Tank Constrctn:
Telephone:
Region:
Other Type:
Container Num:
Year Installed:
Tank Constrctn:
Telephone:
Region:
Other Type:
1 1983
Not reported
(805) 484-3601
Not reported
FIRE STATION
2 1983
12 gauge
(805) 484-3601
Not reported
FIRE STATION
CAMARILLO ANTI-LITTER STATION SWF/LF S102363100
PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD N/A
CAMARILLO, CA
TC269625.1r Page 11 0131.
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Site
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
CAMARILLO ANTI-LITTER STATION (Continued) S102363100
LF
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Op. Tel:
Owner.
Address:
Owner's Tel:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-M-0001
COUNTY OF VENTURA
1001 PARTRIDGE DR. SUITE 150
VENTURA, CA 93003
(805) 658-4647
COUNTY OF VENTURA
1001 PARTRIDGE DR. SUITE 150
VENTURA, CA 93003
(805) 658-4647
Large Volume Transfer Station
Archived
Permitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
3413 / 11902
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
CAMARILLO AIR FORCE BASE* LUST S100236677
SKYWAY (NO STREET NBR) Cortese N/A
CAMARILLO, CA 93010
State LUST:
Facility Type
Reg Board:
Chemical:
Lead Agency:
Case Type:
Status:
Review Date:
Workplan:
Pollution Char:
Remed Action:
Close Date:
LUST Region 4:
Report Date:
Cross Street:
Lead Agency:
Local Agency:
Substance:
Case Number:
Case Type:
ACTIVE
Los Angeles Region
Diesel
Local Agency
Other ground water affected
Pollution characterization
04/24/1989
Not reported
04/24/1989
Not reported
Not reported
03/28/1989
Not reported
Local Agency
56000
12034
042489-04
Other ground water affected
Cross Street: Not reported
Qty Leaked: Not reported
Confirm Leak: Not reported
Prelim Assess: Not reported
Remed Plan: Not reported
Monitoring: Not reported
Release Date: 03/28/1989
CORTESE:
Facility ID: 56-000381 Data Source: LTNO
TC269625.1r Page 12 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Site
SPANISH HILLS DEVELOPMENT
TRACT 4227
CAMARILLO, CA 93010
CAL-SITES:
Facility ID 56130044
Facility Type: N/A
Status: Not reported
Status Date: 06/14/1993
Lead: Not reported
Region: 3 - BURBANK
Branch: SA - SOUTHERN CA. -A
File Name: SPANISH HILLS DEVELOPMENT
Status Name: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Lead Agency: N/A
NPL: Not reported
SIC: 13 OIL & GAS EXTRACTION
Staff Member Responsible for Site: JABRAHAM
Supervisor Responsible for Site: MMONROY
Region Water Control Board: CC - CENTRAL COAST
Access: Not reported
Cortese: Not reported
Hazardous Ranking Score: Not reported
Date Site Hazard Ranked: Not reported
Groundwater Contamination: Unknown
No. of Contamintion Sources: 0
LaVLong: Not reported
LaVlong Method: Not reported
State Assembly District Code: Not reported
State Senate District: Not reported
Activity: SITE SCREENING
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Activity: PRELIMINARY ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Activity: SITE SCREENING
Activity Status: NO FURTHER ACTION FOR DTSC
Background: Not reported
Alternative Name: PANISH HILLS DEVELOPMENT
Alternative Addr: TRACT 4227
CAMARILLO,.CA 93010
Comment Date: 09/16/1992
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
Cal-Sites S100351768
N/A
Comment The site is a new development in an old oil exploration area. During the development, found an oil well sump. RP cleaned up the site and conducted all sample analysis. The Department is unaware of the cleanup. Ventura County Env Health Division referred the site to the Department. Due to the nature of the historical activities at the area, the soils at the site may have been contaminated. Staff
recommends a PEA to verify the cleanup.
The Department completed review of the PEA report. The RP was conducting construction activities a the site. During grading operations, a sump was discovered. The areas
surrounding the sump exhibited metal contamination. Before the discovery of the sump, contaminated soil from the sump area was distributed certain areas of the site. Upon
discovery of the soils contaminated nature, RP removed the contaminated soil and a PEA was prepared and submitted to the Department.
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 13 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Site
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
SPANISH HILLS DEVELOPMENT (Continued)
Based on the information provided in the PEA report, the site shows no evidence of contamination that may constitute a threat to human health and the environment. All the
suspected sump soil has since been incorporated in
structural shear keys constructed on site. The shear keys cannot be removed or uncovered. The suspected materials were placed at least 30 feet below grade and does not pose a potential hazard to human health. Therefore, the
Department concurred with the recommendation that "No
Further Action" is needed at the site.
CalSites Validation Program confirms NFA for DTSC.
S100351768
USFS REYES SWF/LF 5100779 26
APPACHE CYN ROAD. N OF LOCKWOOD VALLEY R N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID.
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LaVLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed.
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-C R-0003
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Unperrnitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 14 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
USFS REYES (Continued) S100779126
Facility ID: #3
Operator: Not reported
Op. Address: Not reported
Owner: Not reported
Address: Not reported
Activity: Not reported
Operators Status: Not reported
Regulation Status: Not reported
Facility Status: Not reported
Facility Class: Not reported
Region: VENTURA
Lat/Long: Not reported
Closing Comment: Not reported
Date Closed: Not reported
Operation Date: Not reported
Permit Date: DOHS 56-49-0072
Facility Type: UNKNOWN
Facility Location: APPACHE CYN ROAD. NORTH OF LOCKWOOD VALLEY RD.
VENTURA 1939
CITY OF VENTURA
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity.
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0019
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre -regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
SWF/LF S100779146
N/A
TC269625.1r Page 15 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
VENTURA 1939 (Continued) S100779146
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#20
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS# 56-49-0086
UNKNOWN
CITY OF VENTURA. HIGHWAY 33 & 101
PIRU LAKE DUMP 1960 SWF/LF S101611224
DOMINGUEZ CANYON ROAD. PIRU N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LatiLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0013
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
1C269625.1r Page 16 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
PIRU LAKE DUMP 1960 (Continued) S101611224
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#13
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not re ported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS #56-49-0082
UNKNOWN
DOMINGUEZ CANYON ROAD. PIRU.
USFS CHUCUPATE SWF/LF S100779124
FRAZIER MTN. RD., S OF INTERSECTION OF F N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0001
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Unpermitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 17 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
USFS CHUCUPATE (Continued) S100779124
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#1
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS 56-49-0070
UNKNOWN
FRAZIER MOUNTAIN ROAD. SOUTH OF INTERSECTION OF FRAZIER MTN. RD. AND LOCKWOOD VALLEY ROAD.
GRADE ROAD SWF/LF S101613017
LOCKWOOD VALLEY ROAD, LOCKWOOD VALLEY WMUDS N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-C R-0005
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
To Be Determined
To Be Determined
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625 1r Page 18 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
GRADE ROAD (Continued) S101613017
Facility ID: #5
Operator: Not reported
Op. Address: Not reported
Owner: Not reported
Address: Not reported
Activity: Not reported
Operator's Status: Not reported
Regulation Status: Not reported
Facility Status: Not reported
Facility Class: Not reported
Region: VENTURA
LaVLong: Not reported
Closing Comment: Not reported
Date Closed: Not reported
Operation Date: Not reported
Permit Date: SUP # 2186 NOV. 27, 1964 LARWQCB REPORT ON WASTE DISCHARGE, OCT. 22, 1964 DOHS # 56-49-0074
Facility Type: REFUSE CLASS II & ill (1964 WASTE DISCHARGE) Facility Location: LOCKWOOD VALLEY ROAD, LOCKWOOD VALLEY. APPROXIMATELY ONE MILE SOUTH OF BOY SCOUT RD. LOT 4, SEC 3, TOWNSHIP 7 N. PARCEL #005-0-020-010.
WMUDS:
Date of Last Facility Edit: Not reported
Last Facility Editors: Not reported
Waste Discharge System ID: 4 560007NUR
Solid Waste Information ID: Not reported
Nste Discharge System: False
Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: True
Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: False
Resource Conservation Recovery Act Program: False
Department of Defense: Not reported
Open to Public: False
Number of WMUDS at Facility: Not reported
Facility Contact: Not reported
Facility Telephone: Not reported
Primary Standard industrial Classification: Not reported Secondary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Solid Waste Assessment Test Program Name: Not reported
Threat to Water Quality: Not reported
NPID: Not reported
Tonnage 0
Regional Board ID: Not reported
Municipal Solid Waste: False
Superorder: Not reported
Sub Chapter 15: False
Reg. Board Progject Officer: LT
Total Waste Mgmt Units: 1
Section Range: Not reported
RCRA Facility: Not reported
Waste Discharge Requirements: Not reported
Base Meridian: Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 19 0131
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
GRADE ROAD (Continued) S101613017
Agency: Not reported
Not reported
Agency Dept: Not reported
Agency Contact: Not reported
Agency Tele: Not reported
Landowner: Not reported
Not reported
CA
Landowner Cont: Not reported
Landowner Tele: Not reported
Date of Last Faoility Edit: Not reported
Last Facility Editors: Not reported
Waste Discharge System ID: 4 560019NUR
Solid Waste Information ID: Not reported
Waste Discharge System: False
Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: True
Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: False
Resource Conservation Recovery Act Program: False
Department of Defense: Not reported
Open to Public: False
Number of WMUDS at Facility: Not reported
Facility Contact: Not reported
Facility Telephone: Not reported
Primary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Secondary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Solid Waste Assessment Test Program Name: Not reported
Thleat to Water Quality: Not reported
N F'rl D: Not reported
Tonnage: 0
Regional Board ID: Not reported
Municipal Solid Waste: False
Superorder: Not reported
Sub Chapter 15: False
Reg. Board Progject Officer: LT
Total Waste Mgmt Units: 1
Section Range: Not reported
RCRA Not reported
Waste Discharge Requirements: Not reported
Base Meridian: Not reported
Agency: US FOREST SERVICE
Not reported
Agency Dept: Not reported
Agency Contact: Not reported
Agency Tele: Not reported
Landowner: Not reported
Not reported
CA
Landowner Cont: Not reported
Landowner Tele: Not reported
Date of Last Facility Edit: Not reported
Last Facility Editors: Not reported
Waste Discharge System ID: 4 560025NUR
Solid Waste Information ID: Not reported
Waste Discharge System: False
Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: True
Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: False
Resource Conservation Recovery Act Program: False
TC269625.1r Page 20 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
GRADE ROAD (Continued) S101613017
Department of Defense: Not reported
Open to Public: False
Number of WMUDS at Facility: Not reported
Facility Contact: Not reported
Facility Telephone: Not reported
Primary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Secondary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Solid Waste Assessment Test Program Name: Not reported
Threat to Water Quality: Not reported
NPID: Not reported
Tonnage: 0
Regional Board ID: Not reported
Municipal Solid Waste: False
Superorder: Not reported
Sub Chapter 15: False
Reg. Board Progject Officer: LT
Total Waste Mgmt Units: 1
Section Range. Not reported
RCRA Facility: Not reported
Waste Discharge Requirements: Not reported
Base Meridian: Not reported
Agency: US FOREST SERVICE
Not reported
Agency Dept: Not reported
Agency Contact: Not reported
Agency Tele: Not reported
Landowner: Not reported
Not reported
CA
Landowner Cont: Not reported
Landowner Tele: Not reported
Date of Last Facility Edit: Not reported
Last Facility Editors: Not reported
Waste Discharge System ID: 4 560026NUR
Solid Waste Information ID: Not reported
Waste Discharge System: False
Solid Waste Assessment Test Program: True
Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Program: False
Resource Conservation Recovery Act Program: False
Department of Defense: Not reported
Open to Public: False
Number of WMUDS at Facility: Not reported
Facility Contact: Not reported
Facility Telephone: Not reported
Primary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Secondary Standard Industrial Classification: Not reported Solid Waste Assessment Test Program Name: Not reported
Threat to Water Quality: Not reported
NPID: Not reported
Tonnage: 0
Regional Board ID: Not reported
Municipal Solid Waste: False
Superorder: Not reported
Sub Chapter 15: False
Reg. Board Progject Officer: LT
Total Waste Mgmt Units: 1
Section Range: Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 21 o31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
GRADE ROAD (Continued)
RCRA Facility:
Waste Discharge Requirements:
Base Mendian:
Agenoy: VENTURA COUNTY
Not reported
Agency Dept: Not reported
Agency Contact: Not reported
Agency Tele: Not reported
Landowner: Not reported
Not reported
CA
Landowner Cont: Not reported
Landowner Tele: Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
S101613017
RICE ROAD COUNTY 1944 SWF/LF S100779136
NEAR OJAI N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/ong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0010
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Arohived
Unpermitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 22 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
RICE ROAD COUNTY 1944 (Continued) S100779136
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#10
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
NONE
UNKNOWN
NEAR OJAI
PIRU COUNTY 1971
SOUTH OF PIRU
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LaVLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0017
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
SWF/LF S101611226
N/A
TC269625.1r Page 2.3c#31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
PIRU COUNTY 1971 (Continued) S101611226
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status.
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/LongClosing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type.
Facility Location.
#17
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
CROFT SITE
SOUTH OF STAUFFER RD
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Qperator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity.
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status.
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
. LOCKWOOD VALLEY
56-C R-0004
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Unpermitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
SWF/LF S101611218
N/A
TC269625.1r Page 24 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Site
. CROFT SITE (Continued)
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
ED R ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S101611218
#4
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS 56-49-0073
UNKNOWN
SOUTH OF STAUFFER RD LOCMOOD VALLEY. R21 W ; 17N
NEWHALL LAND AND INVESTMENT SWF/LF S100779144
SOUTH OF SANTA SUSANA PASS ROAD N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Ot). Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status.
Facility Class:
Region:
Lattong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0018
NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING
Not reported
NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 25 o131
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
Site
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
NEWHALL LAND AND INVESTMENT (Continued) S100779144
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address.
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lot/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#18
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS #56-49-0085
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
ROUND MOUNTAIN COUNTY SWF/LF S102363126
SOUTH OF VENTURA COUNTY N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lot/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type
Facility Location:
56-CR-0031
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
MATAU FLAT SWF/LF S101611221
NORTH PART OF COUNTY N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
TC269625.1r Page 26 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
MATAU FIAT (Continued) S101611221
LF:
Facility ID: 56-C R-0007
Operator: Not reported
Op. Address: Not reported
Owner: Not reported
Address: Not reported
Activity: Solid Waste Disposal Site
Operator's Status: Archived
Regulation Status: Unperrnitted
Facility Status: Not reported
Facility Class: Not reported
Region: STATE
Lat/Long: Not reported
Closing Comment: Not reported
Date Closed: Not reported
Operation Date: Not reported
Permit Date: Not reported
Facility Type: Not reported
Facility Location: Not reported
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LaVLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#7
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
NONE
UNKNOWN
NORTH PART OF COUNTY.
PIERDA BLANCA 1958 SWF/LF S102363120
SESPE RIVER BED, WHEELER SPRINGS. NE1/4 N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
TC269625.1r Page 27 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
PIERDA BLANCA 1958 (Continued) S102363120
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-C R-0008
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Unpermitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
USFS SEYMOUR ROAD SWF/LF S101611217
SEYMOUR RD. / LOCKWOOD VALLEY RD. LOCK N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operator's Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lot/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Faoility Type:
Facility Location:
56-C R-0002
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Unpermitted
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625 1r Page 28 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
USFS SEYMOUR ROAD (Continued) S101611217
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
#2
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
DOHS 56-49-0071
UNKNOWN
SEYMOUR RD. AND LOCKWOOD VALLEY RD. LOCKWOOD VALLEY.
OTTO HOPKINS
10 MI SW OF OJAI NEAR POVERTY CANYON
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
SWF/LF S100779184
N/A
Op. Tel:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LattLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0038
COUNTY OF VENTURA
1001 PARTRIDGE DR. SUITE 150
VENTURA, CA 93003
(805) 658-4647
HOPKINS, E
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Closed
To Be Determined
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
TC269625.1r Page 29 of 31
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
OTTO HOPKINS (Continued) S100779184
Facility ID: #43
Operator: Not reported
Op. Address: Not reported
Owner: Not reported
Address: Not reported
Activity: Not reported
Operator's Status: Not reported
Regulation Status: Not reported
Facility Status: Not reported
Facility Class: Not reported
Region: VENTURA
Lat/Long: Not reported
Closing Comment: Not reported
Date Closed: Not reported
Operation Date: Not reported
Permit Date: SUP 1572
Facility Type. HOUSEHOLD REFUSE, RUBBISH. CUT AND FILL OPERATION, NO BURNING PERMITTED.
Facility Location: TEN MILES SW OF OJAI NEAR POVERTY CANYON. NORTH OF CASITAS PASS ROAD, 4,000 FEET WETERLY OF RANCHO SANTA ANA BOUNDARY. PARCEL # 008-0-190-215. #008-0-190-205. # 008-0-190 -125.
CAL-LUTHERAN SWF/LF S100779160
THOUSAND OAKS AREA N/A
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
TC269625.1r Page 30 of 31
Site
DETAILED ORPHAN LISTING
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
CAL-LUTHERAN (Continued) S100779160
LF:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
LaVLong:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
Facility ID:
Operator:
Op. Address:
Owner:
Address:
Activity:
Operators Status:
Regulation Status:
Facility Status:
Facility Class:
Region:
Lat/Long:
Closing Comment:
Date Closed:
Operation Date:
Permit Date:
Facility Type:
Facility Location:
56-CR-0028
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Solid Waste Disposal Site
Archived
Pre-regulations
Not reported
Not reported
STATE
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
#29
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
VENTURA
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
N/A
UNKNOWN
PARCEL # 521-0-020-090.
TC269625.1r Page 31 of 3l
GOVERNMENT RECORDS .DATA puRRENcy ••TRACKING
•
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Elapsed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90-day updating requirement of the ASTM standard.
FEDERAL ASTM RECORDS:
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 703-413-0223
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 02/17/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 04/13/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 55 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/22/98 ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 202-260-2342
Emergency Response Notification System ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/04/97 Date Made Active at EDR: 01/02/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 29 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/05/98 NPL: National Priority List
Sour: EPA
Telephone: 703-603-8852
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies o'er 1200 , sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC).
