The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12 - OCTA-Measure M Conservation Site InventoryCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 12 January 27, 2009 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager's Office Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager 949/644 -3002 or dkiff@city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Policy Direction regarding the OCTA /Measure M Habitat Conservation Site Inventory ISSUE: What properties should the City ask to be placed on the Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) Measure M Habitat Conservation Site Inventory? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager to ask OCTA to add the following sites in Newport Beach to its Habitat Conservation Site Inventory: • The Banning Ranch (purchase and/or habitat improvement); • The Beach and Bay Mobile Home Park, if available for sale and if legally closed (purchase and /or habitat improvement); • Upper Buck Gully (habitat improvement site); and • Properties in Lower Buck Gully that are held by private property owners (purchase or habitat improvement). DISCUSSION: In December 2008, OCTA sent letters to more than 700 businesses, organizations, and stakeholders in the region, stating that OCTA seeks to build an inventory of potential habitat conservation sites that may be eligible for future funding through OCTA's freeway mitigation and resource protection program, which is part of the Renewed Measure M sales and use tax. The Renewed Measure M Environmental Oversight Committee (EOC) has been tasked with building this inventory. The EOC was appointed by the OCTA Board of Directors in October 2007 to make recommendations to the Board on the allocation of environmental freeway mitigation funds and monitor the implementation of a master agreement between OCTA and state and federal resource agencies. The master agreement will provide higher -value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, wildlife corridors and landscape level resource preservation in exchange for streamlined project approvals and greater certainty in the delivery of the freeway program as a whole. As the program is being developed, the EOC is assessing mitigation opportunities and creating an inventory of potential conservation sites for acquisition or restoration. The baseline for the OCTA Measure M Habitat Conservation Sites January 27, 2009 Page 2 inventory is formed by the Green Vision Map, a comprehensive listing of potential conservation opportunities in Orange County developed by a consortium of non - governmental environmental groups, like the Friends of Harbors, Beaches, and Parks. The Green Vision Map documents public and private lands already protected and lands that are not yet protected. The unprotected properties may be sites selected to potentially purchase and/or restore under this mitigation program. Below is the portion of the Green Vision Map showing Newport Beach: Portions of the Green Vision Map (for the entire map, see this link., www.octa.net/areenvisionmaol Way � C P TI r a'a vy Costa 4 ' Mesa isnr. d, kn laay+�, WwW -Mk+ R�uwe �.s.1iW IM.ewfVn N* /�UaL1# �4'l'�un Rlb�nn ' .r 1P•f- ti�j r�, e Teiben Nosuw lr' ': Pur+ve 5 t MW eW'pM Eb t N /J, then Space 1 � ft PRw�.e f� 4 e 4YYO ML 'L1 �zMl I t �WeGwel 'Y•. New Otl Negro ; Beach �moll i M (\` R+Spe 1M� Rt�h SvR.CM.a. i l ��: Y.•.- t two `' ✓/ ]„ I r14 1 �! .w • Yr OCTA Measure M Habitat Conservation Sites Januaiy27, 2009 Page 3 A Green Vision for Orange County.... This map is the result of an ongoing collaborative project between Friends of Harbors, Beaches & Parks and local conservation organizations and agencies. it is a work In progress. and intended for use as a general planning tool only. Key Watershed, Wetland, or Riparian Projects Watershed Management Plan Priority River Greenway Key conservation Priorities Active Project Potential Conservation Land Current Protected /Public Lands* Public Conservation land Private conservation Land Military Land Other Map Layers F(i Nature/EduWnon Center County Line 10 Sacred Site Hignway WllderneSS Area Boundary River / Stream Watershed Boundary 'NoteCb!a Was data comolled Irma vanenr of sources. Including the Orange county Public FaCIIIOeS and Resources Cepdr[rMnt. We califOTIa caP orwram at the UOIve lw of caifmia Santa Wroara, and Mt califdrnb N6a11rCM Age1Ky legXy WbINt, iIA]. The EOC has asked the City and other entities to submit other potential conservation sites. They also seek eligible property owners and managers, conservation and community groups and local governments who may be interested in participating in the program. Interested participants are asked to enter their property information online at www.octa.net/mvnror)erty by January 30, 2009. A set of preliminary eligibility criteria has been developed and is shown as Attachment A. The criteria are intended to provide guidance to both the EOC and property