/Range T6S. RIOW, Sec. 28 Will a mitigation plan be prepared in accordance with the Army Corps of Engineers' guidelines and submitted to the Regional Board office? Mitigation Plans Attached Ji r es no t CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT. OF FISH AND GAME (CDFG) STREAMBL. XLTERATION AGREEMENT Agreement issued _ yes (attach copy) X_ no Applying for Agreement _ yes (attach copy) X_ no Exempt X yes —no If exempt from a Streambed Alteration Agreement, state why See attached letter of April 14, 2004. The oroiect 1) does not substantially divert, obstruct. or change anynatural flow or bed, channel, or bank of river, stream, or lake or 2) use material from a streambed or 3) substantailly adversely effect fish or wildlife resources DEWATERING PERMIT Will zroundwater dewatering be necessary? —yes X no If so, .what is the proposed method of disposal of the dewatered wastewater? Has an NPDES permit for dewatering discharges to surface waters already been obtained? yes X no Dewatering permit number COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Permit issued _yes (attach copy) X no Applying for permit yes (attach copy) X no Exempt X yes —no If exempt from a Coastal Development Permit, state why r �t STORM WATER PERMIT STATUS* Obtained storm water permit Filed Notice of Intent with the SWRCB yes X no yes X no _ date Prepared Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) _ yes X no If you believe that a Storm Water permit is not necessary, state why Cut- will file an Notice of Notice of Intent Qnce contract is awarded Contractor winning this contract tvilLprepore S W P P P Please list (Best Management Practices) BMPs that will be used to minimize impacts to water quality standards (i.e., water quality and beneficial uses) during and after construction. F m;'on control fend cons olled areas for cleaning and rime dor_vp operatiuons ca�,mre or vacumm- u w'tter contaminated debris Please discuss BMP maintenance and monitoring activities and duration, including the parry(ies) responsible for long-term maintenance of any BMP installed. If maintenance and monitoring will be provided through another agency /party, submit a letter from that agency /parry demonstrating that an agreement for such long terra maintenance /monitoring has been or will be reached. Conrractor will initiate and maintain B M P s under inspection ,bv City staff, If project is a new development within the San Jacinto Watershed (i.e., coverage under SWRCB's general permit not obtained prior to January 19, 2001) coverage under Order No. 01 -34 "Watershed -wide Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water Discharges Associated with New Developments in the San Jacinto Watershed" is required. Please visit our website at http: /hvww.swreb.ca. ovlrww cb8l and click on the "Adopted Orders" button or go directly to the "Adopted Orders" web page at ht tp:// www. swrcb.ca.govlrwcicb8/html/adopted orders.html for more information on the Regional Board's Order No. 01 -34 "Watershed -wide Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water Discharges Associated with New Developments in the San Jacinto Watershed ". To view a map of the San Jacinto Watershed, please visit httl)://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwgcb8/html/san iacinto watershed.html. Applicant's Signature or Agent) i �3 -31 -04 Date California R. -, ional Water Quality (jntrol Board Santa Ana Region s . Terry Tamminen 3737 Main Street. Suite 500. Riverside, California 92501 -3348 Arnold Schwamnegger Senelnp, for (951) 782 -4130 • Fax (951) 781 -6288 Gorcnm Ln vir onnrenml hl1palwwwswrcb.ca.gov 1nvgcb8 11r oleclion (i F August 16, 2004 RECEIVED AUG 1 J 2004 3U9UCWORKSDEPARTMENT ',1TY0FNpNpnFlT9EACN Bob Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659 -8915 NOTIFICATION OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION FOR 401 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS CERTIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSED NEWPORT BLVD. EIGHT TORN LANE TO HOSPITAL ROAD, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH: FILE NUMBER 302004- 20 -APF Dear Mr. Stein: Thank you for your submittal, received on August 6, 2004. Regional Board staff considers your application to be for a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Standards Certification (Certification). After reviewing the submitted items, Regional Board staff has determined that your application is incomplete for the following reason(s): X Application form is not completely filled out. F- A full, technically - accurate description, including the propose and final goal of the entire activity [23 CCR Section 3856(b)]. F Complete project description [23 CCR Section 3856(h)]. r Identification of the federal licenselpermit (Le. agency, type, NWP number, file nwriber) [23 CCR Section 3856(c)]. F- Copies of federal application, notifications, agency - applicant correspondence, or signed statement that none is applicable [23 CCR Section 3856(d)]. Copies of any final or (if not final) draft federal, state, or local licenses, F- permits, or agreements concemutg the project (i.e. ACOE and/or Streambed Alteration Agreement). If none are available, a list of those being sought [23 CCR Section 3856(e)]. California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper City of Newport Beach - 2 - August 16, 2004 Newport Blvd. Right Tutu F A correct fee deposit (typically $500) [23 CCR Section 3856(8)]. A draft or final CEQA document (23 CCR Sec. 3856(01. Note: Per the Pemrit X Streamlining Act, final CEQA documentation cannot be required for a complete application; however, a final documentation must be reviewed before taking In relation to the above, the following issues must be addressed in order to determine whether or not certification can be issued: I ) The application form used is for authorization to discharge dredge or 511 according to the terms and conditions of Water Quality Order No. 2004 - 004 -DWQ. Order No. 2004- 004 -DWQ is only applicable for discharges of dredge or fill to waters deemed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to be outside of their jurisdiction. The letter from the Corps, enclosed with Your application, states that the affected water body is within their jurisdiction. Therefore, authorization to discharge will occur through the issuance of a Certification. Although your application largely satisfies reporting requirements, please complete and submit the enclosed application for Certification for clarification in our records. 