Date of Government Version: 09/25/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09126.'97 Date Made Active at EDR: 11/28/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 63 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 02/06/98 RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 800-424-9346
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Date of Government Version: 01/01/98 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 02/17/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 04/13/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 55 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/05/98 CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
Source: EPA
Telephone: 800-424-9346
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 12/15/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/05/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 02/02/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 28 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/06/98 apvERNmENTI flEppflpsg:ATICHEWMATkPilliFIE NCY TRACKING FEDERAL NON-ASTM RECORDS:
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 800-424-9346
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that colleots data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LOG) and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Faoilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/24/98 Database Release Frequency: Biennially Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Source: EPA Regional Offices
Telephone: Varies
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: Varies Date of Last EDR Contact: Varies Database Release Frequency: Varies Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A FINDS: Facility Index System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 703-908-2493
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Government Version: 04/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 02/26/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: 202-366-4526
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/96 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/31/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07;27/98 MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: 301-415-7169
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 01/30/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/13/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07;13/98 NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Source: EPA
Telephone: 205-564-4267
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
Date of Government Version: 10/15/91 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/26/98 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98 GOvER.NmENTIRpocipa SEARCHED.j.pATkpv13 Fm.NerTRA.pici, NG PADS: PCB Activity Database System
Source: EPA
Telephone.202-260-3936
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 09/22/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/05/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/17/98 RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
Source: EPA
Telephone: 202-564-4104
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/95 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/15/98 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/14/98 ROD: Records Of Decision
Source: NTIS
Telephone: 703-416-0223
Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Supertund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 03/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/22/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/31/98 TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 202-260-1531
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/11/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/29/98 TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 202-260-1444
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. USEPA has no current plan to update and/or re-issue this database.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/94 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/27/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/27/98
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEA RENCY TRACKING
STATE OF CAUFORNIA ASTM RECORDS:
BEP: Bond Expenditure Plan
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 916-255-2118
Department of Health Services developed a site-specific expenditure plan as the basis for an appropriation of Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act funds. It is not updated.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/89 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 07/27/94 Date Made Active at EDR: 08/02/94 Elapsed ASTM days: 6
Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact. 05/31/94 CAL-SITES (AWP): Annual Workplan
Source: California Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 916-323-3400
Known Hazardous Waste Sites. California DTSC's Annual Workplan (AWP), formerly BEP, identifies known hazardous substance sites targeted for cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 11/04/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/21/97 Date Made Active at EDR: 12/20/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 29 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/04/98 CAL-SITES (ASPIS): Calsites
Source: Department of Toxic Substance Control
Telephone: 916-323-3400
The Calsites database contains potential or confirmed hazardous substance release properties. In 1996, California EPA reevaluated and significantly reduced the number of sites in the Calsites database.
Date of Government Version: 01/14/98 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 03/13/98 Date Made Active at EDR. 04/13/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 31 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/08/98 CHMIRS: California Hazardous Material Incident Report System Source: Office of Emergency Services
Telephone: 916-464-3277
California Hazardous Material Incident Reporting System. CHMIRS contains information on reported hazardous material incidents (accidental releases or spills).
Date of Government Version: 12/31/94 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 03/13/95 Date Made Active at EDR: 04/24/95 Elapsed ASTM days: 42 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98 CORTESE: Cortese
Source: CAL EPA/Office of Emergency Information
Telephone: 916-327-1848
The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites Date of Government Version: 12/31/94
Date Made Active at EDR: 04/04/95
Database Release Frequency: Annually
(LUST), the Integrated Waste
).
Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 01/23/95
Elapsed ASTM days: 71
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/22/98
LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-445-6532
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/25/97 Date Made Active at EDR: 12/23/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 28 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/11/98 i0C)VgR1MENTifiegglapapplicti:Ep pAlwooFpag. NCY TRACKING NOTIFY 65: Proposition 65
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-657-0696
Proposition 65 Notification Records. NOTIFY 65 contains facility notifications about any release which could impact drinking water and thereby expose the public to a potential health risk.
Date of Government Version: 10/21/93 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 11/01/93 Date Made Active at EDR: 11/19/93 Elapsed ASTM days: 18 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/01/98 SWF/LF (SWIS): Solid Waste Information System
Source: Integrated Waste Management Board
Telephone: 916-255-4035
Active, Closed and Inactive Landfills. SWF/LF records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills. These may be active or inactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Section 2004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/98 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 03/17/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 04/13/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 27 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact 04/27/98 TOXIC PITS: Toxic Pits
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-227-4364
Toxic PITS Cleanup Act Sites. TOXIC PITS identifies sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed.
Date of Government Version: 07/01/95 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 08/30/95 Date Made Active at EDR: 09/26/95 Elapsed ASTM days: 27 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/12/98 CA UST:
UST!. Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-227-4408
The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. Refer to local/county source for current data
Date of Government Version: 10/15/90 Date of Data Arrival at EDR. 01/25/91 Date Made Active at EDR: 02/12/91 Elapsed ASTM days: 18 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/16/98 FED: Facility Inventory Database
Source: California Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 916-445-6532
The Facility Inventory Database (F)D) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource Control Board. Refer to local/county source for current data.
Date of Government Version: 10/31/94 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09/05/95 Date Made Active at EDR: 09/29/95 Elapsed ASTM days: 24 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/30/98 WM UDS/SWAT: Waste Management Unit Database
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-227-4448
Waste Management Unit Database System. WMUDS is used by the State Water Resources Control Board staff and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards for program traoking and inventory of waste management units. WMUDS is composed of the following databases: Facility Information, Scheduled Inspections Information, Waste Management Unit Information, SWAT Program Information, SWAT Report Summary Inforrnation, SWAT Report Summary Data, Chapter 15 (formerly Subchapter 15) Information, Chapter 15 Monitoring Parameters, TPCA Program lnforrnation, RCRA Program Information, Closure Information, and Interested Parties Information.
Date of Government Version: 03/11/98 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 04/23/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 05/21/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 28 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/11/98 RECORPaipgARQHEa Figtpy:TRApfq
STATE OF CALIFORNIA NON-ASTM RECORDS:
AST: Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-227-4382
Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks.
Date of Government Version: 08/01/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
HAZMAT: Hazmat Facilities
Source: City of San Jose Fire Department
Telephone: 408-277-4659
Date of Government Version: 11/21/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/11/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/10/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/26/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98
HAZNET: Hazardous Waste Information System
Source: California Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: 916-324-1781
Facility and Manifest Data. The data is extracted from the copies of hazardous waste manifests received each year by the DTSC. The annual volume of manifests is typically 700000- 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 350,000 - 500,000 shipments. Data are from the manifests submitted without correction, and therefore many contain some invalid values for data elements such as generator ID, TSD ID, waste category, and disposal method.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/21/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/98 SOUTH BAY: South Bay Site Management System
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-286-0457
Groundwater pollution cases in the Santa Clara Valley where the regulatory lead is the San Francisco Bay Regional Nter Quality Control Board.
Date of Government Version: 09/01/96 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/19/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/15/98 WDS: Waste Discharge System
Source: State Water Resources Control Board
Telephone: 916-657-1571
Sites which have been issued waste discharge requirements.
Date of Government Version: 12/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/26/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: O&!24/98 GOVERNMENT pATA"IclififtENcr7FRAcici.No..
CALIFORNIA COUNTY RECORDS
ALAMEDA COUNTY:
Underground Tanks
Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services
Telephone: 510-567-6700
Date of Government Version: 10/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/08/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/03/98 Local Oversight Program Listing of UGT Cleanup Sites
Source: Alameda County Environmental Health Services
Telephone: 510-567-6700
Date of Government Versiom 10/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/08/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/03/98 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY:
SL: Site List
Source: Contra Costa Health Services Department
Telephone: 510-646-2286
List includes sites from the underground tank, hazardous waste generator and business plan/2185 programs.
Date of Govemment Version: 05/02/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/11/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 0810/98 KERN COUNTY:
UST: Sites & Tanks Listing
Source: Kern County Environment Health Services Department Telephone: 805-862-8700
Kern County Sites and Tanks Listing.
Date of Government Version: 01/28/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/13/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98
LOS ANGELES COUNTY:
HMS: Street Number List
Source: Department of Public Works
Telephone: 626-458-3517
Industrial Waste and Underground Storage Tank Sites.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/13/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Source: La County Department of Public Works
Telephone: 818-458-5185
Date of Government Version: 01/31/96 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98 RgpplipssgAfictien: l4py7R4pplp -
Site Mitigation List
Source: Community Health Services
Telephone: 213-890-7806
Industrial sites that have had some sort of spill or complaint.
Date of Government Version: 01/20/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
MARIN COUNTY:
UST Sites
Source: Public Works Department Waste Management
Telephone: 415-499-6647
Currently permitted USTs in Mann County.
Date of Government Version: 12/01/97
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/27/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/11/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/10/98
NAPA COUNTY:
LUST: Sites With Reported Contamination
Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269
Date of Government Version: 10/27/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/22/98 UST: Closed and Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites Source: Napa County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-253-4269
Date of Government Version: 10/09/96 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/24/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 ORANGE COUNTY:
List of Industrial Site Cleanups
Source: Health Care Agency
Telephone: 714-834-3446
Petroleum and non-petroleum spills.
Date of Government Version: 03/13/98
Database Release Frequency Quarterly
LUST: List of Underground Storage Tank Cleanups
Source: Health Care Agency
Telephone 714-834-3446
Orange County Underground Storage Tank Cleanups (LUST).
Date of Government Version: 03/02/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
UST: List of Underground Storage Tank Facilities
Source: Health Care Agency
Telephone: 714-834-3446
Orange County Underground Storage Tank Facilities (UST).
Date of Government Version: 02/24/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/15/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/14/98
Date of Last EDR Contact 06/15/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/14/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/15/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/14/98
GOVERNMENT RECORDS: SEARCHED. J ATA Cil RRENCTTRACKING
PLACER COUNTY:
MS: Master List of Facilities
Source: Placer County Health and Human Services
Telephone: 530-889-7335
List includes aboveground tanks, underground tanks and cleanup sites.
Date of Government Version: 01/13/98
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
RIVERSIDE COUNTY:
LUST: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites
Source: Department of Public Health
Telephone: 909-358-5055
Riverside County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST).
Date of Government Version: 01/21/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
• UST: Tank List
Source: Health Services Agency
Telephone: 909-358-5055
Date of Government Version: 01/14/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
SACRAMENTO COUNTY:
Toxisite4List
Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management
Telephone: 916-386-6706
Date of Government Version: 02/02/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/30/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contaot: 06/29/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/27/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/27/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/27/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/27/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/15/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/10/98
ML: Regulatory Compliance Master List
Source: Sacramento County Environmental Management
Telephone: 916-386-6706
Any business that has hazardous materials on site - hazardous material storage sites waste generators.
Date of Government Version: 01/06/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
, underground storage tanks,
Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/16/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/10/98
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY:
DENS Permit System Print-Out By Location
Source: San Bernardino County Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division Telephone: 909-387-3041
This listing includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/15/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/14/98 GpVERNIVIgNTORECO RDSSEA fapligp.IDATkp URRE NCY TRACKING SAN DIEGO COUNTY:
SWF/LF: Solid Waste Facilities
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 619-338-2209
San Diego County Solid Waste Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 11/08/95
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/05/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact 08/31/98
HMMD: Hazardous Materials Management Division Database
Source: Hazardous Materials Management Division
Telephone: 619-338-2268
The database includes: HE58 - This report contains the business name, site address, business phone number, establishment 'H permit number, type of permit, and the business status. HE17 - In addition to providing the same information provided in the HE58 listing, HE17 provides inspection dates, violations received by the establishment, hazardous waste generated, the quantity, method of storage, treatment/disposal of waste and the hauler, and information on underground storage tanks. Unauthorized Release List- Includes a summary of environmental contamination cases in San Diego County (underground tank cases, non-tank cases, groundwater contamination, and soil contamination are included.)
Date of Government Version: 01/05/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/13/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY:
LUST: Local Oversite Facilities
Source: Department Of Public Health San Francisco County Telephone: 415-252-3920
Date of Government Version: 03/19/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Underground Storage Tank Information
Source: Department of Public Health
Telephone: 415-252-3920
Date of Govemment Version: 03/19/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/18/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08.17/98
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/18/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08117/98
SAN MATEO COUNTY:
Business Inventory
Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921
List includes Hazardous Materials Business Plan, hazardous waste generators, and underground storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/18/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/17/98 LUST: Fuel Leak List
Source: San Mateo County Environmental Health Services Division Telephone: 650-363-1921
Date of Government Version: 01/12/98
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/18/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/17/98
ppvgANIAgitvifipo:RDSEARCHED/DATA CLJRR
SANTA CLARA COUNTY:
LUST: Fuel Leak Site Activity Report
Source: Santa Clara Valley Water District
Telephone: 408-927-0710
Date of Government Version: 01/15/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/06/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/06/98
SOLANO COUNTY:
LUST: Leaking Undergroung Storage Tanks
Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-421-6770
Date of Government Version: 10/27/97 Data of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 UST: Underground Storage Tanks
Source: Solano County Department of Environmental Management Telephone: 707-421-6770
Date of Government Version: 12/16/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact 04/16/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/22/98
SONOMA COUNTY:
LUST Sites
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 707-525-6565
Date of Government Version: 01/09/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 SUTTER COUNTY:
UST: Underground Storage Tanks
Source: Sutter County Department of Agriculture
Telephone: 916-741-7504
Date of Government Version: 09/18/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 VENTURA COUNTY:
BWT: Business Plan, Hazardous Waste Producers, and Operating Underground Tanks Source: Ventura County Environmental Health Division
Telephone: 805-654-2813
The BWT list indicates by site address whether the Environmental Health Division has Business Plan (B), Waste Producer (W), and/or Underground Tank (T) information.
Date of Government Version: 09/25/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 VERNMENriREpplip”EARCK DATA C URREN ACK1
LUST: Listing of Underground Tank Cleanup Sites
Source: Environmental Health Division
Telephone: 805-654-2813
Ventura County Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Sites (LUST).
Date of Government Version: 12/31/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98
UST: Underground Tank Closed Sites List
Source: Environmental Health Division
Telephone: 805-654-2813
Ventura County Operating Underground Storage Tank Sites (UST)/Underground Tank Closed Sites List.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 03/23/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 06/22/98 SWF/LF: Inventory of Illegal Abandoned and Inactive Sites Source: Environmental Health Division
Telephone: 805-654-2813
Ventura County Inventory of Closed, Illegal Abandoned, and Inactive Sites.
Date of Government Version: 06/01/97
Database Release Frequency: Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/02/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/31/98
GOV.gRN ENT RECORDS SEARCHED I DATA COME NCY TRACKING
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) LUST Records LUST REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigation
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board North Coast (1) Telephone: 707-576-2220
Date of Government Version: 02/11/98
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/31/98
LUST REG 2: Fuel Leak List
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-286-0457
Date of Government Version: 01/22/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/24/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/98 LUST REG 3: LUSTIS Database
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-549-3147
Date of Government Version: 08/20/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/26/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Soheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98 LUST REG 4: Underground Storage Tank Leak List
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-266-7544
Date of Government Version: 01/14/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/06/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/06/98 LUST REG 5: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Database
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Teleptione: 916-255-3125
Date of Government Version: 01/21/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/13/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 LUST REG 6L: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Lahontan Region (6) Telephone: 916-542-5424
Date of Government Version: 12/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/ 14/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07113/98 LUST REG 6V: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Victoniille Branoh Office (6) Telephone: 760-346-7491
Date of Government Version: 11/12/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/11/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/03/98 LUST REG 7: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Case Listing Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado River Basin Region (7) Telephone: 760-346-7491
Date of Government Version: 11/12/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/31/98 LUST REG 8: (LUSTIS) Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 909-782-4498
Date of Government Version: 01/02/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/17/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED CURRENCY TRACKING
LUST REG 9: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Report
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 619-467-2952
Date of Government Version: 12/23/97
Database Release Frequency: Quarterly
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/06/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/06/98
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) SLIC Records SLIC REG 1: Active Toxic Site Investigations
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region (1) Telephone: 707-576-2220
Date of Government Version: 03/09/98
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/01/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/31/98
SUC REG 2: North and South Bay Slic Report
Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region (2) Telephone: 510-286-0457
Any contaminated site that impacts groundwater or has the potential to impaot groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 01/22/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/24/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/98 SLIC REG 3: SLIC Data
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Coast Region (3) Telephone: 805-549-3147
Any contaminated site that impacts groundwater or has the potential to impact groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/26/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/24/98 SLIC REG 4: SLIC Sites
Source: Region Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region (4) Telephone: 213-266-7544
Any contaminated site that impacts groundwater or has the potential to impact groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 01/20/98 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/06/98 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Next Soheduled EDR Contact: 07/06/98 SLIC REG 5: SLIC List
Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region (5) Telephone: 916-855-3075
Unregulated sites that impact groundwater or have the potential to impact groundwater.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 02/25/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 SLIC REG 6V: Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup Cost Recovery Listing Source: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Victorville Branch Telephone: 619-241-6583
Date of Government Version: 09/23/97 Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/14/98 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98 SLIC REG 8: SLIC List
Source: California Region Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region (8) Telephone: 909-782-3298
Date of Government Version: 10/31/97
Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
Date of Last EDR Contact: 04/16/98
Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/13/98
SLIC REG 9: WDS NURD List
Source: California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region (9) Telephone: 619-467-2980
Date of Government Version: 11/21/96 Date of Last EDR Contact: 06/15/98 Database Release Frequency: Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/07/98
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEA RCHED DATA C RRENCY TRACKING
Historical and Other Database(s)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas sites is provided exclusively to EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. ©Copyright 1993 Real Property Scan, Inc. Fora technical description of the types of hazards which may be found at such sites, contact your EDR customer service representative.
Disclaimer Provided by Real Property Scan, Inc.
The information contained in this report has predominantly been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to insure the accuracy of this report, Real Property Scan does not guarantee the accuracy of this report. Any liability on the part of Real Properly Scan is strictly limited to a refund of the amount paid. No claim is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not constitute a legal opinion
DELISTED NPL: NPL Deletions
Source: EPA
Telephone: 703-603-8769
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 09/25/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 09/26/97 Dale Made Active at EDR: 11/28/97 Elapsed ASTM days: 63 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually. Date of Last EDR Contact: 02/06/98 NFRAP: No Further Remedial Action Planned
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: 703-413-0223
As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated No Further Remedial Action Planned" (NFRAP) have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately
25.000 NFRAP sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 02/17/98 Date Made Active at EDR: 04/13/98 Elapsed ASTM days: 55 Database Release Frequency: Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact: 05/22/98 PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202-260-2805
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.
PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: 202-260-2805
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SWDIS) after August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS).
VERN MEW REPO RD.$. :SEARPHED;IATkPURRENCYTRACKI
Area Radon Information: The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions.
Oil/Gas Pipelines/Electrical Transmission Lines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000 Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily gas pipelines and electrical transmission lines.
Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
USGS Water Wells: In November 1971 the United States Geological Survey (USGS) implemented a national water resource information tracking system. This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on more than 900,000 wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater.
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1996 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NVV1: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in March 1997 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Water Dams: National Inventory of Dams
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Telephone: 202-646-2801
Natiorfal computer database of more than 74,000 dams maintained by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
California Earthquake Fault Lines: The fault lines displayed on EDR's Topographic map are digitized quaternary fault lines, prepared in 1975 by the United State Geological Survey. Additional information (also from 1975) regarding activity at specific fault lines comes from California's Preliminary Fault Activity Map prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology.