owners and conservation organizations to help evaluate the potential resource and conservation value of properties that may be available for acquisition or restoration. At a future date, these criteria will include a mechanism for evaluating potential properties and that evaluation will ultimately lead to the selection of eligible properties. City staff has discussed this preliminarily, and suggests filing an official position with OCTA that properties shown below may be good candidates for the Habitat Conservation Site Inventory: • The Banning Ranch; • The Beach and Bay Mobile Home Park (shown below); • Upper Buck Gully (habitat protection); and • Portions of Lower Buck Gully (coastward of Poppy) that are now privately held. 3 OCTA Measure M Habitat Conservation Sites January 27, 2009 Page 4 The Beach and Bay Mobile Home Park 7204 West Coast Highway NOTE: Placing lands on the list does not mean that a public agency would purchase the property from an unwilling property owner. Placement on the list means that the lands would be candidates for purchase using Renewed Measure M funds from willing property owners or for habitat improvement on these same lands, whether the lands stay in private hands or public hands. Environmental Review: The City Council's approval of this Agenda Item does not require environmental review. Public Notices This agenda item may be noticed according to the Ralph M. Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Funding Availability: OCTA members anticipate that Renewed Measure M funds of at least $243.5 million is anticipated to be available to mitigate the environmental impacts of freeway improvements and another $237 million is available under the Environmental Cleanup Program to implement street and highway related water quality improvement projects. 4 OCTA Measure M Habitat Conservation Sites January 27, 2009 Page 5 Submitted by: Dave Kiff Assistant City Manager Attachments: A — Eligibility Criteria 5 Mitigation and Resource Protection Program Renewed Measure M Criteria The Orange County Transportation Authority's (OCTA) Mitigation and Resource Protection Program is designed to provide for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, mitigation of the environmental impacts of freeway improvements. The freeway mitigation program was approved under Orange County Renewed Measure M (M2), the half -cent sales tax for transportation improvements approved by Orange County voters in 2006. Using a proactive, innovative approach, a Master Agreement will be negotiated between OCTA and state and federal resource agencies to provide higher - value environmental benefits such as habitat protection, connectivity and resource preservation in exchange for streamlined project approvals for the 13 M2 freeway projects. The following sets of criteria were created to provide guidance to property owners and conservation organizations to help evaluate the potential resource and conservation value of properties that may be available for acquisition or restoration. At a future date, these criteria will include a mechanism for evaluating potential restoration projects that will ultimately lead to the selection of eligible properties. Orange County Transportation Authority 550 South Main Sheet /P.0. Box 14184 /Orange /California 92863 - 15841(714) 560 -OCTA (6282) Renewed Measure M Restoration Criteria BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA The following criteria are intended to guide the permitting/resource agencies in the recommendation of restoration for the mitigation of habitat impacts by Renewed Measure M freeway projects. Each criterion includes a brief definition to clarify any potential misunderstandings. At a future date, and after more research and input, it is expected these criteria will include a mechanism for evaluating potential restoration projects. ❑ Benefits Targeted Species The potential restoration site includes a net benefit (both immediate and long term) in the ecological value for target species through increased breeding/foraging habitat and increases connectivity between areas of suitable habitat. ❑ Considers the Threat of Habitat Degradation and Urgency The threat of increasing the amount and coverage of non - native species determines restoration urgency, and there may be unique opportunities for restoration, such as bum areas. ❑ Enhances Natural Lands Contiguity Restoration of this site will limit edge effect, supplement existing open space and improve the quantity and quality of core habitat. ❑ Enhances of Already Conserved Lands for Habitat and Wildlife Connectivity Allows funding of restoration and management endowments on previously conserved lands to benefit species and wildlife connectivity in situations deemed appropriate by the permitting/resource agencies. ❑ Evaluates Adequacy of Protection and Management The existing level of protection, anticipated public use inside and adjacent to the restoration site should be considered. ❑ Restores Impacted Habitats An inventory of the property shows it includes the same vegetative communities as those habitats lost to freeway projects, including habitats such as: coastal sage scrub, riparian woodlands, grasslands, etc. and possibly includes ties to historical land coverage. ❑ Restores Sensitive Habitats The property's habitat restoration includes the restoration of species, sub - species, and natural communities ranked as sensitive under CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database). 