2) Fees for Certifications are assessed on a $500 base fee plus the greater of linear feet or acreage of impacts to waters of the State. Based on 187 linear feet of impact, the total fee due is S!,435. Please understand that it is your responsibility to submit any requested information in a timely manner. The review period starts only after the receipt of a complete application as defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 23 §3856 as outlined above. Additional information may be requested in order to provide for a thorough review of your project. When submitting future materials related to this application, please reference the project name and file number shown in the subject line above. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (951) 320 -6363 or via electronic mail at afischer@rbS.swrcb.ca.gov. Sincerely, Adam P. Fischer 401 Certification Coordinator Enclosure cc (w /o enclosure): US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Office APF :401 /Nmpori blvd rt turn— California Environmental Protection Agency p�°a Recycled Paper State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME http://www.dfg.ca.gov 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 467 -4201 April 14, 2004 Mr. Rich Edmonston City of Newport Beach Public Works Department Newport Beach, California 92658 01, ti-AOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Govemor �pR Notification of Proposed Lake or Stream Alteration No. 1600 -2004- 0147 -R5 (Your ref.: Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road Project) Dear Mr. Edmonston: This letter is in response to the Streambed Alteration Notification Package (No. 1600- 2004- 0147 -R5) that you submitted to the Department of Fish and Game (Department) for the Newport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road Project, impacting an Unnamed Creek Channel. The project site is located at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange. The project proposes the widening of Newport Boulevard to provide for a 4.3 meter southbound right -turn lane, resulting in the realignment of an existing concrete /earthen drainage and reinforced concrete pipe to provide for drainage at the bottle of the new fill and cut slopes. The project will impact approximately 0.06 acre of stream channel, of which approximately 0.02 acre are impacts to native riparian vegetation consisting of cattails (Typha domingensis). All work will be completed outside of the breeding/nesting season (March 15 -July 15); unless a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds within three days prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nesting birds shall be impacted by the project. No significant biological impacts are anticipated. Based on the Department's review of the information you submitted, the Department has determined that a Streambed or Lake Alteration Agreement is not required for your project or activity because the project or activity 1) does not substantially divert, obstruct, or change and natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake, or 2) use material from a streambed, or 3) substantially adversely effect existing fish or wildlife resources. As a result, you may begin your project or activity if you have obtained all other necessary permits. If the project or activity changes from that stated in the notification package above, a new notification shall be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game. Nothing in this letter authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or property, nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances. This letter does not constitute and Department's endorsement of the Mr. Rich Edmonston April 14, 2004 Page 2 proposed project or activity, or assures the Department's concurrence with permits required form other agencies. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at (858) 637 -5510. Sincerely, )c/k (p Cyr ( //.�7p,�j Donna L. Cobb �Yl Environmental Scientist Habitat Conservation Planning, Region 5 cc: Ms. Jennifer Weiland, UltraSystems Environmental T � $ri DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O BOX 532711 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIIa 9D0.53 -2325 June 10, 2004 REPLY :b AT EWIONOF', Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch Ultrasystems Environmental, INC Attention: Jennifer Weiland 100 Pacifica, Suite 250 Irvine, California 92618 Dear Ms. Weiland: i RECEIVED uem' ULTR,ASYSTLW3 ENYLROIVMENTfiL Reference is made to your letter (No. 200401128 -WJC) dated February .10, 2004. for a Department of the Army Permit to dredge and fill 0.037 -acre of waters of the United States by expanding the right Iane of Newport Blvd at the northwest corner of Hospital Road and Newport Blvd. (A 8.6 feet wide by 187 linear feet area of permanent impacts), in an unnamed tributary to the Newport Bay in Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Based on the information furnished in your letter, we have determined that yo it proposed project does discharge dredged or fill material into a water of the United States or an adjacent wetland. 'Therefore, the project is subject to our jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and a Section 404 permit is required from our off: ce. The proposed project complies with the terms and conditions of our Nationwide Permit (NWT) 39: Residential, Commercial, and Institutional Developments. Since your proposed project impacts of 0.037 -acre of non - wetland waters of the U.S. is not greats than 0.10 acre of waters of the U.S. a Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) will not be required. Therefore, your projects is verified to commence, provided you have received thexequired certification from the State.Water Resource Control Broad Section 401 o.