California Drinking Water Quality Database
Source: Department of Health Services
Telephone: 916-324-2319
The database includes all drinking water compliance and special studies monitoring tor the state of California since 1984. It consists of over 3,200,000 individual analyses along with well and water system information. 1 0 5 BIOLOGICAL. ASSESSMENT
Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
Biological Technical Report
Prepared for:
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine, CA 92618-2069
Contact: Kevin Thomas
Prepared by:
BonTerra Consulting
151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Contact: Sandra J. Leatherman
(714) 444-9199
April 20, 1999
Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Survey Methodology
3.0 Biological Resources
3.1 Vegetation Associations 2 3.2 Wildlife 3 3.3 Special Status Biological Resources
4.0 Impacts 5
4.1 Significance Criteria 6 4.2 Direct Impacts 7 4.3 Indirect Impacts 8
5.0 Mitigation Measures 8
6.0 References 8
1 2
Table
LIST OF TABLES
Page
A Special Status Plant Species Known to Occur in the Region of the Project Site A-1 Special Status Wildlife Species Known to Occur in the Region of the Project Site B-1 RAProjects \RBF1,1020 BioTechRpt- 042099
Biological Resources Technical Repect
Airport North Road/U.S, Route 101 Interchange
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
AIRPORT NORTH/U.S. ROUTE 101 INTERCHANGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Biological Technical Report has been prepared to support California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation requirements of the proposed construction of the Airport Road/U.S.
Route 101 Interchange project (hereafter referred to as the "proposed project"). The site is located north of the intersection of Las Posas Road and U.S. Highway Route 101.
This section describes the biological resources that either occur or potentially occur on the site.
Vegetation associations, wildlife populations, and special status plant and wildlife species either known or potentially occurring on the site are discussed below. In addition, this information has been prepared in accordance with accepted scientific and technical standards that are consistent with the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
2.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
BonTerra Consulting conducted a search of the available literature to identify special status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB 1997), California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 1998), and compendia of special status species published by the USFWS and CDFG were reviewed. Tables A and B (see end of report) list the special status plant and wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the project site with their status and occurrence probability. BonTerra also reviewed existing documentation and informally consulted with the resource agencies. Existing documentation reviewed by BonTerra included the Ponderosa Corridor Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the Airport North Specific Plan EIR.
The site survey was conducted on September 10, 1998, by Sandra Leatherman, Senior Botanist at BonTerra Consulting, to describe the vegetation and evaluate the potential of the habitat to support special status plant and wildlife species. All plant and wildlife species observed were recorded in field notes. Plant species were identified in the field or collected for future identification.
Plants were identified using keys in Hickman (1993), Munz 1974, and Abrams (1923). Taxonomy follows Hickman (1993) for scientific and common names. Roberts (1998) was used for common names when none were listed in Hickman (1993).
Surveys for plants, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals were conducted simultaneously with the vegetation mapping identified above. During the survey, active searches for reptiles and amphibians were accomplished and included lifting, overturning, and carefully replacing rocks and debris. Birds were identified by standard visual and auditory recognition. The presence of nests R: \ Projects \ RBRJ020 BioTechRpt• 042099 1 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
or other evidence of breeding activity was also noted. Surveys for mammals included searching for and identifying diagnostic sign, including scat, footprints, scratch-outs, dusting bowls, burrows, and trails.
3.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.1 VEGETATION ASSOCIATIONS
The vegetation on the site consists primarily of agricultural fields, disturbed habitat, ornamental landscaping, and willow woodland.
Agricultural fields occur to the north and south of U.S. Highway Route 101. The agricultural fields on the site were being plowed at the time of surveys, but appeared to be strawberry fields. The edges of the agricultural fields consist of ruderal vegetation. There are also two drainages on the site: one on the north side of Route 101 and one on the south side of Route 101. Both of these drainages contain non-native ruderal species including common horseweed (Conzya canadensis), cheeseweed (MaIva parviflora), common sow-thistle (Sonchus oleraceus), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and puncture vine (Tfibulus terrestris).
Ornamental landscaping occurs at the residential area on the south side of the project site. The species present in these areas include Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle), date palm (Phoenix sp.), and pittosporum (Pittosporum sp.).
The only native vegetation on the project site occurs adjacent to the spreading basins north of Route 101. This area can be characterized as willow woodland. However, it is important to note that many of the species in this willow woodland appear to have been planted around the spreading basins and contain plants not typical of willow woodland in the Camarillo area. Species present include arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), narrow leaved willow (Salix exigua), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), alder (Alnus sp.), cattails (Typha sp.), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), and acacia trees (Acacia sp.).
Riparian associations, which may include wetlands and "Waters of the United States" are protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). "Waters of the United States" include navigable coastal and inland waters, lakes, rivers, and streams, and their tributaries, interstate waters and their tributaries, wetlands adjacent to such waters, and isolated wetlands and lakes, intermittent streams, and other waters that could affect interstate commerce. In addition, the onsite drainages may meet the criteria established by Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code, which may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG. These drainages support a riparian herb vegetation association which has been formed by previous and ongoing residential and agricultural RAProjects \RBR.1020 NoTechRpt- 042099 2 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/US. Route 101 Interchange
runoff. This area may be considered an isolated wetland under the ACOE definition and may be considered a streambed under the CDFG jurisdiction. Permitting/agreements from these agencies may be required prior to any altering of the streambed or bank.
3.2 WILDLIFE
The project site provides suitable habitat for numerous wildlife species, although few were observed during the survey. Species observed on the site include Brewer's blackbird (Euphagus cyanocepephalus) and domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Common small mammals expected to occur include valley pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), vole (Microtus sp.), and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audobonii). Larger mammals expected to occur include coyote (Canis latrans), skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and opossum (Didelphis virgin/anus). Amphibians and reptiles are usually inactive in the winter and none were observed during the survey. Common reptiles that are expected to occur on the site include side blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), western skink (Eumeces skiltonianus), and gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus). Agricultural habitats provide foraging habitat for a number of raptors. Red-tailed hawk (Buteojamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooped) are expected to forage on or in the vicinity of the site. Birds present in agricultural areas vary with the crop type and season. During winter months, agricultural fields are used as foraging habitat by a variety of species, including mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), western meadowlark (Stumella neglecta), and American pipit (Anthus rubescens).
The willow woodland may provide habitat for a number of riparian bird species including Bullock's oriole (lcterus bullockii), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), black-headed grosbeak (Pheucticus melanocephalus), blue grosbeak (Guiraca caerulea), warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus), Wilson's warbler (Wilsonia pusilla), and pacific-slope flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis). However, the willow woodland is not dense enough to support southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus) or least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus).
3.3 SPECIAL STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This section addresses special status biological resources observed, reported, or having the potential to occur on the project site. These resources include plant and wildlife species that have been afforded special status and/or recognition by federal and state resource agencies, as well as private conservation organizations. In general, the principal reason an individual taxon (species, subspecies, or variety) is given such recognition is the documented or perceived decline or limitations of its population size or geographical extent and/or distribution resulting in most cases from habitat loss.
RAProjects \ RBFW020 BioTechRpt. 042099 3 Biological Resources Technical Report 'Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
aefilliti-Qns-QLS-P-e-clat-satatils-Illackgical-Re_spurcas A federally endangered species is one facing extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its geographic range. A federally threatened species is one likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The presence of any federally threatened or endangered species in a project area generally can impose constraints on development, particularly if development would result in "take" of the species or its habitat. The term "take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct. Harm in this sense can include any disturbance to habitats used by the species during any portion of its life history.
Proposed species are those officially proposed by the USFWS for addition to the federal threatened and endangered species lists. Because proposed species may soon be listed as threatened or endangered, these species could become listed prior to or during implementation of a proposed development project.
The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy; a threatened species as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an endangered species in the near future in the absence of special protection or management; and a rare species as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. State threatened and endangered species are fully protected against "take".
Species of Special Concern is an informal designation used by the CDFG for some declining wildlife species that are not considered threatened or endangered. This designation does not provide legal protection, but signifies that these species are recognized as sensitive by the CDFG.
Species that are California fully protected include those protected by special legislation for various reasons, such as the mountain lion and white-tailed kite.
The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) is a local resource conservation organization that has developed an inventory of California's sensitive plant species (Skinner and Pavlik 1997). This inventory is the summary of information on the distribution, rarity, and endangerment of California's vascular, plants. This rare plant inventory is comprised of four lists. CNPS presumes that List 1A plant species are extinct in California because they have not been seen in the wild for many years.
CNPS considers List 1B plants as rare, threatened, or endangered throughout their range. List 2 plant species are considered rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common in other states. Plant species for which CNPS needs additional information are included on List 3.
List 4 plant species are those of limited distribution in California whose susceptibility to threat appears low at this time.
R:\Projects \RBF \J020 BioTechRpt- 042099 4 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
Special Status Habitat
As previously discussed, wetlands and "Waters of the United States" are protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and are under the jurisdiction of the ACOE. The spreading basins and drainages on the project site may be under the jurisdiction of ACOE and may be determined to be subject to permit conditions as regulated by the ACOE and may also require a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1601 of the California Fish and Game Code.
Special Status Plant and Wildlife Species
Plants or animals may be considered "special status" due to declining populations, vulnerability to habitat change, or restricted distributions. Tables A and B (see end of report) summarize the special status plant and wildlife species known to occur in the region. Special status plant and wildlife species are discussed separately below.
Plant Species
No special status plant species were observed or are expected to occur on the project site due to lack of suitable habitat and the lack of native habitats on the project site. No significant impacts to these species are expected and no mitigation would be necessary.
Wildlife Species
No special status wildlife species were observed or are expected to occur on the project site because of the lack, or limited amount of suitable habitat and low potential for occurrence. As with the plant species discussed above, no significant impacts to special status wildlife species are expected. No mitigation is required.
4.0 IMPACTS
The determination of impacts in this technical report is based on a comparison of onsite biological resources and the area of project impact of the proposed alignment. All construction activities, including staging and equipment areas, are assumed to be contained within this impact area. Both direct and indirect impacts on biological resource have been evaluated. Direct impacts are those that involve the initial loss of habitats due to grading and construction. Indirect impacts are those that would be related to disturbance from construction activities and use of the project area.
Biological impacts associated with the proposed project were evaluated with respect to the following sensitive biological issues:
RAProjects1RBRJ020 BioTechRpl- 042099 5 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
• federally- or state-listed endangered or threatened species of plant or wildlife; • streambeds, wetlands, and their associated vegetation; • habitats suitable to support a federally- or state-listed endangered or threatened species of plant or wildlife;
species designated as California Species of Special Concern or Federal Species of Concern;
habitat, other than wetlands, considered sensitive by regulatory agencies (USFWS, CDFG) or resource conservation organizations; and
other species or issues of concern to regulatory agencies or conservation organizations.
The actual and potential occurrence of these resources within the project vicinity was correlated with the following significance criteria to determine whether the impacts of the proposed project on these resources would be considered significant.
4.1 Significance Criteria
The criteria for determining significant impacts on biological resources were developed in accordarice the state CEQA Guidelines. Section 15065(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if "...the project has the potential to substantially 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 an endangered, rare, or threatened species..." An evaluation of whether an impact on biological resources would be substantial must consider both the resource itself and how that resource fits into a regional or local context. Substantial impacts would be those that would diminish, or result in the loss of, an important biological resource or those that would obviously conflict with local, state, or federal resource conservation plans, goals, or regulations. Impacts are sometimes locally adverse but not significant because although they would result in an adverse alteration of existing conditions, they would not substantially diminish, or result in the permanent loss of, an important resource on a population- or region-wide basis.
R:\Projecs\RBF\JO2O BioTechRpt- 042099 6 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/US. Route 101 Interchange
4.2 DIRECT IMPACTS
Vegetation Association Impacts
Agricultural Fields, Disturbed Habitat, and Ornamental Landscaping Areas dominated by agricultural fields, disturbed habitat, and ornamental landscaping would be impacted by construction of the proposed project. These impacts would not be considered significant because: (1) these association is dominated by non-native annual grasses and forbs, mostly of European origin, that are indicators of previous site disturbance; (2) these associations are common throughout southern California, and (3) these areas have low biological value.
Within the agricultural areas adjacent the Ponderosa Drive, a man-made irrigation drainage is present. This drainage may be determined to be subject to permit conditions regulated by the ACOE, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1601 of the California Fish and Game Code. In addition, the ACOE requires a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, or a waiver from, by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Willow Woodland
The willow woodland adjacent to the spreading basins will not be impacted as a result of project implementation. Therefore, there will be no significant impacts to this resource onsite.
Wildlife Impacts
To assess impacts on wildlife, the total impact on a given plant association that provides habitat for wildlife species was evaluated. Construction of the project would result in the loss of primarily non-native habitats that provide limited nesting, foraging, and denning opportunities for wildlife species. Removing or altering habitats would result in the loss of small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and other animals of slow mobility that live in the habitats within the impact area. More mobile wildlife species now using the area would be forced to move into remaining areas of open space, consequently increasing competition for available resources in those areas. This situation would result in losing individuals of the wildlife population that cannot successfully compete. In summary, although the proposed project would affect the wildlife resources within the impact area, these impacts are considered less than significant because the proposed project would not substantially diminish habitat for wildlife on a regional basis.
RAProjects \RBRJ020 BioTechRpt- 042099 7 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Rcad/U.a Route 101 Interchange
SI-le-cial-Statu-s-aiDlogical-Reasmaelmpacts.
Plants and Wildlife
Special status plant species are not expected to occur onsite and would therefore not be impacted by the proposed project. In addition, the project site has a low potential for supporting any wildlife species listed by the resource agencies as special status. Therefore, no impacts to these species are expected as a result of project implementation.
4.3 INDIRECT IMPACTS
Indirect impacts are those related to disturbance by construction and increased use of a project area. Indirect impacts on the biological resources in the area could occur as a result of changes in water quality from project use. Runoff from the project site containing petroleum residues and the improper disposal of petroleum and chemical products from construction equipment could have the potential to adversely affect water quality, and in turn, affect populations of aquatic species (amphibians) downstream of the project site. These impacts are considered adverse but not significant because they would be mitigated through the implementation of Best Management Practices required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), administered by the RWQCB.
5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES
The proposed project has the potential to affect areas that may be considered jurisdiction of the ACOE and CDFG. Therefore, prior to project grading, the project applicant shall conduct a wetland delineation of the site to determine if ACOE and/or CDFG jurisdictions are present within the project site. If impacts to onsite irrigation drainages are determined to be jurisdictional, the project applicant will develop a habitat restoration program in the required ratio identified in the project applicant's ACOE and CDFG permit/agreement for the proposed project.
6.0 REFERENCES
Abrams, L. 1923. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States, Volumes. I, II, and III. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
Abrams, L. 1960. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States. Volume IV. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). December 1997. List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by the Natural Diversity Data Base. Prepared by the Natural Heritage Division, Natural Diversity Data Base.
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1998. List of special plants. Heritage section, California Department of Fish and Game. (January).
RAProjects\RBRJ020 BioTechRpt- 042099 8 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
Hickman, J. C. Editor 1993. The Jepson Manual Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
Non-game Heritage Program, State of California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California.
Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
Roberts, F.M. 1998. A Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Orange County, California. F.M.
Roberts Publications, Encinitas, California.
Sawyer, J.O. and Keeler-Wolf, T. 1995, A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.
Skinner M. and Pavlik, B. 1994a. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California.
Special Publication No. 1 Fifth Edition, California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
Skinner M. and Pavlik, B. 1997. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
R:\Projects \RBF1.1020 BloTechRpt- 042099 9 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
TABLE A
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES
KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITE
Species USFWS CDFG CNPS Potential to Occur on Project Site Calochortus plummerae
Plummer's mariposa lily
SOC -- 1B no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Delphinium partyi ssp. blochmaniae
Dune larkspur
SOC -- 1B no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Dudleya blochmaniae ssp.
blochmaniae
Smooth tarplant
SOC -- 1B no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Dudleya verityi
Verity's dudleya
FT -- 1B no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Eriogonum crocatum
Conejo buckwheat
SOC CR 1B no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Senecio aphanactis
Rayless ragwort
-- -- 2 no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
LEGEND
State (CDFG)
E Endangered
T Threatened
PE Proposed Endangered
PT Proposed Threatened
CR State Rare
in California and Elsewhere
in California But More Common Elsewhere
More - A Review List
A Watch List
Federal (USFWS)
E Endangered
T Threatened
PE Proposed Endangered
PT P.roposed Threatened
C Candidate Species
SOC Species of Special Concern
California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
1A Plants Presumed Extinct in California
1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered
2 Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered
3 Plants About Which We Need
4 Plants of Limited Distribution -
RAProjects \RE3R1020 BoTechRpt- 042099 A-1 Biological Resources Technical Report
TABLE B
SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITE
Species USFWS CDFG Potential to Occur on Project Site
WILDLIFE
Reptiles
C/emmys marmorata
Western pond turtle
SSC SSC/P no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Cnemidophorus hypetythrus beldingi
Belding's orange-throated whiptail
SSC SSC/P no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Annie/la pulchra pulchra
Silvery legless lizard
SSC SSC limited suitable habitat/not expected to
OCCUr
Crotalus ruber ruber
Northern red-diamond rattlesnake
SSC SSC no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Birds
Elanus /eucurus
White-tailed kite
-- FP limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Circus cyaneus
Northern harrier
-- SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Accipiter striatus
Sharp-shinned hawk
-- SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Accipit.ercooperii
Cooper's hawk
-- SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Buteo regalis
Ferruginous hawk
SSC SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
-- T limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Aquila chrysaetos
Golden eagle
-- SSC/FP limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Falco columbarius
Merlin
-- SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Fa/co mexicanus
Prairie falcon
-- SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Falco peregrinus
Peregrine falcon
E E limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat
/not expected to occur
Charadrius montanus
Mountain plover
C SSC no suitable habitat /not expected to occur
Athene cunicularia
Burrowing owl
SSC SSC no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Asio otus
Long-eared owl
-- SSC no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Empidonax trailii extimus
Southwestern willow flycatcher
E E no suitable nesting habitat/not expected to
occur as breeder
Lanius ludovicianus
Loggerhead shrike
SSC -- limited foraging habitat/not expected to
occur
. RAProjects\RBR1020 BioTechRpt- 042099 B-1 Biological Resources Technical Report Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange
TABLE B (continued)
SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITE
Species USFWS CDFG Potential to Occur on Project Site
WILDLIFE
Vireo bellii pusillus
Least Bell's vireo
E
•
E no suitable nesting habitat/not expected to
Occur
Dendroic,a petechia brewsteri
Yellow warbler
-- SSC no suitable nesting habitat/not expected to
occur as breeder
Icteria virens
Yellow-breasted chat
-- SSC no suitable nesting habitat/not expected to
occur as breeder
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
Southern California rufous-crowned
sparrow
-- SSC no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Ammodramus savannarum
Grasshopper sparrow
-- -- no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
Agelaius tricolor
Tricolored blackbird
SSC SSC limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat'
not expected to occur
Mammals
Corynorhinus townsendii townsendil
-
Townsend's western big-eared bat
SSC SSC no suitable habitat/not expected to occur
LEGEND
Federal (USFWS) State (CDFG)
E Endangered E Endangered T Threatened T Threatened PE Proposed Endangered PE Proposed Endangered PT Proposed Threatened PT Proposed Threatened C Candidate Species SSC Species of Special Concern SSC Species of Special Concern FP Fully Protected
P Protected
RAProjects\RBRJ020 BioTechRpt• 042099 B-2 Biological Resources Technical Report
10.6 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT
PM10 (pou
nds/day)
PM10 (pounds
/day)
Co
o c ci
5 _a * * a) O -c 0
z v) z ..c
„...., o) * --- 6 * ± ,--. E ,--, co l-0 co rj.-: a) ir. -0 ci , --- 0 C o >,
,- _a ,--- c) -a
-0 a)
0_ ..".