7 OTHER CRITERIA This list includes the secondary tier of evaluation criteria after the biological criteria are considered. It is expected that these criteria would require a simpler evaluation (such as yes, no, maybe) and the answers may merely play an informational role. ❑ Aligns with Resource Agency Priorities Proposed restoration meets resource agencies' particular requirements (e.g., the restoration satisfies the agencies' (ACOE, RWCB, and DFG) definition of habitat creation for the purposes of no -net loss policies for wetlands) and/or is determined to otherwise benefit fish and wildlife resources and the habitats upon which they depend. ❑ Includes Support from Local and State Governments This acquisition is supported by local cities, appropriate JPA's, the county or other governmental entities. ❑ Includes Support from the Community This acquisition is supported by the public, environmental and community organizations. ❑ Utilizes Partnership & Leveraging Opportunities Working on this restoration project would be enhanced by existing conservation efforts, partnerships and/or includes existing funding. CO- BENEFITS Where applicable, the following criteria would assist in the event the above criteria are roughly equal. These may take on a simpler evaluation (such as yes, no, or maybe) and the answers may merely play an informational role. Includes: Watershed Protection Proximity to Underserved Area ScenicNiewshed/Enhanced recreation experience Economic Benefits (supports local businesses) Public Access Archeological Sites Cultural and Historical Sites Paleontological Sites Trail Connectors Q RESTORATION CONSTRAINTS The following criteria are potential constraints to restoration, but detailed information regarding some of these constraints may not be available until later in the evaluation process. ❑ Considers Cost In addition to streamlining OCTA's regulatory process, the intent of the comprehensive environmental mitigation program is to provide the greatest possible biological benefit for the region with the available funding. Consequently, the cost of potential restoration will be an important factor in selecting mitigation sites. ❑ Determines Hazardous Conditions Through a Phase I — Environmental Site Assessment, determine the property's historical use and any potential or known hazardous materials on -site. ❑ Includes Access to Site The restoration site is accessible for restoration work, maintenance and management. ❑ Includes Availability and Delivery of Water The water used for the restoration is available, does not increase environmental impacts when delivered to the site and works with local water agencies to ensure groundwater sources are not impacted by water withdrawal. a Renewed Measure M Property Acquisition Criteria BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA The following criteria are intended to guide the permitting /resource agencies in the recommendation of sites for the mitigation of habitat impacts by Renewed Measure M freeway projects. Each criterion includes a brief definition to clarify any potential misunderstandings. At a future date, and after more research and input, it is expected these criteria will include a mechanism for evaluating potential acquisitions. ❑ Aligns with Impacted Habitats An inventory of the property shows it includes the same vegetative communities as those habitats lost to freeway projects, including habitats such as: coastal sage scrub, riparian woodlands, grasslands, etc. ❑ Conserves Sensitive Habitats The property's habitat includes the conservation and possible restoration of species, sub - species, and natural communities ranked as sensitive under California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). ❑ Considers Property Acreage Generally larger properties are better. ❑ Contains Target Species The potential property includes the presence of endangered, threatened, species of special concern, and other sensitive species impacted by freeway projects. ❑ Considers the Threat of Development and Urgency The evaluation considers where the landowner is in CEQA and other permitting processes, quantifies the degree of the development threat, and determines if this acquisition creates an opportunity for leveraging expiring conservation funding. ❑ Enhances Natural Lands Connectivity, including significant Wildlife Corridors Acquisition of this property