-' the Clean Water Act, Water Quality Certification. Pursuant to N WP 39(i) a post construction notification shall be submitted within 30 days post construction with th,? following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the permittee; (2) The location of the work; (3) A description of the work; (4) The type and acreage of the loss of waters of the U.S.; (5) The type and acreage of any compensatory mitigation used to offset the loss of waters of the U.S. _I)_ If you have any questiorLs, please contact James Chuang of my staff at (213) 452 -3372. ancerely, Mark Durham Chief, South Coast Section Regulatory Branch A BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE NEWPORT BLVD RIGHT TURN LANE AT HOSPITAL ROAD CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA June 2004 Prepared for. W.G. ZIMMERMAN ENGINEERING, INC. 801 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200 Seal Beach, California 90740 (562) 594 -8589 Prepared by: ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL 100 Pacifica, Suite 250 Irvine, California 92618 (949) 788 -4900 (949) 788 -4901 (fax) www.ultrasystems.co m BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this biological assessment is to provide technical information and to review the proposed project in sufficient detail to determine to what extent the proposed project may affect threatened, endangered, or proposed species. The biological assessment is prepared in accordance with legal requirements found in Section 7 (a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S. C 1536(c)) and with Federal Highway Administration and California Department of Transportation regulation, policy and guidance. 1.1 Project Background And Description The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department's is proposing an intersection improvement project, which involves construction of a right -turn at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road (proposed project). The proposed project site lies within the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) right -of -way; therefore, the proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications, dated July 1999, and Caltrans Standard Plans, dated July 1999. The project consists of widening Newport Boulevard to provide for a 4.3 meter (14.1 -foot) southbound right -turn lane (with curb and gutter) and a 5.9 meter (19.4 -foot) graded parkway area which requires the deep drainage area on the west side of Newport Boulevard to be graded with a fill slope for most of the area along with a small amount of cut slope at the southerly end near Hospital Road and along the Caltrans right -of -way line. The existing concrete ditch and reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) drain pipe in the deep drainage area will be realigned and reconstructed to provide for drainage at the bottle of the new fill and cut slopes. The regarded area will be hydroseeded at the end of the project to provide for slope stability and erosion control. Additionally, the curb return and traffic signals at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road will be reconstructed to provide for the widened right -turn lane. Detailed construction drawings can be found in Appendix A (Construction Drawings). The area to receive biological analysis is approximately 213 meters by 27 meters (90 feet by 700 feet) in size on the west side of Newport Boulevard, adjacent to the existing roadway. 1.2 Project Location The project site is located in western Orange County, in the City of Newport Beach; see Figure 1 (Regional Location Map). The project site is depicted on the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5- minute series topographic quadrangle Newport Beach' (Township 6 South, Range 10 West, northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 28, 33° 37' 32" N, 1170 55' 41" W); see Figure 2 (Topographic Map). Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road and involves an area approximately 20 meters wide by 240 meters long (65 feet wide by 787 feet long) consisting of the area from the Newport Boulevard southbound traffic lane to the Caltrans west right -of -way line and from 5 meters north of the centerline of Hospital Road to 240 meters (787 feet) northerly; see Figure 3 (Local Vicinity Map). This property is generally bounded on the east and south by residential properties and on the west and north by public facilities (health care). '/ Newport Beach, California Topographic 7.5- minute Series Quadrangle Maps. Source: All Topo Maps. Contact: IGAGE Mapping Corporation, P.O. Box 56596, Salt Lake City, UT 84158 -9912. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 2 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 3 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 1A , '84 11?O5S00" W -[ - ���xrJ!. r )S7� ■ • f` _ . \ SL .im.� -. ' - __ -,JQ9 N, i F1: [ 3:• >, ST ���� -. (,er Tanks; `{ �. JA `. V`'',, /,,�' /•.:' .I.� I,:1�� 47,; per`. -. 33 3, 32` 11. 117055'41" W 1 � •�M�mO'iat.1'�sp��a JKI Mal -oijC/ .. city Q. r- 117 °56'00" \N '�VG'384 117 °55'00" b`U 1.5` /x° 0 1000 FEET 0 SOO r� 1000rn r� —t✓'-f -- -i Printed firmTOPO ! ©1999Wildi]owerPmdurtiow("w .topo.com) Figure 2 Topographic Map Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 4 of16 F od�, tzo,i A 10 :- - AV W 1 "Ith St Fa,,id s I. o. BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 113 Cliff X-" - .-- Propb�Qd- ProjeEl - ^ C� on Hoag Hospital 0' "V Coa.-;f H ..Ivy 'N ..Mmpt kikol" qp tv \ % im ai Exhibit 3 Local Vicinity Map Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 5 of16 ;dR, A 5 Y k% Exhibit 3 Local Vicinity Map Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 5 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 1.3 Project Proponent W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc., under the authority of the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department, and in compliance with federal and State regulatory requirements, will be the contractor undertaking the proposed action. The contact information is as follows: W.G. Zimmerman Engineering, Inc. 801 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 200 Seal Beach, CA 90740 Point of Contact: Bob A. Warren, Project Manager Phone: (562) 594 -8589 Fax: (562) 594 -8549 2.0 SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION TO DATE The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was consulted to obtain a species list of sensitive or federally listed species with the potential to occur on or immediately adjacent to the project site. Based on the information provided to the USFWS (site photos and specific project location), it was determined that the project area does not appear to support any sensitive or federally listed species .2 A copy of the USFWS correspondence /determination can be found in Appendix B (Agency Consultation). Consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) was initiated because