4- c)
....... ......... *5 .o) 6.
0_ --
':-' -,•, 46 Cr I 4-
0 C.) 0 C1)
(l) c) 47 a) a) a) ED_ ,
492 ..., ‘st::- 0 Co Lt) 1141: LL 73 2 'I: ; ...0 :" s c""" c:is 0 C CN- N-- CN 0 = Cr) 4'" C4.4 = O >s
fr CNI • • ..c.-,,.. 1N.
u_ r.L' -
0) 0) 0) 43 u) c Co Nr •.zr -- .._1 c) c) co cp u)
• 0 0 ,
C c) c\I 0 C •c .5- ...0 (:) c) >, co co >,
-0 "0 '0 E 0 C/ Co 0 0 in
(0--,
LO LO Co C2 (:). V: 1`..- h - C N, (NI '0 0 0 C \I
.5 N.- et 1:3 'E ci c5 Lri ci c al 1--- N.-- N.
II II II II II II II II II II II > a) ii ii II II II II II riedrich House
0o o
1 E E c 0 ot EE
(1) a) o
a) 7 f.-..)
..c - ..-• , Ws To
4.4.' > al ,
O 0 CO 0 0 LL I— F-- -i a I-- I—
CoI . . >
Co
>
0 c
zOn_0 45vi Tu••F) . _ E o
N
00 04 w ...... ..--.. .cio, W .....
C • • C •
O (j) 0 eL* * >1 CI. *
N (ST (S1-' e- "a CO CN1 N CO CO co. oN (0 (0
N N N v.: N N cri ,
II II II II II II II II ROG (p
o
u
ndsp
er day)
R
OG (p
o
u
ndsp
er day)
Fugitive Du
st
_c
CO
>
CO
• ui
'a5 o La 'a
t v.2CO ▪ CZ CZ LLLL LL.
o 4E' 4-C"'
E EE CL
= 5 5 5
O CT CT' cs
111 111 W
ri.
c c c
.— o .2.2
t5
77 a) I. 2. 1 . r, I... L..
c c 0)0 00
4-+ 0 00
cci
C
`r.:
• < < <
'*"6 a) °
• CZ ▪ CZ CO
O E- H
co 00
4.)
• C
/- 5
• o (1) 0.. ct
X
Emis
sio
ns (p
o
u
nds/day)
h:\34233\eir\aqform
ul.wpd
Mobile Eq
uip
m
en
a)
5 ROG (p
o
u
ndsp
er day)
>,
0 6
c
.5";
CU C6
E•j
a) Tti -C--
00 9.
'Al
CZ
>,
0 VC;
7; v.
,= iii
0 'et
00 6
4.0801
0 CO
cr)
ri
'ci- CO
st-.
-,-.
dr ..*
r,
Co °I..
0 0
ol
,---
0 (C) <Y)
cei
0 Co
It)
4 5.
5001
TIr
o
Ce)
ri
C4
00 0
0 00
0 0
0 Co
• 00 esi
9 x <0
0 V
Z " 10
CD
CO
C \i
CI)
0. C,
Lai
'4'
30.480
Co
(7)
Csi
,--.
CO
VI
10 a;
Co
‘r"
20.8801 40.800
0 Co
Co
Co;
0 0
0 6
CO
•teC.4
vc,)
0.1 00
00 0
6 0
6 CN1
Cl
e...
cl
t•4
-'' : 5 •
0 79-
........
6.4801
DL
A
5.520
CJ
N
4 Co
CO
6 Co
in
nC) (5)
0 0
<.0
Co6
0 CO
r0
0 0
6 (D
rc..1 (NI
00 0
0 6
1.0201
23.44 Hours
Per Day
C\J C\I N N
ly Exhaust
N N
Total Mobile Eq
uipment Daily Exhau
st
Total Daily Demolition
Total Daily Eq
uipme
nt Exhaust
Total Daily Fugitive Dust
Total Daily Asphalt Pa
ving
Total Da
ily Co
n
struction
Hourly Exhaust Emissions
......,
0 6"
T"' Z.C.-
2 0
a. -a zz..-.
,--
'1'
0 r.--
ci
--
6 e---
0 c) 6
Total Grading Eq
uipme
ntDail
._6
0 C)'.-
6 ,71-
6 Nox
(lbs/hr)
3 8
.
4 1
0).
' '.C)
NC \! Nt
In
6 N00 P--
,--
..--.
m "
0 IA
Ce 12
........
N- C \I
cp.
0.23 L
(CC)
'.- Co
c; d
LOU)
C9
c-3
Ap
0 MS
0 CN1
09 C•I
te)
0 C.0
N--
C \ I
CO
N..-
Co
Co
— C N
21 2641
Eq
uip.
Eq
uipmentType
Qty.
Scrap
er I 21
Wheeled Lo
ader
Wheeled Tractor 2
MotorGrader I 21
43 -5
it
---
Misc. (Dump Truck)
'Grading 'Gra
ding
'Grading
Gra
ding1
ci)
IE5
o
2 Mobile
CO
(/) 't3 C O 0 ct
E ct
-cn CU --
•-•1' -C
a0
L.. L.-
•Ze :•C'e
0 CD CC v- -0
CL .0 .., 0
9. 6
8401
tri
m
0 N
v0 el' 0
N CO h6 Csi (I t's.
.,--•rc Na
0 0 CO. 0 CV 1".-
co
0 01 0 0 0 0
6 Cs1
in Cl
0 el
0 0
o
6 l000.o I
I.0 0.1
6 cl
>%
ov
z sch ..0
....-
0 CO
('4
0 0 0
00 (.0
45.7201
0. 648
CO Csi 01
0 00c4
C('4
31. e3201 81.600
0 01 09
0 0 0
6 319.848
00 00 00
6 6
111)
03 al '
v- CO
(Aepisql)
DOM
6.4801
8.280
0 CO
-1:
O
CO
CO
"st6
03 0
c•-:
,-- CNI 2.
3401
0 0 c•4
N.:
0 vt
co
oi
0 0
6 o
CO
"Kt
•1°- CI
00 0
6 CD
T.-
em
V'
csi
c•I
Hours
Per Day
,-- -r- ..,-- .--- NNNN
C
ly Exhau
st
12 Total Mo
bile Eq
uipmentDaily Exhaust
.-
0 0
CI
›N
rn
—
i""
Total Daily Eq
uip
mentExhau
st
Total Daily Fugitive Dust
Total Daily Asphalt Paving
Total Daily Con
struction
Hourly Exhaust Emissions
PM10
(lbs/hr)
Total Gra
ding Eq
uipmentDail
C,')
' 8
0. 05
0.14 0.
0541
h- CO
6 N-.
%---
0.271
Lo 0:3 CD
6 Lo
.<---
c3
0 >,
ea
0 N CO
-rN CO ver CO 0,,1
N CO
',--
264
ci
cr a
w
N CO
Eq
uipment Ty
pe
IScrap
er
Whe
eled Loader
Wheeled Tra
ctor
, Motor Grader
=0 M1 isc. (Dump Truck)
'Grading
0) C
'Es
cc
1Grading
09 C
co
0 :15
2 00
C D
25 2
10.7 NOISE ASSUMPTIONS
TURE WITHOUT
Ea EAR 2020)
TL/RE
ROADWAY SEGMENT PEED
ph)
Existing Conditions
Ponderosa Drive
Las Posas Road to Joseph Earl Road 2 40 96' 39' 22.5'
Future With Project (Year 2020)
Ponderosa Drive
Las Posas Road to Joseph Earl Road 4 50 94' 44' 25'
North/South Road
101 Interchange to Ponderosa Drive 4 50 94' 44' 25'
Future Without Project (Year 2020)
Ponderosa Drive
Las Posas Road to Joseph Earl Road 2 40 96' 39' 22.5'
AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS USED IN NOISE ANALYSIS
Ponderosa Drive
Las Posas Road to Joseph Earl Road 1,950 18,100 9,700
North/South Road
101 Interchange to Ponderosa Drive NA 21,800 NA
ROADWAY ASSUMPTIONS USED IN NOISE ANALYSIS
NOTES: ROW = Right-of-Way
CLS = Centerline separation
NLCL = Nearest lane centerline
ADT Average daily trips
MPH = Miles per hour
Route 101 Assumptions and ADT
Year
# Eanes Speed
(mph)
ROW CIS
NLCU
ROW
ADT
1998 6 55 160' 102' 30' 147,000
2020 6 55 160' 102 30' 176,000
NOTE: Roadway configuration data derived from information contain in Table 6 within the Camarillo General Plan Circulation Element. Average daily traffic (ADT) (1998) obtained from Project Study Report (PSR). • • 4.41 • •4•4.• VI SI I...C.4QI INUCZU tl, JUJepl I CCU! rVidU VARIABLE INPUT (as desired)
Existing:Jefferson ( Indio to Fred Waring)
////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// 1/1/1/1/11////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// // Speed Vehicle Speed (mph, 0 to 100) 40 //
// Grad Road Gradient (%, 0 to 6) 0 //
II Sep1 Centerline Separation (feet) 39 // // with » (Usually 23' for 2-lane, 38' // // median » for 4-lane, 50' for 6-lane) // // Dist1 Distance from observer to the 100 // // nearest lane centerline (>50') // // (used in calculations) // // Dist2 Dist. from ROW to NLC 22.5 HARD // ' Ldn @ 100' (soft) 54.25 57.3 // VOL TOTAL Vehicle Volume (two-wa 1950 // // ALPHA //
Hard site=0, Soft site=0.5 0.5 //
// DISTANCE FROM RESULTS DISTANCE FROM // Cntrline ROW Centerline ROW // 63 23 <-- hard 60 Ldn soft ---> 49 8 // 20 -20 65 Ldn 23 -18 // 6 -34 //
70 Ldn 10 -30
// // View View Angle of Observer (180) 180 // //
//
SHIELDING (adjust output by hand) //
// // Woods Thickness of woodland between 0 // // observer and road (feet) // // Cover Percent view coverage between 0 // // observer and road (0-100) // // Rows Building rows between observer 0 // // and roadway (0-4). // ////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// 11/1/1/1 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates. 24-Mar-99 JN (NS) ruiute vviu I rlojeet eui 4u4u). r011UelOSEI NOSaS 1-(080 10 JOSepil Carl K080 VARIABLE INPUT (as desired)
Existing:Jefferson ( Indio to Fred Waring)
////"//////// ///// ///////////////// //////////////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// 11111111 // 2)eed Vehicle Speed (mph, 0 to 100) 50 //
// Grad Road Gradient (%, 0 to 6) 0 //
// Sep1 Centerline Separation (feet) 44 //
// with » (Usually 23 for 2-lane, 38' //
// median » for 4-lane, 50' for 6-lane) //
// Dist1 Distance from observer to the 100 //
// nearest lane centerline (>50') //
// (used in calculations) /1
// Dist2 Dist. from ROW to NLC 25 HARD
II *** Ldn @ 100' (soft) 66.22 69.32
II VOL TOTAL Vehicle Volume (two-wa 18100 II
// ALPHA Hard site=0, Soft site=0.5 0.5 //
//
// DISTANCE FROM RESULTS DISTANCE FROM
// Cntrline ROW Centerline ROW
// 1,026 981 <-- hard 60 Ldn soft ---> 312 267
// 324 279 65 Ldn 145 100
// 103 58 70 Ldn 67 22
// //
// View View Angle of Observer (180) 180 //
// SHIELDING (adjust output by hand) //
// ---- ----- //
// Woods Thickness of woodland between 0 //
// observer and road (feet) //
// —iver Percent view coverage between 0 //
// observer and road (0-100) //
// Rows Building rows between observer 0 //
// and roadway (0-4). //
////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //NM Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates. 24-Mar-99 JN (NS) • ••••,.• •••• V V ILI I I I INUI LI I/JtJULI I r\ou--w I intercnange to vonaerosa unve VARIABLE INPUT (as desired)
Existing:Jefferson ( Indio to Fred Waring)
////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// /////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// // Speed Vehicle Speed (mph, 0 to 100) 50 // // Grad Road Gradient (%, 0 to 6) 0 // II Sep1 Centerline Separation (feet) 44 // // with ». (Usually 23' for 2-lane, 38' // // median » for 4-lane, 50' for 6-lane) // // Dist1 Distance from observer to the 100 // // nearest lane centerline (>50') // // (used in calculations) // // Dist2 Dist. from ROW to NLC 25 HARD // ' Ldn @ 100' (soft) 67.03 70.12 // VOL TOTAL Vehicle Volume (two-wa 21800 // // ALPHA Hard site=0, Soft site=0.5 0.5 // // // DISTANCE FROM RESULTS DISTANCE FROM // Cntrline ROW Centerline ROW // 1,234 1189 <-- hard 60 Ldn soft ---> 353 308 // 390 345 65 Ldn 164 119 // 123 78 70 Ldn 76 31 // // // View View Angle of Observer (180) 180 // // SHIELDING (adjust output by hand) // // --- ----- — // // Woods Thickness of woodland between 0 // // observer and road (feet) // // Cover Percent view coverage between 0 // // observer and road (0-100) // // Rows Building rows between observer 0 // // and roadway (0-4). // ////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates. 24-Mar-99 JN (NS) L..AIJ1.11 ly I aao. r'SUUW I U I . LS 1-05aSIo uentrai VARIABLE INPUT (as desired)
Existing:Jefferson ( Indio to Fred Waring)
///m//// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// ;peed Vehicle Speed (mph, 0 to 100) 55 //
// Grad Road Gradient (%, 0 to 6) 0 // // Sepl Centerline Separation (feet) 102 // // with >> (Usually 23' for 2-lane, 38' // // median » for 4-lane, 50' for 6-lane) // // Distl Distance from observer to the 100 // // nearest lane centerline (>50') // // (used in calculations) // // Dist2 Dist. from ROW to NLC 30 HARD 1/ ' Ldn @ 100' (soft) 75.28 78.74 // VOL TOTAL Vehicle Volume (two-wa 147000 // // ALPHA Hard site=0, Soft site=0.5 0.5 // // // DISTANCE FROM RESULTS DISTANCE FROM // Cntrline ROW Centerline ROW // .... .... <-- hard 60 Ldn soft ---> 1,484 1412 // 3,363 3291 65 Ldn 689 617 /I 1,063 991 70 Ldn 320 248 // // // View View Angle of Observer (180) 180 // // SHIELDING (adjust output by hand) // // ----- // // Woods Thickness of woodland between 0 // // observer and road (feet) // // over Percent view coverage between 0 // // observer and road (0-100) // // i-tows Building rows between observer 0 // // and roadway (0-4). // ////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates. 26-Mar-99 JN (NS) VARIABLE INPUT (as desired)
Existing:Jefferson ( Indio to Fred Waring)
////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// 1/1/1/1/11////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// // Speed Vehicle Speed (mph, 0 to 100) 55 //
1/ Grad Road Gradient (%, 0 to 6) 0 //
// Sep1 Centerline Separation (feet) 102 //
// with » (Usually 23' for 2-lane, 38' //
// median » for 4-lane, 50' for 6-lane) //
// Dist1 Distance from observer to the 100 //
II nearest lane centerline (>50') //
// (used in calculations) //
// Dist2 Dist. from ROW to NLC 30 HARD
// *— Ldn @ 100' (soft) 76.06 79.52
// VOL TOTAL Vehicle Volume (two-wa 176000 //
II ALPHA Hard site=0, Soft site=0.5 0.5 //
II
//
//
//
DISTANCE FROM
Cntrline ROW
....... ......
RESULTS DISTANCE FROM
Centerline ROW
<-- hard 60 Ldn soft ---> 1,673 1600
I/ 4,024 3952 65 Ldn 776 704
// 1,273 1201 70 Ldn 360 288
// //
11 View View Angle of Observer (180) 180 //
// SHIELDING (adjust output by hand) //
// //
// Woods Thickness of woodland between 0 //
// observer and road (feet) // // Cover Percent view coverage between 0 // // observer and road (0-100) // // Rows Building rows between observer 0 // // and roadway (0-4). //
////////// ////// ///// //////////// ///// ////////// ////// ////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////// //////// Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates. 26-Mar-99 JN (NS) NOTICE OF DETERM .TION ! Tlementarv Document P
TO: V Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street, Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
FROM: (Public Agency)
City of Camarillo
P. 0. Box 248
• Clerk of the Board (1920)
County of Ventura
800 South Victoria Avenue
Camarillo. CA 93011-0248
Ventura, CA 93009 Date: June 24, 1999
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
EIR 99-15 for Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation 83 Project Title
SCH #99031099
State Clearinghouse Number
(if submitted to Clearinghouse)
Matthew A. Boden
Planning Director
Lead Agency
Contact Person
(805) 388-5360
Telephone No.
Project Location (include county): Camarillo, California; County of Ventura; Route 101 (Ventura Freeway) between existing interchanges at Las Posas Road one mile to the east and Central Avenue one mile to the west; annexation of approximately 270 acres located on north side of Route 101, west of Las Posas Road, easterly of Ponderosa Avenue/Avenida de Aprisa
Project Description: The interchange portion of the project involves the construction of a conventional diamond interchange with a four-lane overcrossing, consisting of two through lanes in each direction, with new on- and off-ramps merging with the existing Route 101 northbound and southbound travel lanes. The annexation portion of the project is for annexation of approximately 270 acres to the City of Camarillo, Camarillo Sanitary District and detachment from the Ventura County Resource Conservation District.
This is to advise that the Camarillo City Council has approved the above described project • Lead Agency 0 Responsible Agency
on June 23, 1999 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project:
(Date)
1. The project X will, will not have a significant effect on the environment.
2. X An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures X were, were not made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations X was, was not adopted for this project. 5. Findings X were, were not made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final EIR comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at:
City of Camarillo Department of Planning and Community Development Carmei iv
, I amarillo, CA 93010
Signature (Public Agency)
June 24, 1999 Director of Planning and Community Development Date Title
Date received for filing at OPR:
(f: \ annex\ a83 \83-intchgEIR.notdet) Revised October 1989 City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Jason Marshall
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
Assistant Director
801 K Street, MS 24-02
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER (dated June 10, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Mr. Marshall,
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your May 13, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (example). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Matthew A. Bolden
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 13, 1999 LEI 1ER
FROM
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
Issues pertaining to the potential to impact agricultural resources have been addressed in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, Section 6.2, Growth-Inducing Impacts, and Section 4.3, Cumulative Impacts.
It should be noted that this comment letter was received by the City of Camarillo following the close of the public review period, and therefore does not require a written response, in accordance with CEQA. The City of Camarillo also received an NOP response from the Department of Conservation, although this also was received after the close of the NOP public review period (the NOP comment letter is also attached, and was actually received after the Draft EIR public review period commenced).
As acknowledged in the comment letter, the Draft EIR already addresses many of the Department's concerns. The Draft EIR includes a discussion of cumulative impacts and growth-inducing impacts. As noted in the Draft EIR, the Annexation Area is being pre-zoned for agricultural use, and any future development would require discretionary review by the City. It should be noted that the Annexation Area is in an Urban Reserve Overlay.
Agricultural resources are discussed in Section 4.2 of the Draft EIR, which uses County of Ventura significance thresholds. The Draft BR also addresses cumulative impacts, growthinducing impacts and alternatives to the project.