would connect to existing protected areas, examine the effects on multiple taxa (such as birds, large mammals) and could be identified as an essential habitat linkage in regional or local plans. ❑ Enhances Natural Lands Contiguity The property borders existing open spaces and acquisition increases the amount of core habitat or reduces edge effects. ❑ Includes Species/Habitat Diversity The property includes a wide variety of habitat types and species (including subspecies, if known). Special emphasis would be provided for properties with examples of various stages of vegetative structural diversity and functional ecosystem diversity present (e.g., habitat with a natural flood regime). ❑ Provides for Quality Habitat or Potential for Quality Habitat The property includes mature habitats or property constraints are minimal and property has a high potential to support high - quality habitat after acquisition. OTHER CRITERIA This list includes the secondary tier of evaluation criteria after the biological criteria are considered. It is expected that these criteria would require a simpler evaluation (such as yes, no, maybe) and the answers may merely play an informational role. ❑ Aligns with Resource Agency Priorities The property is included on the DFG & USFWS's list of acquisition priorities. ❑ Includes a Cooperative Landowner The landowner effectively coordinates with the entity responsible for acquisition to complete tasks required for acquisition. ❑ Includes Support from Local and State Governments This acquisition is supported by local cities, appropriate JPA's, the county or other governmental entities. ❑ Includes Support from the Community This acquisition is supported by the public, environmental and community organizations. ❑ Utilizes Partnership & Leveraging Opportunities Working on this acquisition would be enhanced by existing conservation efforts, partnerships and/or includes existing funding. CO- BENEFITS The following criteria would assist in the event the above criteria are roughly equal. These may take on a simpler evaluation (such as yes, no, or maybe) and the answers may merely play an informational role. Includes: Archeological Sites Cultural and Historical Sites • Paleontological Sites Watershed Protection Proximity to Underserved Area ScenicNiewshed Trail Connectors Economic Benefits (supports local businesses) PROPERTY CONSTRAINTS The following criteria are potential constraints to property acquisition, but detailed information regarding some of these constraints may not be available until later in the evaluation process. ❑ Considers Cost In addition to streamlining OCTA's regulatory process, the intent of the comprehensive environmental mitigation program is to provide the greatest possible biological benefit for the region with the available funding. Consequently, the cost of potential acquisitions will be an important factor in selecting mitigation sites. ❑ Consider Conflicting Easements or Inholdings The property may have restrictive deeds, easements, other agreements, and/or inholdings that would limit management/public use options. ❑ Considers Neighboring Land Uses Neighboring land uses may decrease the habitat mitigation value of the mitigation property. ❑ Considers Other Complications The property may have unidentified complications associated with acquisition and management including, vector control, vandalism, inadequate access, significant obstacles to restoring water quality (toxics, pesticides, salts), etc. ❑ Considers the extent of Isolation or Habitat Fragmentation The property may be fragmented or isolated from other valuable habitats that may impede its long -term biological value. Fragmented or isolated habitats would make it challenging to have a variety of flora and fauna, ❑ Determines Hazardous Conditions Through a Phase I — Environmental Site Assessment, determine the property's historical use and any potential or known hazardous materials on -site. ❑ Understands Management Encroachments The property may have unauthorized users; there are adopted plans for future infrastructure that may be inconsistent with habitat mitigation; or the type and quantity of public use inside or adjacent to the property. (e.g. vegetative fuel modification zones are adjacent) I:;L Renewed Measure M Property and Habitat Management Criteria Endowments will be provided through Measure M funding for long term management of the acquired and restored properties. The amount of funding provided will be determined in each case through the preparation of Property Analysis Record (PAR) or an equivalent method. A PAR analysis involves application of a computer database methodology developed by the Center for Natural Lands Management for estimating the required amount for endowments. Every effort will be made to work with partners to leverage the available Measure M funding to accomplish the necessary long -term management of acquired and restored habitat. 13