there is a drainage ditch on site (containing cattails) subject to both agencies' jurisdiction. The Corps reviewed the proposed project' and determined that it does discharge dredged or fill material into a water of the United States or an adjacent wetland (see Appendix B, Agency Consultation, for a copy of the Corps determination letter). Therefore, the project is subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and since the proposed project complies with the terms and conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 39, and the impacts are less than 0.10 acre of water of the U.S., a pre- construction notification will not be required. However, prior to the commencement of construction, the proposed project will need to be certified (Water Quality Certification) by the State Water Resource Control Board under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. CDFG reviewed the proposed project" and determined that a Streambed or Lake Alteration Agreement is not required because the project 1) does not substantially divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake, or 2) use material from a streambed, or 3) substantially adversely effect existing fish or wildlife resources (see Appendix B, Agency Consultation, for a copy of the CDFG determination letter). Z/ Snyder, Jonathan. 2004. Personal communication. USFWS, Carlsbad, California. March 2, 2004. 3/ Army Corps of Engineers. June 10, 2004. (Letter to Ms. Jennifer Weiland, UltraSystems Environmental, 100 Pacifica, Suite 250, Irvine, CA 92618). Subject: Corps Jurisdiction of the Proposed Project Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road. °/ California Department of Fish and Game. April 14, 2004. (Letter to Ms. Jennifer Weiland, UltraSystems Environmental, 100 Pacifica, Suite 250, Irvine, CA 92618). Subject: Notification of Proposed Lake or Stream Alteration No. 1600 -2004- 0147 -R5 (Newport Blvd. Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road)_ Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 6 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 3.0 SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES For the purpose of this BA, the terms "Listed Species' and "Candidate, Sensitive, and Species of Concern" are defined as species that are: LISTED SPECIES Listed or proposed for listing as Threatened (FT, FPT) or Endangered (FE, FPE) under the federal Endangered Species Act (federal ESA) (50 CFR 17.11 [listed animals] and 50 CFR 17.12 [listed plants], and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species); and Listed by the State of California as Threatened (ST) or Endangered (SE) under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (14 CCR 670.5), CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN • Federal Candidates for listing as Threatened or Endangered (FC) under the federal ESA (58 FR 188: 51144 - 51190, September 30, 1993); • Fully protected (FP) animals in California (CDFG Code, Sections 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians], • Federal Species of Concern (FSC) or California Species of Special Concern (CSC); • Plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (California Fish And Game (CDFG) Code, Section 1900 et seq.); • Plants considered by California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be "rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California" (generally Species from CNPS Lists 1B and 2); and The species considered in this document are presented in Table 1 (Listed, Candidate, Sensitive, and Species of Concern Species Potentially Occurring in the Project Area). TABLE 1 LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA Common Name I Scientific Name I Status General LISTED SPECIES PLANTS Habitat Description Habitat P esenf Absent'; Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 7 of16 San Fernando Chorizanthe parryi FC Occurs in coastal scrub. A Valley spineflower var. fernandina SE Formerly known from southern CNPS California. Requires sandy 1B soils. Elevation range: 3 — 1035 m (9 — 3400 ft). Blooming period: April to June. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 7 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT TABLE LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA Common Name Scientific Name Status General'Habitat:Description I Habitat I Present (P) r(A) iAbsent all marsh bird's Cordylanthus FE Occurs in coastal salt marsh A 4 beak maritimus ssp. SE and coastal dunes. Limited to maritimus CNPS the higher zones of the salt 1B marsh habitat. Elevation range: 0 — 30 m (0 — 98 ft). Blooming period: May — October. WILDLIFE San Diego fairy Branchinecta FE Endemic to San Diego and A shrimp sandiegonensis Orange County mesas. Requires vernal pools. California black rail Laterallus FSC Mainly inhabits salt- marshes A jamaicensis ST bordering larger bays. coturniculus Occurs in tidal salt marsh heavily grown to pickleweed; also in fresh -water and brackish marshes, all at low elevation. light- footed clapper Rallus longirostris FE Found in salt marshes A rail levipes SE traversed by tidal sloughs, where cordgrass and pickleweed are the dominant vegetation. Requires dense growth of either pickleweed or cordgrass for nesting or escape cover; feeds on mollusks. California least tern Sterna antillarum FE Nests along the coast from San A brown SE Francisco bay south to northern Baja California. Colonial breeder on bare or sparsely vegetated, flat substrates: sand beaches, alkali flats, landfills, or paved areas. Belding's savannah Passerculus SE Inhabits coastal salt marshes, A sparrow sandwichensis from Santa Barbara south beldingi through San Diego County. Nests in salicornia on and about margins of tidal flats. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 8 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT TABLE 1 LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA Common Name Scientific Name Status General Habitat Description I Habitat Present (P) /(A) Absent coastal California Poliophla Fr Obligate, permanent resident of A gnatcatcher californica CSG coastal sage scrub below 2500 californica ft in Southern California. Inhabits coastal sage scrub in and washes, on mesas & slopes. Not all areas classified as coastal sage scrub are occupied. western snowy Charadrius FT Federal listing applies only to A plover alexandrinus CSC the nesting pacific coastal nivosus population. Inhabits sandy beaches, salt pond levees & shores of large alkali lakes. Needs sandy, gravelly or friable soils for nesting _ CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN i PLANTS -- — — chaparral sand- Abronia villosa CNPS Inhabits chaparral and coastal A verbena var. aurita 1B scrub habitats. Requires sandy areas. Elevation range: 80- 1600 m (262 — 5250 ft). Blooming period: January to Au ust. aphanisma Aphanisma CNPS Occurs in coastal bluff scrub, A blitoides 1B coastal dunes, and coastal scrub. Found on bluffs and slopes near the ocean in sandy or clay soils. In steep decline on the islands and the mainland. Elevation range: 1- 305 m (3 — 1000 ft.). Blooming eriod: March to June. Coulter's saltbush Atriplex coulteri CNPS Occurs in coastal bluff scrub, A 1B coastal dunes, coastal scrub, valley, and foothill grassland. Found on ocean bluffs, ridgetops, as well as alkaline low places. Elevation range: 10 — 440 m (32 — 1440 feet). Blooming period: March to October. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 9 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT TABLE 1 LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA Common Name I Scientific Name r Status General Habitat Description Habitat I Present I !I{ (P)/(A) iAbsent South coast I Atriplex paclfica CNPS i Occurs in coastal scrub. coastal A saltscale 1B bluff scrub, playas, and chenopod scrub. Requires alkali soils. Elevation range: 1 — 500 m (3 — 1640 ft). Blooming period: March to October. Davidson's saltscale Atriplex serenana CNPS Occurs in coastal bluff scrub, A var. davidsonii 113 and coastal scrub. Requires alkaline soil. Elevation range: 3 -250 m (9 — 820 ft). Blooming period: April to October. southern tarplant Centromadia CNPS Inhabits marshes and swamps A parryi ssp. 1B (margins), valley and foothill australis grassland, vernal pools. Found from Southern California and Baja California. Often found in disturbed sites near the coast; also in alkaline soils sometimes with saltgrass; also vernal pools. Elevation range: 0 — 425 m (0 — 1390 ft). Blooming eriod: May to November. many- stemmed Dudleya CNPS Found in chaparral, coastal A dudleya multicaulis 1B scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Endemic to southern California. Grows in heavy, often clayey soils or grassy slopes. Elevation range: 0 — 790 m (0 — 2590 ft). Blooming eriod: April to June. Los Angeles Helianthus nuttallii CNPS Occurs in marshes and A sunflower ssp. parishii 1A swamps (coastal salt and freshwater). Historical from southern California. Elevation range: 5 — 1675 m (16 — 5500 ft). Blooming period: August to October. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 10 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT TABLE 1 LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA _ Name TS cteiN I GeCommon nera► Habitat Descnptlon I Habitat I Present I I (P) /(A) rk �• i Absent Coulter's goldfields Lasthenia glabrata I CNPS Inhabits coastal salt marshes A ssp. coulteri 1B playas, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Usually found on alkaline soils in playas, sinks, and grasslands. Elevation range: 1 — 1400 m (3 — 4590 ft). Blooming period: February to June. Robinson's pepper- Lepidium I CNPS Inhabits chaparral and coastal A grass virginicum var. 1B scrub. Requires dry soils, robinsonii shrubland. Elevation range: 1- 945 m (3 — 3100 ft). Blooming period: January to July. mud nama Nama CNPS 2 Found in marshes and A stenocarpum swamps. Inhabits lakeshores, riverbanks, and intermittently wet areas. Elevation range: 5 — 500 m (16 — 1640 ft). Blooming period: Janua to Jul . prostrate navarretia Navarretia FSC Occurs in coastal scrub, valley A prostrata CNPS and foothill grassland, and 1B vernal pools. Requires alkaline soils in grassland, or in vernal pools. Elevation range: 15 — 700 m (49 — 2300 ft). Blooming period: A ril to Jul . coast woolly -heads Nemacaulis CNPS Found in coastal dunes. A denudata var. 1B Elevation range: 0 —100 m (0 denudata — 328 ft). Blooming period: April to Se tember. estuary seablite Suaeda esteroa CNPS Inhabits marshes and swamps. A 1B Requires coastal salt marshes in clay, silt, and sand substrates. Elevation range: 0 — 5 m (0 — 16 ft). Blooming eriod: Jul to October. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 11 ofl6 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT TABLE 1 LISTED, CANDIDATE, SENSITIVE, AND SPECIES OF CONCERN SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE PROJECT AREA Common Name i Scientific Name Status Gene ral Habitat Habitat Description Present I (P) / (A) Absent i VVILVLIPC California imitator Locally Inhabits coastal lagoons, A brackishwater snail ronia importan estuaries and salt marshes, t from Sonoma County south to San Diego county. Found only in permanently submerged areas in a variety of sediment types; able to withstand a wide range of salinities. monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus Locally Winter roost sites extend along A importan the coast from northern t Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico. Roosts located in wind - protected tree groves (eucalyptus, monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and water sources nearby. coast (San Diego) Phrynosoma CSC Inhabits coastal sage scrub and A horned lizard coronatum chaparral in arid and semi -arid (blainvillei) climate conditions. Prefers friable, rocky, or shallow sandy soils. Absent [A] means no further work needed. Present [P] means general habitat is present and species may be present. 3.1 Critical Habitat The action addressed within this BA does not fall within Critical Habitat for any species. 4.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY Literature Review UltraSystems reviewed available literature to identify any special status plants, wildlife, or communities known from the vicinity of the project site. The review included California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants' and the California Department 5/ M.W. Skinner and B.M. Pavlik, ads. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plans of California. — Electronic Inventory. Sacramento, CA: California Native Plant Society. Available at: http://www.northcoast.com/—cnps/cqi-bin/cnps/sensinv cqi. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 12 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT of Fish and Game's (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB)6 for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute series topographic quadrangle. The results of the literature review indicate the potential occurrence of 16 special status plants species, 2 of which are listed; and 10 special status wildlife species, 7 of which are listed. Table 1 presents a compilation of the special status species known from the region and summarizes their agency status designations, habitat requirement, and whether or not suitable habitat exists within the proposed project site. Field Reconnaissance UltraSystems biologist (Ms. Jennifer Weiland) conducted a general biological assessment of the project site to determine whether special status species would be affected by the proposed project. The site assessment was conducted on February 6, 2004, from approximately 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. The weather on the survey date can be characterized as cool temperature of about 55° F; scattered clouds; zero precipitation; and slightly breezy. A jurisdictional determination was conducted on March 23, 2004, from approximately 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. The weather on this survey date can be characterized as cool temperature of about 61° F; scattered clouds; zero precipitation; and slightly breezy. Botanical Surveys Botanical surveys consisted of general searches over the subject property. Plants identified in the field were recorded in field notes to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Plants not recognized in the field were collected and subsequently identified from keys, descriptions and illustrations in the Jepson Manual' Wildlife Surveys General surveys for amphibians and reptiles included pedestrian surveys over the entire site by walking meandering transects searching for surface - active diurnal species. Birds were identified both visually and aurally. Techniques used to determine the presence of mammals included using active searches for diurnal species, and identifying diagnostic mammal sign (i.e., scat, tracks, prey remains, dust bowls, burrows, and trails). Jurisdictional Determination The drainage ditch that bisects the subject property was measured — total length and average width — and characterized in sections, such as cement -lined "v- ditch" or natural - bottomed drainage to determine extent of jurisdiction of the regulatory agencies. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The existing conditions described below include general site characteristics and the plant and wildlife species present. Appendix C contains an aerial and site photos that depict the current condition of the site. 6/ California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), November 3, 2003. Rarernd 3: A Database Application for the Use of the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Base. Version 3.0.3. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 7/ J. Hickman (editor). 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 13 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT The site is located at an elevation of approximately 7.6 meters (25 feet) above mean sea level. The site does not contain any native plant communities; rather, it is collection of non - native and /or ornamental plantings with a few native species interspersed. The dominant ground cover is hotentot fig (Carpobrotus sp.). The herb layer includes ivy (Hedera sp.). The shrub /tree layer includes cape honeysuckle (Tecoma capensis), pine trees (Pinus sp.), palm trees (Washingtonia sp.), and eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus sp.). No special status plant species were observed on site. The site lacks suitable habitat or is out of the known range for all of the above referenced plant species (Table 1). The subject property is bisected by a drainage, which totals 557 linear feet, 370 linear feet of which is a concrete lined V -ditch (4.5 feet wide). The remaining portion, 187 linear feet (average width of 8.6 feet), is natural- bottomed. A few sparse patches of cattails (Typha domingensis) and one stand of pampas grass (Cortaderia sp.) are growing in this section of the drainage. This drainage collects irrigation run -off from the medical facilities /housing immediately west of the subject property, and receives storm -water run -off from the roadway that runs along the east boundary. No special status wildlife species were observed at the time of the site visit. The site lacks suitable habitat or is out of the known range for all of the above referenced wildlife species (Table 1). The wildlife species observed /detected on site include, American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), and Anna's hummingbird (Ca /ypte anna). 6.0 EFFECTS 6.1 Direct Impacts 6.1.1 Vegetation Project approval and implementation would result in minor grading and cut and fill activities to accomplish meet the objective of the intersection improvement project. This would result in the loss of primarily non - native vegetation that occurs on the project site, which would be considered less than significant since this habitat type provides little value to wildlife. Grading and cut and fill activities would impact the dirt-bottom stretch of drainage that contains cattails. However, the one small patch of cattails present provides little habitat value, therefore this impact would be considered less than significant. 61.2 Wildlife The loss of the vegetation described above would result in the loss of habitat that provides nesting and foraging opportunities for common neighborhood birds. Loss of wildlife and wildlife habitat is an adverse impact. However, similar habitat occurs adjacent to the project site, and only avian species were observed, all of which are common and opportunistic. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant. 6.1.3 Special Status Plants No special status plants were observed on site; therefore, there is no impact Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 14 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 6.1.4 Special Status Wildlife No special status wildlife were observed on site nor does the site provide suitable habitat for special status species with reported occurrences in the vicinity of the project, therefore, there is no impact. 6.1.5 Impacts to Wildlife Movement No impacts to wildlife movement are expected as a result of project implementation. The proposed project lies in the midst of urban development and major thoroughfares. 