June 14, 1999
State of California The Resources Agency
MEMORANDUM
To: Project Coordinator Date: June 10, 19gg
Resources Agency
Mr. Matthew A. Eoden
City of Camarillo
Department of Nanning and Community Development
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
From. Department of Conservation
Office of Governmental and Environmental Relations
Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) SCH #99031099 The Napa nt of Conservation's Division of Land Resource Protection has reviewed the referenced DER The Division monitor3 farmland conversion on a statewide basis and administers the California Lend ConseNation (WItiarnson) Act We over the following corn on the DEIR for your consideration.
This project proposes a new Interchange on Route 101, plus several new local arterial streets connecting to the Interchange, and the annexation of approximately 270 acres along the north side of Route 101 into the City of Camarillo. The Department previously reviewed and commented on this project's Notice of Preparation in a May 13, 199 latter. Many of the Department's previous comments were addressed in the DEIR However, In this memorandum we re-emphasize several that were not. Also, based on our review of the more detailed DEIR, we offer a few new comments. - rmIn. F, a • *i. 11 f e • hue Fa u a*
To ensure a Complete coverage of the project's impacts and mitigation relative to agnoulturel land, the FEIR should Include the following information. • Current and past agricultural use of the project area and data on types of crops grown, yields and crop values. This should be a basic component of the description Of the project Setting, and would provide good context for discussing project impacts. • The economic value of agricultural production. Economic multipliers can be used to assess the total agricultural value to the economy. The University of California Cooperative Extension's study 'Economic Impacts of Agricultural Production and Processing in StanIsleus County" can be used as a model. (Copies of thia end other similar publications are available by calling the Cooperative Extension Service at (209) 525-6500,)
• Incremental project Impacts leading to cumulatively considerable Impacts on agricultural innd. These Impacts would Include impacts from the proposed project as Mr. Matthew A. Baden
lune 10, 1999
well as impacts from past current and probable future projects. Relative to the total amount of farmland in the State, the conversion of land resulting from this Individual project is small. However, when one considers that 50 to 60 years ago Los Angeles County was California's top agricultural county, it Is dear that the impact of small projects like this one can have a significant cumulative Impact on the agricultural land resource. In 1990, the Department of Conaervation published the study, impacts of Farmland Conversion In California.° ThIs study cally examined the loss of ferrniand in Ventura County over a 20-year period. 'This study, along with the farmland conversion reports of the Division's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, should be of value to a cumulative impact analysis for this project. Both publicatioes are available from the Division at the contact listed at the end of this memorandum. • Project Thresholds of Significance, Thresholds uSed In EIRs for agricultural lend conversion impacts are often subjective or arbitrary. Thresholds for agricultural land conversion should be tailored to the Specific agricultural region affected. Previously we suggested the use of the Department-develOped Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) model, a relatively objective tool for establishing site-specific significance ratings. UeIng this tool helps to take the decision of significance out of the realm of personal values and emotions, end base it on factors directly related to the Importance of a particular piece of farmland.
• Growth Inducing Impacts, The FEIR should include an analysis of the effects of the Project on the land values of neighboring farmland. In other words, how will this project InCrease the property values and taxes, reduce the profitability of farming, and Increase the pressures to sell for development? The Mission Oaks DE1R. prepared for the Mission Oaks subdivision project in Santa Berbera County, provides a good example of an analysis 01 the growth-inducing factors of land development on agricultural land Viklilameort A01 Londe
The FEIR should contain a clear diScussion of the status of Williamson Act contracted tends in the project area, At a minimum, a Map detailing the location of agricultural preserves, the number of acres, and type of land in each preserve (e.g., prime or non-prime) should be included In the document This map should also show lands within agricultural preserves that are encumbered by WIllemson Act contracts Finally, the disposition of agricultural lands should be discussed, Including whether contracts will be terminated; i.e., cancellation, public acquisition, annexation or contract nonrenewel. The Government Cods requirements for each of these termination processes that are applicable should be discussed as well.
Mr. Matthew A. Bocien
June 10, 1999
Mttioation Measures and Alternative%
A full range of feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to lessen farmland conversion Impacts should be discussed in the FEIR. In our NOP comment letter we mentioned several ways that agricultural land conversion impacts could be mitigated. We reiterate and expand on some of these below.
• Purchase development rights from farmland along access points of the transportation Corridor to maintain agricultural uSes and lessen induced urban growth Impacts. • Provide convenient cross-freeway access for farm equipment where freeway right-ofway bisects farmland that is under common management. • Consider land use planning tools, such as transfer of development nghts, to protect farmland from premature development.
• rt continued agricultural uses of lands designated for urbanization with such tactics as favorable water pricing and tax relief, until actual development ensues. • Encourage the County to retain agricultural uses on lands surrounding the planning area ana lands within the planning area pending their annexation to the City for development by mutual agreement with the County.
• Finally, we encourage the use of conservation easements to protect other agricultural lends of equivalent quality and quantity as compensation for the farmland converted.
This is a strategy that CalTrans has proposed in Imperial County to mitigate the farmland impacts of a new freeway.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIR. If you have questions on our comments Or need further information on the Division's land resource protection programs or publications, please contact the Division at 801 K Street, MS 13-714 Sacramento, CA 95814; phone (916) 324-D850.
Jason Marshall
Assistant Director
• cc: John Amodio, Chief
Division of Land Resource Protection
Ventura County Resource Conservation District
PO Box 27413380 Santis Road
Sarnia, CA 23
4 4'1 05 SAL1FORNLA TFIE RESOORCES AEPCY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
61'41 K Street. MS 24-02
Sacroff+ento. CA 95614
1.916) 445-8733 Phono
;9i6) 324-0949 Fa).
916) 324-2555 TOO
14ay 13, 1 99 9
Mr, Dan Greeley, PE
Director of Engineering Services
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo. CA 93010
Subject.
Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange end Annexation No. 83 E1R, SCH #99031099
Dear Mr. Greeley:
The Department of Conservation's Division of Land Resource Protection mortitor$ farmland conversion on a statewide basis and administers the California Land Conservation (lealliarnson) Act The Division has reviewed the above NOP propoSing the Rake 101 Interchange (approximately 15 acres) and the annexation of 270 acres to the city. We offer the ecitowing comments for your consideration.
The California Code of Regulations (Section 15000 et seq., Appendix 0.) includes sample initial study chec,klist by which lead agencies may deterrnine significance of project Impacts on agricultural resources, In accordance with the checklist, the Department recommends that the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) eddreas the following issues when a project has the potential to Impact agricultural resources. If this Information Is to be addressed by incorporating previous analyses by reference, the relevant Information should be briefly summarized In the DEIR. If addressing some of the Items recommended below Is premature for the annexation phase of the project, they should be included in any subaequent Focused EIR on the project.
e F prime Farmlanct F armlan •• tewide Im Unl t'i^r1 A t Existing and potential agricultural productivity Is determined to a large extent by a site's soil type(s) and water availability. The Division's Important Farmland series map definitions are based on both soil quality and Irrigation. The Division's maps, as welt as the
NOP, Indicate that the interchange area Includes lands classified as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, the mapping program's two highest rated farmland categories. (Note, The DEIR should correct the identify the agency compiling the Ventura County soil survey to the United States Department of Agriculture Instead of the Geological Survey.) The maps also show that there are bodies of Unique Farmland, a category of farmland whose soil is of lower quality but nevertheless supports high value agricultural production. Therefore, tee DEIR should provide the following Information.
Mr. an Greeley
May 13, 1999
• A map identifying areas of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland in the project area. A 1996 Ventura County Farmland Map can be ordered from the Division using the enclosed order form, or by calling or signalling the Division at the below address or website.
• Current and past agricultural use of the project area, and data on types of crop grown, yields, and crop values.
• The economic value of agricultural production. Economic multipliers should be used to assess the total primary and secondary agricultural value to the local, regional and state economies.
• Tabular, graphic and narrative depictions of the type, amount, and location of farmland conversion resulting from project implementation.
• impacts on current and future agricultural operations, both on and off-site. in particular, the DEIR should address growth-inducing impacts of the project, including effects of the extension of urban services to the site on adjacent agricultura3land; the hindrance or impairment of proposed uses on neighboring agricultural lands; and, any other project effects that will result in an Increase in the property values of adjacent agricultural lands. • Incremental project impacts leading to Cumulatively considerable impacts on agricuttural land. These impacts would inciude impacts from the proposed project as well as impacts from past, Current and probable future projects. A 1995 University Of California study, Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California's Central Valley: The Bottom Line, offers a broad scale example of the kind of cumulative Impact analysis that would be appropriate for this project. Portions Of this document are available on the American Farmland Trust Webslte at www.farmlandinfo.oro.
• Impacts on agricultural resources may also be quantified and qualified by use of established thresholds of significance (California Code of Regulations Section 1 .7).
The Division has developed a California version of the USDA Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model that is intended for use in establishing environmental significance of project impacts on farmland. The model may also be used to rate the relative value of alternative project sites, The LESA Model Is available from the Division. • The DIvIsion'S 1990 publication, The Impacts of Farmland Conversion In California, Contains a discussion of the kinds of physical, social and economic impacts that can occur as a result of farmland conversion. This publication can be a good guide as you endeavor to address the farmland impacts of this project. Again, this publication Is available through the Division.
Mi,ic ea ur
Feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to lessen farmland conversion impacts to below significance, especially for Impacts resulting from annexation, should be discussed in the DER. The Division has complied a listing of approximately 30 'conservation tools which have been used by other communities to conserve, or mitigate impacts on, agricultural land, Th,s listing is not an exhaustive listing of potential mitigation Jason Marshall
Assistant Director
Mr. Dan Greeley
ray t3, 1999
measures, but will give you a sense for the range of possibilities. A few examples of the kinds of tools Included In the report are:
• Use alternative sites or configurations that would use lower quality soils and avoid more productive agricultural lands;
• Increase development density to leave a greater portion of the project site In agricultural production;
• Replace converted farmland by placing other farmland under long-term use restrictions via agricuttural conservation easements (e.g., Department Of Conservation's Agricultural Land Stewardship Program (Public Resources Code Section 10200-10277)1, Farmland Security Zone contracts (Government Code Section 51298), or Williamson Act contracts (Government Code Section 51200 et seq.); .
Use buffers such as setbacks, berms, greenbelts, and open space areas to separate farmland from urban uses;
Implement right-to-farm Ordinances to protect neighboring agricultural land users from frivolous nuisance complaints;
• For a more comprehensive community-wide approach, adopt comprehensive farmland protection policies supported by implementation measures such as those listed above, to address the loss of farmland systematically rather than case-bycase Transfer of development credits, mitigation banking, and economic incentives for continuing agricultural uses, are broad scale strategies that would also be appropriate the more comprehensive approach to mitigation.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment On the NOP. If you have questions but the above comments, or require technical assistance or Information, please contact the Division at 801 K Street, MS 13-71, Sacramento, CA 95814: phone (916) 324-0850; or, at the Department's website, viww,consrvta,gov.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
John Amodio, Chief
Division of Land Resource Protection
Ventura County Resource
Conservation District
California Department of Conservation
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Narhe
OrganiZatioh:
StreeVP,O, Sox:
Ciry, StiMI, Zip:
'elephone Of email: FAX:
Order Form
Mall To:
Departmant of Conservation
Farmland Mapptrig & Monitoring Program
801 K Street, MS 13.71
Sacramento, CA 95814-3528
Telephone: (916) 324-0859
FAX: (916) 327-3430
email: fetal nerv.ea.gov
To be used for
Please cneck desired
supporting material.
county(les) for map orders. See reverse side for listing of map cztegortes, extent of coverage, Sr Alameda
AMOar (P)
......IGnps
Lake
Nevada (P) San Mateo Sutter
Orange Santa Barbara (P) Tithama (A)
_Butta (1/P) _Los Angeles (P) Plac-er (P) Santa Clara Ttgahl (I/1FL/10)) —CaluSa (VP)
COMM Costa
__Madera (P)
Marin
—Rivarsida (P) Santa Cruz
Shasta (P)
Verdun! (P)
Sacramento Yak
El Dorado (P) __Mariposa (P) Berth
—
San Sierra Valley —Yuba
Fresno (P) Merced San Bernardino (P) Sisklyou (P)
Glenn ___Modoc (P) San Diego (13) Solano
___ImPerla' (P) Monterey San Joaquin Sonorna
_Kern (l/IFL) Napa San Luis Obispo (P) Stanislaus (P)
t !ntetim Farmland map I/IFL z intisArrVImponant Farmland map P = Portion of county mapped
ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL
IMPORTANTANTERIhriARMLAND MAPS
Full color county map at a scale of 1:100,000 or 1:120,000. Depending on Size j of county, can consist of up to three sheets.
IMPQRTANT/IN'UM FARMLARWERLAYS,
Overlays are at a scale of 1:24,000 or 1:100,000. Variable scale overlays available upon request, Please indicate name(*) of requested qtaitiningle(S),
QUANTITY
. Farmland Conversion Reports (Indicate quint
1934-66 1988-88
10042- 1SS2-94'
ty of each report):
tgea-00
1924-m•
A Guide to the Farmland Mapping and Monttoring Program' tiaa4. Dept of Covemelch. 1 1.46.02)
SHIPPING $400 1.5 Kama
AND $5.00 800 Items
HANDLING ,00 10. items
, Urns will be snipped upon receipt of payment. Please make check payable to DERARTmENT OR CONSERVATION (prices Include applicable sales ta.xL OTHER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES AVAILABLE:
• Otgitai information (nontaxable) - All ImportanVInterim Farmland data Is available by county in dighld farm...sat • kr Photo Librbry Use • Air photos of selected areas are available for viewing, The phC45 (flontaxst)e) IS 142 for u'g CV$11'‘OV: Int 5 toi• eaCh etolttonal hour.
'Also avail/Ole On the Worldwide Wit. wyew.conerv.C.2.govidIrpfImmp TOTAL
I. • • a • • •
- 1
• a • • • • 7C
AIN
••
00 f Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Ms. Cheryl Powell
IGR/CEQA Program Manager
CALTRANS DISTRICT 7
120 South Spring Street
Advance Planning Office 1-10C
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LEVIER (received June 14, 1999) Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Ms. Powell:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and ended June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, MitigationMonitoringand Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR. These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your June 8, 1999 comment letter, which was received by the City following the close of the public review period on June 14, 1999 (see attached). A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (cxamplc). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855-3659 if you should have any questions.
Matthew A. Boden
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
Proposed Responses to Comments
RESPONSE TO JUNE 8, 1999 LETTER
FROM CALTRANS (Received June 14, 1999)
1. Page 2-3 of the Draft EIR is hereby revised to read "...2) Alternative 1 (the project as proposed) and 3) Alternative 2 (thc project as proposed).
2. The Aerial Photograph is for illustrative purposes only. The "project" addressed in the Draft EIR is described in Section 3, Project Description, and is shown in Exhibit 4, Proposed Transportation Improvements.
3. Ventura Boulevard is not proposed for "connection" to Route 101. The exhibit simply shows the realignment/relocation of Ventura Boulevard, due to construction of the new interchange. The Project Study Report did not address this relocation, as Ventura Boulevard is a local arterial in this area, and related improvements will occur outside of Caltrans right—of-way.
4. Exhibit 5 will be replaced with the most current typical sections exhibit from the Project Study Report.
June 15, 1999
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GRAY DAVIS, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 7, ADVANCE PLANNING OFFICE 1-10C
120 SOUTH SPRING STREET
LOS ANGEIFS,CA 90012
TEL (213) 897-3747 FAX: (213)897-6317
E-mai1. CheryljpoweIVO07/CAGOV@DOT
990527 /
Interchange &
IOR/CEQAJDE1R/4990444 &
Route 101/Airport North Area
Annexation No, 83 DEIR
LA-101-15.89
SCH4 99031099
Mr, Dan Greeley, Director
Engineering Services
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Dear Mr. Greeley:
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the review process for the project referenced above. The project involves the construction of the proposed Route 101/Airport North area conventional diamond interchange with a six-lane overcrossing, consisting of two through lanes in each direction and dual left turn lanes. New on-ramps and off-ramps would merge with the existing Route 101 northbound and southbound travel lanes. The proposed interchange overcrossing would connect to the north with the proposed westerly extension of Ponderosa Boulevard, and would connect to the south with the proposed easterly extension of Verdulera Street. Ponderosa Drive would be widened to four lanes from Las Posits Road to the new interchange and associated north/south arterial.
The project includes a request to annex approximately 270 acres Into the City of Camarillo, Camarillo Sanitary District and detachment from the Ventura County Resource Conservation District. The Project Study Report 19160K was approved for the project in May, 1999 not January, 1999 as indicated on
Based on our review of the DEIR we have the following comments:
1. DEER-Page 2-3 — Of the three alternatives listed in the DEIR, the Project Study Report recommends Alternative 2.
2. Aerial Photograph (DE_1R) - The_Aerial PhotographffA il LnUd.i 10;i1 nr lvd• — connection to Route 101 giat I net included in tile Proiect Stud _yek._.1,.__ m• Interchange Spacing Alternative 1. Figure 16. Exhibit 3(with notations) and Alternative 1 are attached for your reference. Please refer to approved PSR, Alternative 1, Figure 16.
3. Proposed Transportation Improvements, Exhibit 4 (DEER) — The relocation of Ventura Boulevard and the connection to Route 101 as shown in Exhibit 4 was not part of the approved PSR.
4. Typical Section', Exhibit 5 (DEIR) — Our review indicates Exhibit 5 needs to be replaced with Figure lg from the approved PSR 19160K.
If you have questions regarding this response please reference IGR/CEQA 4 990527 and call me at (213) 897-4429 or contact Cheryl Powell, IGR/CEQA Coordinator for the project at (213) 897-3747.
Sincerely,
STEPHEN J. BUSWELL
IGR/CEQA Program Manager
Transportation Planning Office
Cc: Mosie Boyds
State Clearinghouse
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
• Bruce Smith, Manager
COUNTY OF VENTURA
Resource Management Agency
Planning Division, L #1740
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER (dated June 8, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Mr. Smith:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your June 8, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (ex-ample). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
DI UCe mitn
June 14, 1999
Sincerely,
-
Matthew A. Boden
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO JUNE 8, 1999 LE1TER
FROM
COUNTY OF VENTURA
(Bruce Smith)
1. The Draft EIR concurs with this comment. Section 6.2, Growth Inducing Impacts, states the following:
"It is important to note, however, that there is the potential for development proposals to be considered for the Annexation Area within the next fouryears. Although the Annexation area would be pre-zoned for agricultural uses and those uses would remain in effect until such time that development proposals are approved by the City of Camarillo, the potential exists for the area to be developed with uses other than the RE-40 pre-zone designation.
Thus, annexing Area No. 83 into the City of Camarillo would be considered potentially growth inducing."
2. This comment will be taken into consideration by the decision-makers during their deliberation on the project. No further response is required.
3. This comment will be considered by the City during project deliberations. It should be noted that the Draft EIR estimates a loss of 13.25 acres of agricultural land due to the interchange and road improvements.
4. This comment will be taken into consideration by the decision-makers during their deliberation on the project, and may be incorporated into project design plans during final design. Although the project itself only represents a 2 dBA CNEL noise level increase (due to projected increases with or without the project, much of which is from Route 101), use of double-paned windows will also be considered to reduce interior noise levels.
cc: Joseph Eisenhut
June 14, 1999
County of Ventura
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joseph Eisenhut DATE: June 8, 1999
1_,5_ FROM: Bruce Smith. Manager
General Plan Section
SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEM) for Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & A nnt-xation No. 83 (City of Camarillo) — Reference No. 99-056 The Ventura County Planning Division has reviewed the DEER for the above project We offer the following comments:
Growth Inducement. The proposed project would result in the annexation of 270-acres of agricultural land The EUZ indicates that the City would retain agricultural zoning and general plan designations for the site. Once the property is annexed, there is nothing to prevent subsequent General Plan amendments/zone changes to urban-type land uses. County General Plan policies and the Guidelines for Orderly Development prevent the urbanization of this site as long as it remains under County jurisdiction. Annexation to the City would remove these policy impediments to urbanization and would, thus, encourage urbanization.
Project Alternatives. The "Reduced Scale Annexation Alternative", described in the ablit, appars to be the only feasible environmentally superior altemath, e. This alternative would reduce the area annexed to 80 acres and would have the least impact on agricultural resources and would minimize growth-inducing impacts associated with the project Agricultuial Resourecl. The EIR indicates that the loss of agricultural acreage (less than 80 acres) for construction of proposed infra.structure and circulation improvements is significant and unavoidable. At the same time, the EIR concludes the annexation and potential conversion of the surrounding acreage (almost 200 acres) would be less than significant We feel tlist loss of agricultural acreage would be significant regardless of whether the agricultural land is lost to infrastructure and circulation improvements or urban land use.
Noise. The EIR indicates that traffic noise along the proposed north-south arterial will exceed City noise standards, but that there are no feasible mitigation measures available We note that use of rubberized pavement and installation of double-pane windows are feasible measures that can reduce traffic noise impacts.
Sincerel
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Ms. Lori Windt
COUNTY OF VENTURA
Resource Management Agency
Planning Division, L #1740
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER (dated May 9, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Ms. Windt:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your June 9, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (example). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
Matthew A. Baden
Community Development Director
A agiG A Proposed Responses w Comments
Route 1011AirportNorth Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 11, 1999 LEITER
FROM
COUNTY OF VENTURA
(Lori Windt)
1. No development proposals have been allowed at this time for the annexation area and the area will be pre-zoned for agricultural uses. Potential development-related impacts would be addressed though the CEQA document required for future development.
The EIR generally addresses potential impacts of development facilitated by Annexation No. 83.
The Ponderosa Corridor Specific Plan was never finalized, hence, was not included in this Draft EIR.
2. It is recognized that a land division would be required. This could take place prior to recordation of the annexation or thereafter, and would include the County in the review process. This has been successfully done in other areas between the City and the County.
3. In accordance with LAFCO requirements, the City of Camarillo submitted an annexation application, including supporting reasons to justify the request. This application will be considered by LAFCO, together with the Draft EIR and responses to comments.
cc: Joseph Eisenhut
June 14, 1999
n I if r% I NI •"..• %.11 I II I a' • • "I 'MI •
nty of vEntura
Planning Division
Keith A. Turner
Direc;or
DATE: . june 9, 1999
TO: Joseph Eisenhut
FROM; Lori Windt
SUBJECT: DEIR 99-056 Highway 101/Airport Interchange and Annexation of Additional Land
I have reviewed the subject Draft EIR (DEIR) and have the following comments. There is no description .of the development project anticipated by the City "within the next four years! (Section 1-5, Page 1-3) on the agricultural land at the west end of the annexation area (which is a portion of a larger lot). Also, there is no summary of the Ponderosa Corridor Specific Plan (Section 2.5, Page 2-3, last paragraph) to aid the reader. If there is an anticipated project, it must be included in the DEIR. If the project includes a subdivision of the proposed [additional] annexation area;it must be included in the DEIR and the County of Ventura listed as a Responsible Agency or Lead Agency.
Subdivision law requires approval by all jurisdictions in which lots are being created. e.g,, the City has no jurisdiction to unilaterally approve a subdivision that creates any lots in the County and vice versa.
Since the western boundary of the [additional) proposed annexation area is not a discrete lot line, the proposed annexation would cause the entire lot to be placed In two local agencies' jurisdictions (City of Camarillo and County of Ventura) for the 'first time.
The Planning Department routinely recommends to LAFCO that they not approve a boundary change which causes a lot to be sited in more than one jurisdiction. This particular problem can be avoided if the annexation area is amended to extend on the westerly end no further than the Ro. Santa Clara Del Norte boundary line which is a discrete lot line or if the Reduced Scale Annexation Alternative were implemented.
In the DEIR the only reason given for the project (annexation of the additional land) is to enclose an Island' created on the west end by the previous annexation of a road and to allow infrastructure and round out the oity's boundaries consistent with the sphere of influenc:e lines. The reasons given for the annexation of the 'additional land" do not appear to overcome the premature aspects of this request. 800 South Victoria Avenue, L #1740, Ventura, CA 93009 (805) 654-2481 FAX (805) 654-2509 Par.ted on liectried Pacer
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Nancy Settle, Manager
COUNTY OF VENTURA
Resource Management Agency
Planning Division, L #1740
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LEI lER (dated June 8, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Ms. Settle:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your June 8, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (example). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
Ms. Nancy Settle
June 14, 1999
Sincerely,
Matthew A. Boden
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
-*g
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO JUNE 8, 1999 LETTER
FROM
COUNTY OF VENTURA
(Nancy Settle)
1. The Draft EIR identifies the loss of approximately 13.25 acres of farmland as an unavoidable significant impact. Refer to discussion Item No. 3, below, regarding mitigation options.
2. No further response is required.
3. Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, states the following:
"The Ventura County General Plan acknowledges that the annexation area is within the City of Camarillo's Sphere of Influence. In doing so, the County recognizes that these lands would eventually be annexed into the City and ultimately developed. This fact is reflected in the "Urban Reserve Overlay" associated with the County land uses designated within the project area. The proposed annexation area is surrounded on four sides by incorporated areas of the City of Camarillo. The annexation area is proposed to remain in agriculture as shown on the Land Use Element of the City of Camarillo's General Plan. The annexation area would be pre-zoned to RE-40 acres (Rural Exclusive, 40 acre minimum lot size). All parcels would be in conformance with the zoning (parcels smaller than 40 acres would remain with no further division). This would be consistent with the City of Camarillo General Plan.
While annexation of the 270 acres into the City of Camarillo is a first step tovvu,J must occur before development, the annexation would not provide any development entitlement.
The annexation area would remain in agricultural use until subsequent development proposals are processed through the City of Camarillo. Subsequent development would be subject to a discretionary review process including, at minimum, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The specific impacts of future development would be addressed in project-specific CEQA documentation.
There is the potential for development proposals to be considered within the next fouryears.
However, the annexation area would continue to be utilized for agricultural uses under the pre-zone RE-40. No changes or disruptions to existing agricultural operations would occur until such time that future development proposals are approved by the City of Camarillo.
Thus, annexing area No. 83 into the City of Camarillo would not result in the loss of agricultural land. The actual loss of agricultural land would occur with on-site development at a later date. Therefore, the potential development-related impacts are more appropriately addressed through the CEQA documentrequiredfor future development. The impacts regarding the loss of agricultural land associated specifically with the interchange and local arterials were separately identified and analyzed above." June 14, 1999
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO JUNE 8, 1999 LE1 1ER
FROM
COUNTY OF VENTURA
(Nancy Settle)
As noted previously, the City has submitted an annexation application to LAFCO, which includes justification for the annexation request (see attached Supportive Reasons For Annexation Request). Although future development is anticipated, the City has not received any formal applications, and it would be speculative to assume the nature of development. The Draft EIR does address the generally anticipated impacts of future development, and notes that any future development would be subject to appropriate discretionary review by the City and other applicable agencies.
With reference to seeking alternative vacant lands to annex, this is not applicable, as a primary objective of the annexation request is to incorporate this specific County "island" area, which is within the City's sphere of influence. In addition, a primary objective is to allow for the local arterials proposed for construction to be maintained by the City of Camarillo.
4. As noted in the Draft EIR, future development within the annexation area has the potential to generate land use incompatibility impacts with the neighboring agricultural uses. The identification of specific development-related impacts and additional mitigation measures shall be addressed through the CEQA document required for future development within the annexation area. Refer to response below, regarding "Farmland Conversion Mitigation Options".
5. These additional mitigation measures will be considered by the City during project deliberations. The comment letter does not demonstrate the applicability, feasibility or viability of any of the suggested measures. Development of a comprehensive mitigation program such as this is considered outside the scope of this project, and would be more appropriately addressed through a City or County-wide process such as a General Plan or Zoning Code. Should such a program be in effect at the time of future development proposals for the annexation area, the future development proposal will incorporate the appropriate required agricultural mitigation measures. cc: Joseph Eisenhut
June 14, .1999
COUNTY OF VENTURA
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 8, 1999
TO: Joseph Eisenhut, Coordinator, Non-County Environmental Document Review
FROM: Nancy Settlf ;imager Regional Projects Section
RE: Reference No. 99-056 (Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) — Route 101/Airport North Interchange end Annexation #83) The Regional Projects Section has reviewed the above referenced DEIR and suggests the following comments should be addressed in a final environmental impact report (FEIR). Our review has primarily been confined to potential impacts on agricultural operations in and adjacent to the proposed interchange and annexation area.
The DEIR lists four agricultural resources impact categories on page 1-7 (Executive Summary):
4.2-1 Implementation of the proposed infrastructure and circulation improvements would result in the conversion of agricultural land for urban uses. Significance:
Significant and unavoidable.
4.2-2 Construction of the interchange and local arterials could potentially impact adjacent agricultural uses. Significance: Less than significant with mitigation.
4.2-3 Annexation No. 83 would resutt in the conversion of agricultural land for urban uses. Significance: Less than significant.
4.2-4 Potential for future uses within the annexation area could potentially impact adjacent agricultural uses Significance: Less than significant with mitigation.
ComrriRnt on Impact Category 4.2-1 (Conversion of 13.25 acres gf Forrniansil Suggest changing the 'Significance Finding' from Signifitnt and unavoidable to potentially Less than significant with the application of suitable mitigation measures (see mitigation options below). The permanent loss of 13.25 acres of prime and statewide importance farmland would exceed the cumulative impact threshold criteria (loss of more than 1 acre) noted in Ventura County's Intel Study Assessment Guidelines. Staff recommends that the interchange project should be referred to the Agricultural Department for review and comment as to appropriate mitigation measures.
Comment on Implct Cateoory 4.2-2 (Construction Impacts on AdjacentFarmiandi Nc comment.
Comment on Impeacateraory 42-.3 (Annexation of 270 acres of Farm)and) A finding of Less than significant does not seem consistent with other findings in the DEIR nor does It meet the 'Environmental Setting' test of CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a). Suggest changing the 'Significance Finding' from Less than significant (no mitigation required) to potentially Less than significant with the application of suitable mitigation measures (see mitigation options below).
Both impact categories 4.2-1 and 4.2-3 acknowledge that 'irrigated farmland will be converted to urban uses' except the category 4.2-1 finding acknovvledges that the loss of
13.25 acres is Significant and unavoidable. if the loss of 13.25 acres to circulation improvements is Significant, it follows that the future annexation (and subsequent development) of 270 acres of farmland for urban uses is also Significant.
The DEIR (pages 4.2-8 and 4.2-7) states that the Less than significant finding is based on the following assumption — the 270 acre annexation area would remain (in the interim) in an Agriculture designation arid urban development entitlements would have to be subsequently approved by the Camarillo City Council. However, this finding does not address three issues:
• Presumably, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) will use the FEIR as the basis for judging the merits of the proposed annexation. The DEIR implies that Annexation #83 will not impact existing farmland operations because the 270 acres will remain in a (City) Agriculture designation. However, if the intent is to preserve the on-site agricultural resources, then annexation is neither necessary nor desirable. • LAFC0's Cortese-Knox guidelines state that the annexation of farmland should be permitted only if there are no alternative vacant lands available for future urban development within the City. Camarillo currently has over 1,000 acres of vacant land rocated within its city limits. The FEIR should address the need for the annexation of irrigated farmland given the City's current inventory of vacant land — e.s., if the inventory of vacant land includes marginal property that cannot be developed because of steep slopes or floodplains, then this should also be noted In the FEIR, • The annexation of the property and the City's intent to issue subsequent development permits should be considered as a cumulative, single project. The project should not be segmented Into smaller parts (e.g., annexation, general plan and zoning ordinance amendments, subdivision of land, etc.) if the effect is to avoid full disclosure of environmental impacts (Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Commission [1975] 13 Ca1.34 263). CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a) states the environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline _physical conditions by which a lead agency determines if an impact is significant" (emphasis added).
If the Less than significant finding is also s sad on previous environmental documents prepared for the 1989 Camarillo General Plan, the Airport North Specific Plan or the Ponderosa Corridor Specific Plan, then this should be noted in the FEIR Section. 15125(e) of the CEQA Guidelines states that if a "proposed project is compared with an adopted plan, the analysis shall examine the existing_ conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation is published or . . . . at the time an environmental analysis is commenced... " (emphasis added).
2 The permanent loss of 270 acres of prime and statewide importance farmland would exceed the cumulative impact threshold criteria (loss of more than 'I acre) noted in Ventura County's Initial Study Assessment Guidelines. Staff recommends that the 270- acre annexation project should be referred to the Agricultural Department for review and comment as to appropriate mitigation measures.
Comment on impact Category 4.2-4 (Growth Inducing Impacts) The mitigation measure proposed for Impact Category 4.2-4 does not seem to adequately address Annexation No. 836 potential growth-inducing impacts on adjacent farmland in the Camartilo/Oxnard Greenbelt. The County of Ventura's Right-to-Farm (RTF) ordinance already protects the farmer's right to utilize agriculture practices that are in compliance with state and federal laws. The CC&Rs referenced in the DEIR would not likely provide farmers with any further protection against nuisance lawsuits, etc. than that afforded by the RTF ordinance.
Farmlang Conversion Mitigation Options
When farmland conversion exceeds an acceptable threshold level, other jurisdictions In California have adopted or endorsed various mitigation measures that are designed to minimize farmland conversion impacts. Mitigation options include, but are not limited to the following:
• Farmiand/ooen space conservation ordinance - some cities have adopted farmland conservation ordinances that are designed to implement farmland protection policies in their general plans. The ordinances require that any conversion of farmland/open space land to urban uses should be compensated by:
• Payment of an in-lieu fee that is equal to or greater than the "development rights" value of the lands to be converted to non-agriculture uses. • Acquisition of conservation easements on "like-kind-agricultural lands within adjoining greenbelts or community separators. 'Like-kind' farmland is defined as lands that are equal to or superior in value to comparable lands (e.g., substituting prime farmland for prime farmland, grazing land for grazing land, etc.) • Acceptance of the in-lieu fee and/or administration of the conservation easement may be the responsibility of a land conservation agency or non-profit organization that is acceptable to the affected jurisdiction(s).
• Purchase of develooment iights (PDR) Prooram - the 'development rights' value of farmland and/or open space land is purchased and a conservation easement is applied to the property permanently limiting its future use to agricultural/open space compatible uses.
* Transfer of development rights (TDR1 or credits (TDC) program - similar to a PDR program, a TDR involves trading, selling and/or purchasing development credits from 'sending properties' (usually unincorporated lands) and applying the credit to 'receiving properties' (usually located within city limits). As with the PDR program, the compensation received for the sending property permanently limits its future use to agricultural or open space uses.
3 If there are questions about the above comments, please contact Gene Kjellberg at 554- 2455
cc: Keith Turner, Planning Director
Arnold Dowdy, Executive Director, L4FC0
Earl McPhail, Agricultural Commissioner
4 TOTAL P.07
SUPPORTIVE REASONS FOR ANNEXATION REQUEST
AIRPORT NORTH INTERCHANGE STUDY SYNOPSIS
Planning Departmer
City of Camarillo
P.O. Box 248
Camarillo, CA 9301
1. The Las Posas Road interchange currently operates at LOS D. The city's General Plan calls for providing LOS C or better.
2. The city is proceeding with improvements that will collectively provide LOS B at the Las Posas Road interchange if traffic volumes do not increase.
3. Traffic will increase on Las Posas Road due to development approved in the area. It is estimated that by 1999, LOS C (almost LOS D) will occur at the Las Posas Road interchange. This assumes the scheduled road improvements have been completed.
Without the improvements, LOS ELF conditions would occur.
4. Any significant development currently not approved near the Las Posas Road interchange would cause unacceptable LOS D conditions. Therefore, any further development in the Airport North or TMI areas will necessitate the Airport North interchange in order to maintain acceptable LOS operations.
5. Due to regional traffic growth, the Las Posa Road interchange may operate at unacceptable LOS D conditions with five years. This assumes no additional Camarillo development other than projects that have already been approved.
6. The Airport North interchange is included in the General Plan Circulation Element: The interchange is necessary to provide consistency between the Circulation and Land Use elements which is required by California law.
7; If the interchange project is delayed, the following problems occur:
a. Unacceptable traffic conditions will develop.
b. The city may have to return developer fees collected for the project if it is delayed for more than five years.
c. Delays may cause the project costs to increase due to ever-increasing Caltrans requirements.
d. If the interchange is delayed too long, the LOS will degrade to levels that cause the city to no longer comply with the CMP.
e. Essentially, a development moratorium would occur for the properties in the Mello Roos District. This impacts current businesses located in the district by locking them into higher annual fees.
f. The city's redevelopment project could be significantly impacted. Revenue would be reduced due to a moratorium on new development within a significant portion of the redevelopment district boundaries.
airnonsyn.mis
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Mr. John A. Ferro
SATICOY BERRY FARMS, INC.
Vice President
183 Montgomery Avenue
Oxnard, CA 93030
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LEI 1ER (dated June 3, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Mr. Ferro:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Finz 1' Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. The Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response to your June 3, 1999 comment letter (see attached). A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (cxamplc). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855-3659 if you should have any questions.
Matthew A. Boden
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
rdge .1
Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO JUNE 3, 1999 LETTER
FROM
SATICOY BERRY FARMS, INC.
The City of Camarillo appreciates your comments on this project. Agricultural access and drainage will be accommodated in the final design plans, as is commonly done throughout the City and County. This is not considered to represent a significant "environmental impact".
The required improvements on agricultural roadway crossings shall be included in the Final EIR as follows:
4.2-2a During site preparation
4.2-2b The Final Street Improvement Plan shall include a crossing to allow for farm implements to traverse between portions of the farm areas. The final design and location is subject to City approval and include special paving such as concrete, signage and curb cuts as necessary.
4.2-2a During site preparation
4.2-2b The Final Street Improvement Plan shall include a crossing to allow for farm implements to traverse between portions of the farm areas. The final design and location is subject to City approval and include special paving such as concrete, signage and curb cuts as necessary.
June 14, 1999
z' .1111611 161 ,14 ,10y 110,64.1 I y N1II I I I, WU.