6.1.6 Impacts to Critical Habitat No critical habitat exists on site; therefore, there is no impact. 6.2 Indirect Impacts 6.2.1 Noise Noise levels will increase substantially during excavation activities. These temporary noise impacts have the ability to disrupt foraging and nesting activities for local avian species. The effect of temporary construction noise on the surrounding environment is an adverse impact. However, very few wildlife species were observed on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site; therefore this impact would be considered to be less than significant. 6.3 Cumulative Impacts The impacts associated with the proposed project, when considered in conjunction with other projects (including past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects) that would impact similar biological resources, would contribute to a cumulative direct loss of the existing vegetation and wildlife habitat. The cumulative effect of the loss of vegetation associations, associated wildlife habitat, and wildlife in the region is an adverse, but less than significant impact in terms of CEQA. The project site is located in the midst of an urban developed area and provides very little habitat value. 7.0 CONSERVATION / MITIGATION MEASURES All best management practices to be followed; All construction should be accomplished between July 161h and March 14th, to avoid the nesting season of federally and state protected migratory birds. All native breeding birds, (except game birds) regardless of their listing status, are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).e Potential impacts to the breeding birds are considered significant under CEQA. Construction between March 151h and July 151h would require a pre - construction survey (within three days prior to work in the areas) by a qualified biologist to determine presence /absence of active nests within or adjacent to the project site to avoid the nesting season of federally and state protected migratory birds. If no breeding or nesting activities are detected within 200 feet of the proposed work area, construction activities may proceed. If breeding /nesting activity is confirmed, work activities within 200 feet of the active nest shall be delayed until the young birds have fledged and left the nest. a/ Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703 -711). This treaty with Canada, Mexico and Japan makes it unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, rapture, or kill migratory birds. The law applies to the removal of nests (such as swallow nests on bridaes) occuoied by miaratory birds durino the breedina season. Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 15 of16 BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT • Any other conservation /mitigation measures as required by the regulatory agencies. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND DETERMINATION The proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any special status plant or wildlife species. The footprint of the project area is less than 1.5 acres, and it does not contain any special status plant species. No special status wildlife species were observed on site, nor does the site provide habitat suitable for special status species. 9.0 LITERATURE CITED California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), November 3, 2003. Rarefind 3: A Database Application for the Use of the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Base. Version 3.0.3. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. J. Hickman (editor). 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. M.W. Skinner and B.M. Pavlik, eds. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plans of California. — Electronic Inventory. Sacramento, CrA: California Native Plant Society. Available at: http: //www.northcoast.com /-- cnps /cqi- bin /cnps /sensinv.cgi. Newport Beach, California Topographic 7.5- minute Series Quadrangle Maps. Source: All Topo Maps. Contact: (GAGE Mapping Corporation, P.O. Box 58596, Salt Lake City, UT 84158 -9912. 10.0 LIST OF CONTACTS /CONTRIBUTORS /PREPARERS Contacts Army Corps of Engineers .......................... California Department of Fish and Game . ...... Mr. Mark Durham & Ms. Crystal Marquez ................. Ms. Donna Cobb U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ........ ............................... Mr. Ken Corey & Mr. Jonathan Snyder Preparers UltraSystems Environmental, Inc......... Ms. Jennifer Weiland, Biologist/Environmental Analyst Newport Blvd. at Hospital Road Biological Assessment June 2004 5181 (W.G. Zimmerman) Page 16 016 Appendix B Agency Consultation Re: Newport Blvd. right turn lane modifications - species list reques t Jennifer Weiland From: Jonathan_D_Snyder @rl.fws.gov Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 5:10 PM To: Jennifer Weiland Subject: Re: Newport Blvd. right turn lane modifications - species list reques t Jennifer, Based on the information you have provided, the proposed project area does not appear to support any sensitive or federally listed species. If additional information becomes available or the project description changes, this determination may change. Although the area is disturbed, 1 would recommend contacting the California Department of Fish and Game and Army Corps of Engineers to determine whether permitting is required for impacts to the drainage area. Thank you for coordinating. Sincerely Jonathan Snyder 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 (760) 431 -9440 x307 jonathan_d_snyder@rl.fws.gov Jennifer Weiland <jweiland @ultrasy To: jonathan_d_snyder@fws.gov stems.com> cc: Subject: Newport Blvd. right turn lane modifications - species list reques t 03/02/2004 04:21 PM Please respond to Jennifer Weiland Hi Jonathan, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly! I am in the process of writing a 1/25/2005 Page 1 of 2 Re: Newport Blvd. right turn lane modifications - species list reques t biological assessment and would greatly appreciate a species list for the above referenced project. 1 am attaching the Appendices (less construction drawings) for your review and information. Please let me know if you require further information to generate the species list. Thanks again. Jennifer Jennifer Weiland, BiologisUEnvironmental Analyst UltraSytems Environmental. Inc. 100 Pacifica, Suite 250 Irvine, California 92618 Tel: (949) 788 -4900 ext. 243 Fax: (949) 788 -4901 Email: jweilandnultrasystems.com www.ultras),Stems.com 1/25/2005 Page 2 of 2 4`rr oE. ,p :d T \GM1 �T %SOT v .n'P!