Telephone (805) 485-0355 183 mON130f$ERY AVENUE
Fax [805) 485-1188 QXNARD, CALIFORNIA Mt
June 3, 1999
Mr. Matthew Boden
City of Camarillo Planning & Community Development
601 Carmen Dr.
Camarillo, CA 93010
Re: Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 EIR Dear Mr. Boden:
In reviewing the above mentioned Environmental Impact Report I did not see where the document addressed the following issue on either side of the freeway.
The issue in question being the continued viability of Agricultural production on the ranches being "split" by the new interchange and connecting roads.
The proposed new interchange is going to split contiguous farm properties on both sides of the freeway. Once the properties have been split by the anew roar how are tractors, irrigation water and drainage water to cross over or under the new road?
If and/or when you can answer my question would you please let me know the answer. If you have any questions about my inquiry don't hesitate to contact me. •
John A. Ferro
Vice President,
Saticoy Berry Farms, Inc.
if
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 298 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Mr. David Stein
Manager, Performance Assessment and Implementation
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
818 West Seventh Street, 12 Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-3435
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LEI I ER (dated May 19, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099; SCAG No. 19900197) Dear Mr. Stein,
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and ended June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission,Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR. These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your May 19, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (cxample). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Matthew A. Boden
Community Development Direct();
City of Camarillo
Proposed Responses to Comments
Effe 1 of 7 Route 1011AitportNorth Area Interchan •e and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LEI TER
FROM
SCAG
This comment letter generally indicates concurrence with the Draft EIR discussions. The following discussions of additional SCAG policies are hereby incorporated into the Final EIR:
With the year 2015 population projected to be 861,562861,700 persons, growth in the County over the 17 years between 1998 and 2015 will be approximately 15 percent or 130,738 130,876 persons.
The 2015 housing forecast for the subregion is 33.7;600 287,500 units, which is an addition of 109,000 59,500 units over the 1990 level of 228,000 units.
The employment forecast for the Ventura Council of Governments Subregion is 444;990 438,200 jobs for the year 2015. This represents an increase of approximately 48 61 percent or 169,000 jobs added between 1990 and 2015.
It is important to note, however, that considered potentially growth inducing.
Applicable Regional Plans. An evaluation of the proposed project's relationship to applicable regional plans is required pursuant to Section 15125[d] of CEQA. A discussion of the project's consistency with applicable policies is provided below.
Regional Comprehensive Plan And Guide
The Growth Management Chapter (GMC) of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPD) contains the following policies that are particularly applicable to the Project:
3.01 The population, housing, and jobs forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG's Regional Council and that reflect local plans and policies, shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review.
As noted above, the interchange and roadway improvements would be consistent with the City of Camarillo General Plan Circulation Element and would not create or 1110.69111111.01111MNIMINI
June 14, 1999
Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LETTER
FROM
SCAG
accommodate additional growth beyond that already planned in the City's General Plan. Therefore, as SCAG's adopted population, housing, and jobs forecasts are reflective of the City's General Plan, implementation of the proposed interchange and roadways is consistent with Policy 3.01. Annexing Area No. 83 into the City of Camarillo would be considered potentially growth inducing, however, since the potential exists for the area to be developed with uses other than the RE-40(Rural Exclusive, 40-acre minimum) pre-zone designation. The City recognizes :the °need to take into account for the population, housing, and jobs forecast :at the :time of conversion of any land use changes in the future.
3.03 The timing, financing, and location of public facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to implement the region's growth policies.
The phasing of the interchange construction is discussed in Section 3.6, Project Phasing.
The project is consistent with this Policy 3.03.
3.07 Support subregional policies that recognize agriculture as an industry, support the economic viability of agriculture activities, preserve agricultural land, and provide compensation for property owners holding land in greenbelt areas.
The annexation of the 270 acres would include a pre-zone of RE-40 (Rural Exclusive, 40-acre minimum), and any future development proposal would require a change of zone. The immediate intent is for the agricultural uses to remain. There would be an unavoidable impact with interchange construction, given the loss of approximately 13 acres of agricultural land. The project is partially supportive of Policy 3.07. Right-ofWay acquisition would include compensation for affected woperty owners.
3.09 Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure of public service delivery, and efforts to seek new sources offloading for development and the provision of services.
The Draft EIR identifies various arterial streets that would be extended and/or constructed to serve the new interchange. The infrastructure is designed to rninimin cost to the maximum extent, supportive of Policy 3.09.
_ 3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least likely to cause adverse environmental impact.
$11M1011101(0064111111Mil. June 14, 1999
rroposed Responses to Comments
RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LE'll ER
FROM
SCAG
As noted in Section 4.2, Agricultural Resources, design of the improvements was based upon the goal of minimizing the loss of agricultural land, supportive of Policy 3.18.
3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources, rneasure-s that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans.
Sections 4.6.2, Biolo , 4.6.3, Geology and Soils, 4.6.5, Hydrology and Water Quality,42, Agricultural Resources , and 4.5, Noise , acknowledge all of the major resource constraints addressed by this policy. The project is supportive of Policy 3.23.
Regional Transportation Plan
The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) also has policies pertinent to this proposed project. Among the relevant policies of this chapter are the following:
4.01 Transportation investments shall be based on SCAG's adopted Regional performance Indicators:
Mobility - Transportation Systems should meet the public need for improved access, and for safe, comfortable, convenient and economical movements of people and goods. • Average Work Trip Travel Time in Minutes - 22 minutes • PM Peak Highway Speed -33 mph
• Percent of PM Peak Travel in Delay (All Trips) - 33%
Accessibility - Transportation Systems should ensure the ease with which opportunities are reached. Transportation and land use measures should be employed to ensure minimal time and cost.
• Work Opportunities within 25 Minutes - 88%
Environment - Transportation Systems should sustain development and preservation oJthe existing system and the environment. (All Trips)
• Meeting Federal and State Standards - Meet Air Plan Emission Budgets June 14, 1999
Proposed Responses to Comments Page 4 of 7 Route 1O1/Ai ort North Area Interchan e and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LE11LR
FROM
SCAG
Reliability - Reasonable and dependable levels of service by mode. (All Trips) • Transit - 63%
• Highway - 76%
Safety - Transportation Systems should provide minimal risk accident, death ancl.,injury. (All Trips)
• Fatalities Per Million Passenger Miles - 0.008
• Injury Accidents - 0.929 •
Livable Communities - Transportation Systems should facilitate Livable Communities in which all residents have access to all opportunities with minimal travel time (All Trips) • Vehicle Trip Reduction —1.5%
• Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction —10.0%
Equity - The benefits of transportation investments should be equitably ..distributed among all ethnic, age and income groups. (All Trips)
• Low-Income (Household Income $12,000) Share of Net Benefits - Equitable Distribution of Benefits
Cost-effectiveness - Maximize return on transportation investment. (All Trips) • Net Present Value - Maximum Return on Transportation Investment • Value of a Dollar Invested — Maximum Return on Transportation Investment As noted in Section 3.0,Project Description, the proposed project would improve traffic flow, provide relief for existhig and anticipated future congestion, and provide more efficient access consistent with Policy 4.01.
4.02 Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental impactqjto an acceptable Sections 4.1 through 4.6 of this document contain various impacts associated with the interchange construction and annexation, reducing most impacts to less than significant levels. Two impacts, the loss of 13 acres of agriculture land, and the year 2020 noise level impact on a farm house, remain significant and unavoidable. The project would be generally consistent with Policy 4.02.
June 14, 1999
Proposed Responses to Comments
Ilue 5 of 7 Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LETTER
FROM
SCAG
4.03 Major Investment Studies and other studies of regional transportation facilities shall include consideration of freight movement.
Implementation of the proposed interchange and roadways would improve traffic flaw, provide relief for existing and anticipated future congestion, and provide moreefficient access, thereby improving the movement of freight through the area. Accordingly, the project would be consistent with Policy. 4.03.
4.07 Projects proposed for the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) that do not indicate a reasonable phasing of construction between segments will not be approved.
The proposed interchange is part of the Regional Transportation Improvement Program . Section 3.6, Project Phasing, details the proposed phasing of the project. The project would be consistent with Policy 4.07.
* 4.12 New freeway facilities shall be open for goods movement ercept where safety prohibits this.
Implementation of the proposed interchange would improve traffic flow, provide relief for existing and anticipated future congestion, and provide more efficient access, thereby improving the movement of goods through the area. Accordingly, the project would be consistent with Policy 4.12.
Air Quality Chapter Core Actions
The Air Quality Chapter core actions related to the proposed project include:
5.11 Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air ,basin, county, subregional and local) consider air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts.
_
The Ventura County APCD Guidelines state that any General Plan Amendment that will result in population growth above that forecasted in the most recently adopted AQMP is inconsistent with the Plan. With respect to the 'interchange and roadwnys„the project would not involve a General Plan Amendment and would not have the capacity to increase population growth, and is therefore considered consistent with the AQMP.
With respect to the proposed annexation, however, the potential exists that development proposals could be considered for the Annexation Area, but not likely 1111=0.11111Mille81010
June 14, 1999
Proposed Responses to Comments Page 6 of 7 Rowe 1011Airport North Area Interchange and Anne:xation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LETTER
FROM
SCAG
authorized for development within the next four years. Although the Annexation area would be pre-zoned for agricultural uses and those uses would remain in _effect until Such time that development proposals are approved by the City of Camarillo, the area would not be developed with uses other that the RE-40 pre-zone desii, ation within the next four years. Future development projects in the annexation °area' involving any General Plan Amendment which would provide for increased population 4. above that forecasted in the most recently adopted AQMP may be considered inconsistent with the Plan. Consistency with the Plan for each future development PrOjC.'at would be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Refer to Policy 4.07 above for a discussion of the project's consistency with the RTIP.
Any General Plan Amendment or of its potential to result in population growth.
Consistency With The AQMP
4.4-4 The proposed interchange and roadways are considered consistent with the AQMP.
Future development projects in the annexation area would have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis to detei'mine consistency with the Plan. Significance: Less than significant.
4.4-4 Discussion: According to the Ventura County APCD 1989 Guidelines for the Preparation of Air Quality Impact Analyses (as contained in Appendix G-94 of the 1994 AQMP, Page 3-6), any General Plan Amendment that will result in population growth above that forecasted in the most recently adopted AQMP is inconsistent with the Plan.
With respect to the interchange and roadways, the project would not involve a General Plan Amendment and would not have the capacity to increase population growth, and is therefore considered consistent with the AQMp. With respect to the proposed annexation, the potential exists that development proposals could be considered for the Annexation Area within the next four year, however, are not authorized by the City Council . Although the Annexation area would be pre-zoned for agricultural uses and those uses would remain in effect until such time that development proposals are approved by the City of Camarillo, that however would not allow development within the next four years. Future development projects in the annexation area involving any General Plan Amendment which would provide for increased population growth above that forecasted in the most recently adopted AQMP would have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis to determine consistency with the Plan.
June 14, 1999
Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/AirportNorth Area Interchan• e and Annexation No. 83 Page 7 of 7 RESPONSE TO MAY 19, 1999 LETTER
FROM
SCAG
It should be noted that the expansion of single occupancy lanes is not proposed as part of the project. Accordingly, Policy 4.17 is not applicable to this analysis.
June 14, 1999
ASSOCIATION of
GOVERNMENTS
Main Office
818 West Seventh Street
12th Floor
Los Angeles, California
9001 -3435
t (213) 236.1800
f(213) 236.1825
www.scag.ca.gov
officer. • President Saperriscr Zr' "fonslavsky.
Los Angeles County • first Vice Presidnn: of
Ron Bales. City of Los Aiannicos • Seci4n6 von
President. Supervisor Kathy Zero. San Bernardino
County • Iminediare Pas: Prenidenr Map , bob
Bs ,tp of Mcnron.
;count). Torn resey. !riper.: Coo.:, •
Da, Cenarb
Los Angeles County. Yvonne Bra:Jun:An Bu!ke.
Los Angeles Cour r) • Zen Yonsiasany. Los Angele,
County • Eileen Anuri. Diamond Bar • Bu.,
Barilec. Monrovia • Bruce Barrows. Cerrito, •
George Bars. Bell • Hal Benson. Los Angeles •
Robert Bruesch. Rosemead • Laura Chick. Ins
Angeles • Gene Daruels. Paranscuns • John Arrarn.
Los Asgejes • Michael Feuer, Los Ange!ri • Roth
Galatter. Los Ange.es • Jackie Caoldberg. Los
Angejes • Ray Grabinski. Long Beath • Garland
Hardman. Inglewood • Dee Mardi-on. Torrance •
Mike Hen:sander. Los Angeles • Sate Holnie. Los
Ange:es • Keith McCardis. Downey • Cindy
Miscikowskr Los Angeles • David Myers. Paindiee
v Pam O'Connor. Santa Monica • Jenny Oropeza.
Long Beach • Bob. arsnajer. Redondo Seamy •
Beatrice Pr.. Aco ILisera • Mark Rid/ev•Thomas.
Los Angeles • Richard Auroan. Los Angeles •
Martins Shaw. Comp:on • Rudy Svormich. Los
Angeles • Paul Talbot..Alharribra • Joe; With Los
Angeles • Rita %Viten,. Los Angeles • Dennis
Washburn. Calabasas • Peril Zee. South Pasadena
Orange County. Charles Smith. Orange County •
Ron Bases. Los A41111lOS • Ar: Brown Buena Park •
Elizabeth Cowan. Costa Mesa • Ian >hay Sewpor:
Beach • Cathryn DeYoung. Laval. Nignei•
Richard Door.. Lake Pores: *Alta Duet La Palma •
Ben Pein.y. Brea
Riverside County: James Venab!e
County • Dick Kelly. Palm Onset: • Jar Le:a.
Beaumont • Ron Lovu-idge. Riverside • Andres
Puga. Corona • Ron Roberts. Temecula
6411 lernardfiao County: Kathy Davi, Sin
Bernardino C011Ay • Blil Alexander, Rancto
Cucamonga • lint Basim. Twenty:line Palms • Da:
Eshleman. Fontana • Lee +air. Gams. Gran C 7t:71,
Gwenr. Nonon•Perr). Chino Mills • Puy Auke:.
Highland
V¢Hrttri County: Vann.ira Counts •
Donna De An'ia. San Buer.Aentiara • .andress Pot.
Thousand Oaks • Toni Year.g kr. Hueneme
ansporiztion Commission:
Herne:
tuna County Transportation Cortunissiory
Ball Darts. Punt VaLeJ
l:Lr; trf
I
I
MAY 2 E 1999
ROBER7BE1. A": FRCS:i
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
May 19, 1999
Mr. Matthew A.Boden
City of Camarillo
Planning and Community Development Department
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the addition of a freeway interchange on State Route 101 and annexation of 270 acres in the City of Camarillo - SCAG No. 19900197
Dear Mr. Boden:
Thank you for subrnittingthe addition of a freeway interchange on State Route 101 and annexation of 270 acres in the City of Camarilloto SCAG for review and comment the. As areawide clearinghouse for regionally significant projects, SCAG assists cities, counties and other agencies in reviewing projects and plans for consistency with regional plans.
The attached detailed comments are meant to provide guidance for considering the proposed project within the context of our regional goals and policies. If you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please contact me at (213) 236-1917..
Sincerely,
I
IDAVID STEIN
anager, Performance Assessment and Implementation
Ptanted at rt.ryned Pipe: Sit.. h to
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ADDITION OF A FREEWAY INTERCHANGE ON STATE ROUTE 101 AND ANNEXATION OF 270 ACRES IN THE CITY OF CAMARILLO - SCAG No. 19900197 .
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of the construction of an interchange on the 101 Freeway between the LaPosas Road and Central Avenue off-ramps, and the annexation of 270 acres adjacent to the proposed interchange in the City of Camarillo.
INTRODUCTION TO SCAG REVIEW PROCESS
The document that provides the primary reference foiSCAG's project review activity is the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG). The RCPG chapters fall into three categories: core, ancillary, and bridge. The Growth Management (adopted June 1994), Regional Transportation (adopted April 1998), Air Quality (adopted October 1995), Hazardous Waste Management (adopted November 1994), and Water Quality (adopted January 1995) chapters constitute the core chapters. These core chapters respond directly to federal and state planning requirements. The core chapters constitute the base on which local governments ensure consistency of their plans with applicable regional plans under CEQA. The Air Quality and Growth Management chapters contain both core and ancillary policies, which are differentiated in the comment portion of this letter. The Regional Transportation Element (RTE) constitutes the region's Transportation Plan (also referred to as Community Link 21). The RTE policies are incorporated into the RCPG.
Ancillary chapters are those on the Economy, Housing, Human Resources and Services, Finance, Open Space and Conservation, Water Resources, Energy, and Integrated Solid Waste Management. These chapters address important issues facing the region and may reflect other regional plans. Ancillary chapters, however, do not contain actions or policies required of local government. Hence, they are entirely advisory and establish no new mandates or policies for the region.
Bridge chapters include the Strategy and Implementation chapters, functioning as links between the Core and Ancillary chapters of the RCPG.
Each of the applicable policies related to the proposed project are identified by number and reproduced below in italics followed by SCAG staff comments regarding the consistency of the Project with those policies.
General SCAG Staff Comments
The Draft EIR does not adequately address the relationship of the proposed project vapplicable regional plans as required by Section 15125 [d] ofGuidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, which state that: "The EIR shall discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans. Such regional plans include, but are not limited to, the applicable air quality attainment or maintenance plan or State Implementation Plan, area-wide waste treatment and water quality control plans, regional transportation plans, regional housing allocation plans,habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, and regional land use plans for the protection of the Coastal Zone, Lake Tahoe Basin, San Francisco Bay, and Santa MonicaMountains".
Discussions in the EIR are lacking on the consistency of the project with applicable regional plans, specifically the Regional Transportation Plan and the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide(which incorporates references to policies in the other regional plans). We are particularly concerned at the lack of specific reference to SCAG's policies. The Final EIR should address the relationships (consistency with core policies and support of ancillary policies) toSCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and Regional Transportation Plan, utilizing commentary from the following detailed SCAG staff comments. The response should also discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable regional plans. We suggest that you identify the specific policies, by policy number, with a discussion of consistency or support with each policy.
CONSISTENCY WITH REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND GUIDE POLICIES The Growth Management Chapter (GMC) of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains the following policies that are particularly applicable and should be addressed in the Draft EIR for the Project.
"3.01 „The population, housing, and jobs forecasts, which are adopted bySCAG's Regional Council and that reflect local plans and policies, shall be used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review.
SCAG
Ventura COG
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Forecasts
Population 712,800 745,000 804,300 861,700 932,300
Households 237,500 252,400 274,700 287,500 326,400
Employment 306,600 343,200 394,800 438,200 485,600
Camarillo Forecasts 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Population 56,700 59,100 63,500 67,700 72,900
Households 20,200 21;500 23,600 25,700 28,400
Employment 29,800 31,700 34,500 36,900 39,400
SCAG staff comment. The DEIR, page 6-2 through 6-5 discusses population, housing, and employment; based on State Finance Department figures. These numbers are generally higher than SCAG numbers. The Final EIR should include a discussion of the relationship of the project to SCAG's adopted forecasts. Based on the information contained in the DEIR, staff is unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
3.03 The timing, financing, and location ofpublic facilities, utility systems, and transportation systems shall be used by SCAG to implement theregion growth policies.