`R• _r a DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O BOX 532711 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 9OD53 -2325 June 10, 2004 RFPLYTO ATTENTION OF: Office of the Chief Regulatory Branch Ultrasystems Environmental, INC Attention: Jennifer Weiland 100 Pacifica, Suite 250 Irvine, California 92618 Dear Ms. Weiland: RECEIVED ULTKASYSTL^'M3 ENVLRONMENTfiL Reference is made to your letter (No. 200401128 -WJC) dated February 10, 2004, for a Department of the Army Permit to dredge and fill 0.037 -acre of waters of the United States by expanding the right lane of Newport Blvd at the northwest corner of Hospital Road and Newport Blvd. (A 8.6 feet wide by 187 linear feet area of permanent impacts), in an unnamed tributary to the Newport Bay in Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Based on the information furnished in your letter, we have determined that yo .ir proposed project does discharge dredged or fill material into a water of the United States or an adjacent wetland. 'Therefore, the project is subject to our jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and a Section 404 permit is required from our ofEce. The proposed project complies with the terms and conditions of our Nationwide Permit (NWP) 39: Residential, Commercial, and Institutional Developments. Since your proposed project impacts of 0.037 -acre of non - wetland waters of the U.S. is not greatar than 0.10 acre of waters of the U.S. a Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) will not be required. Therefore, your projects is verified to commence, provided you have received the.required certification from the State Water Resource Control Broad Section 401 o.° the Clean Water Act, Water Quality Certification. Pursuant to NWP 39(i) a post construction notification shall be submitted within 30 days post construction with the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the permitter; (2) The location of the work; (3) A description of the work; (4) The type and acreage of the loss of waters of the U.S.; (5) The type and acreage of any compensatory mitigation used to offset the loss of waters of the U.S. If you have any questions, please contact James Chuang of my staff at (213) 452 -3372. incerely, Mark Durharp Chief, South Coast Section Regulatory Branch State of Caiifosma -'The Resources Agency ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Covernor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME http /;ww idgc Avenue 4949 Viewr�dge Avenue San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 46? - -9 2011 April 14. 2004 Mr. Rich Edmonston City of Newport Beach Public Works Department Newport Beach. California 92658 Notification of Proposed Lake or Stream Alteration No. 1600- 2004- 0147 -R5 (four ref:: Newport Boulevard Right Turn lane at Hospital Road Project) Dear Mr. Edinonston: This letter is in response to the Streambed Alteration Notification Package (No. 1600- 2004- 0141 -R5) that you submitted to the Department of Fish and Game (Department) for the i e,wport Boulevard Right Turn Lane at Hospital Road Project. impacting an Unnamed Creek Cli fume]. The project site is located at the northwest corner Of Newpoii Boulevard and Hospital Road. in the City of Newport Beach. County o:f Orange. -I'hc lrroject proposes the widening of Newport Boulevard to provide for a 4.3 meter southbound ri`.,ht -turn lane, resulting in the realignment of an existing concrete/earthen drainage and reinforced concrete pipe to provide for drainage at the bottle of the new fill and cut slopes. The project will impact approximately 0.06 acre ofstream channel, of which approximately 0.0'2 acre arc impacts to native riparian vegetation consisting of cattails (Typha domingensis), All work will be completed outside of the breeding/nesting season (March 15 -July 15): unless a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds within three days prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nesting birds shall be impacted by the project. No significant biological impacts are anticipated. Based on the Department's review of the information you submitted. the Department has determined that a Streambed or Lake Alteration Agreement is not required for your project or activity because the project or activity 1) does not substantially divert, obstruct, or change and natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of it river, stream, or lake, or 2) use material from a Streambed, or 3) substantially adversely effect existing fish or wildlife resources. As a result, you may begin your prg1ect or activity if you have obtained all other necessary permits. If the project or activity changes from that stated in the notification package above, a new notification shalt be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game. Nothing in this letter authorizes the Operator to trespass on .uty land or property, nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal. state, or local laws or ordinances. This letter does not constitute and Department's endorsement of the Mr. Rich Edmonston April 14, 2004 Page 2 proposed project or activity, or assures the Department's concurrence with permits rcquir, d form other agencies. Ifyou have any questions regarding this matter, piease feel tree to contact me at itiS } G3? -5510. Sincerely, Donna L. Cobh Environmental Scientist Habitat Conservation Planning, Region 5 ecc Ms, Jennifer Weiland, UltraSystems Environmental Appendix C Aerial & Site Photographs IY m ON IN AL Q � w Cj two tk fill i:. -. • . � b '1, s. � 1 r w ✓ 1.p ' i `�;.' ; ;:. i ; „ .�.�., ;r. r. ���' t r `` _ �.t ���' .r�c � ._ " - _ t' `� i . .`Q"��j�i `i( :. [ c 1 .. t 9: _ :� �:: •j . ._ ��, ,k ,E, - . ,. � :c. • y �- ��. � .. _p r _, • t'; w:'. t \ � >r, -` .� _ __ . .,r..__.. y,, � � C'•}, �v i�hy�� �+ ^� -ice. A. ,� ., � �� � " A0 I f7 AZ .� 1 �. l' :.:..� . f ..� _ l,..ri .,, '.� � V `�. i_R �`� h'�i ski _ �y,• ''. r_ �. � y _�� _'� . _ r i �j � i' � r. ;�'.� _ '� .:r =yk� .J y. �.. � �� �' �� ` � ll ,'3 � �� . S .. t•�. �: 11�1,ti \ �� '. i I'�, i `. \ � i ' i Ii .� I i i 00 1 40 IA IY . . . . . . . . .... lN S. tot., 7�i d C O N C O V 7 N C O V w O R C 7 O L Y tN d 3 L O C O] C O m d O) m C w O C O V d N .a d C C d d A r O O L hl