SCAG staff comment. Section 3.6 of the Draft EIR, page 3-8, discusses the phasing of the interchange construction, consistent with this core policy.
3.07 Support subregional policies that recognize agriculture as an industry, support the economic viability of agriculture activities, preserve agricultural land, and provide compensation for property owners holding land in greenbelt areas.
SCAG staff comment. The annexation of the 270 acres will include a pre-zone of RE-40, (Rural Exclusive, 40-acre minimum) and any future development proposal would require a change of zone. .
The immidiate intent is for the agricultural uses to remain. There will be an unavoidable impact with interchange construction, the loss of 13 acres of agricultural land. The project is partially supportive of this ancillary policy.
3.09 Support local jurisdictions 'efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to seek new sources offunding for development and the provision of services.
SCAG staff comment. The Draft EIR identifies various arterial streets that will be extended and/or constructed to serve the new interchange. The infrastructure is designed to minimize cost to the maximum extent, supportive of this ancillary policy.
3.18 Encourage planned development in locations least likelyto cause adverse environmental impact.
SCAG staff comment. Page 4.2-4 states that the design of the improvements were based upon the goal of minimizing the loss of agricultural land, supportive of this ancillary policy.
3.23 Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources ,measures that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans.
SCAG staff comment. The Draft EIR acknowledges in Sections 4.6.2 Biology, 4.6.3 Geology and Soils, 4.6.5 Hydrology and Water Quality, 4.2 Agricultural Resources, and 4.5 Noise, all of the major resource constraints addressed by this policy. The adequacy of project specific mitigation should be carefully considered. The project is supportive of this ancillary policy.
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN POLICIES
The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) also has policies pertinent to this proposed projeet This chapter links the goal of sustaining mobility with tilt: goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment, reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation-friendly development patterns, and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected byocio-economic, geographic and commercial limitations. Among the relevant policies of this chapter are the following:
4.01 Transportation investments shall be based onSCAGS. adopted Regional performance Indicators:
Mobility - Transportation Systems should meet the public need for improved access, and for soft, comfortable, convenient and economical movements of people and goods.
Average Work Trip Travel Time in Minutes- 22 minutes
_ PM Peak Highway Speed - 33 mph
Percent of PM Peak Travel in Delay (All Trips)- 33%
Accessibility - Transportation Systems should ensure the ease with which opportunities are reached. Transportation and land use m'easures should be employed to ensure minimal time and cost.
Work Opportunities within 25 Minutes- 88%
Environment - Transportation Systems should sustain development and preservation of the existing system and the environment. (All Trips)
Meeting Federal and State Standards -Meet Air Plan Emission Budgets See Endnote.
Reliability - Reasonable and dependable levels of service by mode. (All Trips) Transit - 63%
Highway - 76%
Safety - Transportation Systems should provide minimal, risk, accident, death and injury. (All Trips)
Fatalities Per Million Passenger Miles - 0.008
Injury Accidents - 0.929
Livable Communities - Transportation Systems should facilitate Livable Communities in which all residents have access to all opportunities with minimal travel time. (All Trips) Vehicle Trip Reduction -1.5%
Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction - 10.0%
Equity - The benefits of transportation investments should be equitably distributed among all ethnic, age and income groups. (All trips)
Low-Income (Household Income $12,000)) Share ofNet Benefits- Equitable Distribution of Benefits
Cost-Effectiveness - Maximize return on transportation investment. (All Trips) Net Present Value -Maximum Return on Transportation Investment Value of a Dollar Invested -- Maximum Return on Transportation Investment SCAG staff comment. The DE1R acknowledges on page 3-6 that the proposed project will improve traffic flow, provide relief for existing and anticipated future congestion, and provide more efficient access consistent with this core policy.
4.02 Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental impacts toan acceptable level.
SCAG staff comment. Pa2es 4.1-5 through 4.6-7 in the DEIR contain various impacts associated with the interchange construction and annexation, and reducing most impacts as much as feasible, most to less than significant. Two impacts, the loss of 13 acres of agriculture land, and the year 2020 noise level impact on a farm house, remain significant and unavoidable. The project is generally consistent with this core policy.
4.03 Major Investment Studies and other studies of regional fansportation facilities shall include consideration offreight movement.
SCAG staff comment. There are no discussions regarding Major Investment Studies and Goods Movement. Staff in unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
4.07 Projects proposed for the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) that do not indicate a reasonable phasing of construction between segments will not be approved.
SCAG staff comment. There are no discussions regarding The Regional Transportation Improvement Program. Staff in unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
4.12 New freeway facilities shall be open for goods movement except where safety prohibits this.
SCAG staff comment. There are no discussions regarding goods movement. Staff in unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
4.17 Alternatives to highway expansion must be evaluated before giving regional approval to expand single occupancy lanes.
SCAG staff comment. There are no discussions regarding this. Staff in unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
AIR QUALITY CHAPTER CORE ACTIONS
The Air Quality Chapter core actions related to the proposed project include:
5.11 Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air basin, county, subregional and local) consider air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts.
SCAG staff comment. The Draft EIRfials to address the relationship and the matter of regional transportation and air quality modeling consistency. Based on the information provided, staff is unable to determine consistency with this core policy.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The project is consistent with and supportive of many oiSCAG's core and ancillary policies. Based on the information provided, staff is unable to determine oprisistency with policies 3.01, 4.03, 4.07,
4.12, 4.17, and 5.11. The project is partially consistent with policy 3.07. 2 All feasible measures needed to mitigate any potentially negative regional impacts associated with the proposed project should be implemented and monitored, as required by CEQA.
As stated in the General Comments. the Final EIR should contain the appropriate regional discussion and consistency with regional plans as required by CEQA. doc: HAIGR_SCAG1LE 1 IERS \ 99isfwy.wpd
ENDNOTE
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
Roles and Authorities
SCAG is aJoint Powers Agencyestablished under California Government Code Section 6502 et seq. Under federal and state law, SCAG is designated as a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).SCAG's mandated roles and responsibilities include the following:
SCAG is designated by the federal government as the Regionletropolitan Planning Organizationand mandated to maintain a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transpoitien planning process resultin a Regional Transportation Plan and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program pursuant to 23 U.S.C134(g)-(h), 49 U.S.C.§1607(f)-(g) et seq., 23 C.F.R§450, and 49 C.F.R.§613. SCAG is also the designateRegiona Transportation Planning Agencyand as such is responsible for both preparation of the Regional Transportion Plan (RIP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) under California Government Code Section 65080.
SCAG is responsible for developing the demographic projections and the integrated land use, housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of Month Coast Air Quality Management Pl.anpursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 40460(b)-(c). SCAG is also designated under 42 U.04(a) as a Co-Lead Agency for air quality planning for the Central Coast and Southeast Desert Air Basin District.
SCAG is responsible under the Federal Clean Air Act for determinCrqnformityof Projects, Plans and Programs to the Air Plan, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§7506.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65089.2, SCAG is responsible feriewing all Congestion Management Plans (CMPs) for consistency with regional transportation pkurequired by Section 65080 of the Government Code. SCAG must also evaluate the consistency and compatibility of such programs within the region.
SCAG is the authorized regional agency fainter-Governmental Revieuof Programs proposed for federal fmaricial assistance arid direct devtlopment activities, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12,372 (replacing A-95 Review).
SCAG reviews, pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 210ffiavironmental Impact Reportsof projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans [California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15206 and 15125(b)].
Pursuant to 33 U.S.C.§1288(aX2) (Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act), SCAG is the authorileelawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Agency
SCAG is responsible for preparation of thliegional Housing Needs Assessmentpursuant to California Government Code Section 65584(a).
SCAG is responsible (with the San Diego Association of Governments and the Santa Barbara County/Cities Area Planning Council) for preparing theSouthern California Hazardous Waste Management Ptapursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25135.3 City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive • P. 0. Box 248 • Camarillo, CA 93011-0248 June 14, 1999
Elaine Searcy
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
Planning and Evaluation Division
669 County Square Drive, Second Floor
Ventura, CA 93003
Re: RESPONSE TO COMMENT LE11ER (dated June 7, 1999)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 99031099)
Dear Ms. Searcy:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Camarillo policies for implementing CEQA, the City of Camarillo has prepared the Finar Environmental ImF, act Report (EIR) for the proposed Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83 project.
The Draft EIR for the proposed project was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days. The public review and comment period for the Draft EIR established by the State commenced on May 11, 1999, and expired on June 9, 1999. This Comments and Responses, combined with the Draft Program EIR, staff report to the Planning Commission, Errata Sheet, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, along with resolutions and minutes of the public meetings make up the Final Program EIR.
These are available for review at the City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
The attached response has been provided to your June 7, 1999 comment letter (see attached).
A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR public review period. Added or modified text is shown by shading (example) while deleted text is shown by striking (cxamplc). A public hearing is scheduled for June 23, 1999 at 7:30 p.m., at the City of Camarillo. Please call me at (949) 855- 3659 if you should have any questions.
4-A Matthew A. Boden
Ms. Elaine Searcy
June 14, 1999
Sincerely,
Community Development Director
City of Camarillo
rage I OX Ii Proposed Responses to Comments
Rowe 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
The City of Camarillo appreciates your comments on this project. The comment letter addresses various technical issues for which responses are provided, none of which substantively change the Draft EIR conclusions or raise new significant issues. As requested by the District, the Draft EIR is revised as follows:
1. Page 4.4-2, Paragraph 2
The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) maintains nine . . . . proposed project site. Local air quality data from 1992 to 1996 1997 for the El Rio Monitoring Station is provided in Table 4.4-1, Local Air Quality Levels.
CO is a colorless and odorless gas. The automobile and to 2.0 ppm in 1996. The CO State standard was not exceeded between 1992 and 1996 1997. 'Page 4.4-4, Paragraph 1
All stations monitoring 03 in Ventura County have experienced exceedances of the Federal 03 standard. The 03 concentrations monitored at the El Rio Station from 1992 to +996 1997 regularly exceed the State standard (0.09 ppm) and occasionally exceed the Federal standard (0.12 ppm) during the 03 season(June through October).
The maximum 03 concentration dropped from 0.14 ppm in 1992 and 1993 to 0.12 from 1994 to 1996 to 0.10 in 1997. The exceedance of State standards also dropped from 17 days in 1992 to 7 days in 1996 2 days in 1997.
There are a number of NOxcompounds, but stationary sources. Seasonal and diurnal patterns in NO2 concentration vary widely between locations, and levels have fluctuated at the El Rio Station, although the State standard of 0.25 ppm (1-hour average) was not exceeded from 1992 to 1996 1997. The maximum one-hour concentration within those years was 0.13 ppm measured in 1995. 1•111111•11•1111
June 14, 1999 01198=P885911.0.1.4.1.8.011011111MBEIBMINIMMUSSESSIMOSINAl CO 20 ppm
for 1 hour
35 ppm
for 1 hour
9 ppm 9 ppm
for 8 hours for 8 hours
0.09 ppm 0.12 ppm
for 1 hour for 1 hour
0.25 ppm 0.053 ppm
for 1 hour annual average
50 ug/m 150 ug/m
for 24 hours for 24 hours
Ozone
NO2
PM102
California
Pollutant Standard
Federal
Primary
Standard Year • Maxix' num'
Concentration
Days (Samples)
State/Federal
Std. Exceeded
1992 2.0 0/0
1993 5.0 0/0
1994 3.0 0/0
1995 3.0 0/0
1996 2.0 0/0
1997 2.6 0/0
1992 2.0 0/0
1993 5.0 0/0
1994 3.0 0/0
1995 3.0 0/0
1996 1.5 0/0
1997 2.1 0/0
1992 0.14' 17/3
1993 0.14 8/1
1994 0.12 7/0
1995 0.12 7/0
1996 0.12 8/0
1997 0.10 2/0
1992 0.06' 0/0
1993 0.08 0/0
1994 0.10 0/0
1995 0.13 0/0
1996 0.11 0/0
1997 0.07 0/0
1992 57 (3/0)
1993 63 (4/0)
1994 54 (2/0)
1995 62 (3/0)
1996 64 (1/0)
1997 63 (3/1)
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
Table 4.4-1
LOCAL AIR QUALITY LEVELS MEASURED AT THE
El RIO AMBIENT AIR MONITORING STATION
Maximum concentration is measured over the same period as the California Standard.
Based on 60 samples in 1992; 59 samples in 1993; 57 samples in 1994; 60 samples in 1995 and 61 samples in 1996.
NS = No standard set. NM = Not measured.
ug/rns = micrograms per cubic meter ppm = parts per million Source: Annual Summaries of Gaseous and Pollutant Particles, 1992 through i-99•6 1997, California Air Resources Board. 'Measured at Simi Valley Air Monitoring Station.
MIAMIMIS=000=1
Notes: 1.
2. June 14, 1999
age .1 01 1.5 Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 1011Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
2. The Draft EIR is revised as follows:
4.4-1 Short-term air quality impacts would occur during site preparation and project construction. Significance: Less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures for asbestos containing materials and fugitive dust; less than significant for ROC and NOx from construction equipment emissions (although mitigation measures are still required by the Ventura County APCD).
4.4-1 Short-term air quality impacts would occur during site preparation and project construction. Significance: Less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures for asbestos containing materials and fugitive dust; less than significant for ROC and NOx from construction equipment emissions (although mitigation measures are still required by the Ventura County APCD).
Soil that would be disturbed by adversely effect agricultural crops.
Because of the presence of asbestos-containing materials, demolition activities have the potential to significantly impact local air quality in the immediate project vicinity.
APCD Rule 62.7, Asbestos - Demolition and Renovation, governs activities related to demolition and renovation of buildings with asbestos-containing materials. This rule establishes the notification and emission control requirements for demolition activities.
construction (Page 5-8). It is necessary, however, to less than significant levels.
As noted in Section 4.6.4, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for the project which indicated the potential for asbestos-containing materials (ACM's) (also refer to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment included in Appendix 6.3 of Appendix 10.1, Initial Study/Notice of Preparation). As a result, the proposed demolition of the Friedrich House has the potential to impact local air quality in the immediate project vicinity. However, with 0101(004111M11.11114M881.MMIMONSIEMIEN
'-tne 14, 1999
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LEVIER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
implementation of the provisions of Rule 62.7, requiring the removal of all ACM's from a facility being demolished before any activity begins that would break up, dislodge, or similarly disturb the ACM, asbestos-related air quality impacts are expected to be less than significant.
4.6.4- 1 a No mitigationrcs arc ncccssary. The applicant shall be required to notify the APCD prior to the issuance of demolition permits or the demolition of any of the onsite structures. All demolition activities shall be in full compliance with APCD Rule 62.7.
4.6.4- 1 a . The applicant shall be required
to notify the APCD prior to the issuance of demolition permits or the demolition of any of the onsite structures. All demolition activities shall be in full compliance with APCD Rule 62.7.
3. The Draft EIR is revised as follows:
fdr thc day;
All clearing, grading, carth moving, or excavation activities will cease NOMMEN MIRB June 14, —
Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchanie and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LE1 1ER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
• All ri rat-L. tia+- ti i rally! at-LAW-15i
4.4-la A comprehensive Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be developed and approved by the APCD prior to commencement of grading and excavation operations.
The. plan shall include all feasible, but environmentally safe, dust .control methods. If a particular dust control method is determined or believed not to be feasible, or if it would conflict with other regulations, justification for not including the subject method shall be provided at the time the Fugitive Dust Control Plan is submitted to the APCD. The Plan shall identify all fugitive dust sources, the means by which fugitive dust from each identified source will be minimized, and the schedule or frequency that each dust control method will be applied for each identified source. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall include, at minimum, the following dust control measures:
• The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• Pre-grading activities shall include watering the area to be graded prior to any land clearing and excavation operations. Application of water (preferably reclaimed, if available) should penetrate to the depth of the proposed cuts.
• Throughout grading and construction operations, fugitive dust shall be controlled with the use of water trucks or other suitable means, generally at east three times a day (except during and immediately after rainfall).
All water used on the site for fugitive dust suppression shall be reclaimed water whenever possible.
• Dust produced during grading and construction activities shall be controlled by the following activities:
All exposed soil areas including unpaved on-site roadways and material stockpiles shall be watered and/or treated with .J d
Otaill1.111.11111111011111108116.1/11169{621101101121111•141. June 14, 1999
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY MR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
environmentally-safe soils stabili7ation materials and roll compacted unless recent rainfall provides sufficient dust control.
Completed grading shall be monitored weekly._ for . dust stabilization.
All trucks exporting fill from the site shall use tarpullns to cover the load in compliance with State Vehicle Code §23114. Material transported in trucks off-site shall comply with State Vehicle Code §23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2), and (e)(4) as amended. Material transported on-site shall be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust emissions.
c) All material transported on-site shall be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust.
d) All active portions of the construction site, including unpaved onsit roadways shall be sufficiently watered and/or treated with environmentally-safe soil stabilization additives to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
e) All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered or treated to prevent excessive generation of dust.
All inactive portions of the construction site should be seeded and watered until grass growth is evident, or treated with
environmentally-safe dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
• Signs shall be posted on-site limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less. • Soil stabilization methods, such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally-safe dust control agents, shall be applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four days. • During periods of high winds (i.e., wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact adjacent properties), all clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to semsenavearmoss.esametamanemegvaszawm WM.
June 14, 1999 MISOISIDNO
FilgC I VI 13 Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LE1 i ER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY MR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
prevent fugitive dust created by on-site activities and operations from being a nuisance or hazard, either off-site or on-site. The site superintendent shall use his/her discretion in conjunction witktkpAPCD in determining when winds are excessive.
• Adjacent streets and roads shall be swept at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and roads.
Employees involved in grading operations should be advised to wear face masks during dry periods to reduce dust inhalation.
These control techniques will be indicated on project grading plans.
Compliance with this measure will be subject to periodic site inspections.
vehicle speed will bc limited to 15 miles per hour;
All arcas with vehicle traffic will bc watared periodically; and Streets adjaccnt to thc project rcach wiH bc swept as nccdcd to remove These -procedures will bc indicated on projtet grading plans. Cempliancc with this
4.4-1-elb Project grading plans will indicate
4.4-1-dlc All trucks carrying soil to and from
1ICEASS02 assesummanassmarec• en nes
June 14, 1999
for thc day;
crITSpth ted-off-sitt,
c y cov r p
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LE1 1ER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
appfieti-ferreadridentificd source.
All material excavated or graded will be sufficiently watcrcd to prevent •
4.4-la A comprehensive Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall be developed and approved by the City prior to commencement of grading and excavation operations. The plan shall include all feasible, but environmentally safe, dust control methods.
If a particular dust control method is determined or believed not to be feasible, June 14, 1999
at. ..., A..., I UpU.SCU INC.SpUliZe3 10 L. ()Mine/11S
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
or if it would conflict with other regulations, justification for not including the subject method shall be provided at the time the Fugitive Dust Control Plan is submitted to the APCD. The Plan shall identify all fugitive dust sources, the means by which fugitive dust from each identified source will be minimized, and the schedule or frequency that each dust control method will be applied for each identified source. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan shall include, at minimum, the following dust control measures:
• The area disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• Pre-grading activities shall include watering the area to be graded prior to any land clearing and excavation operations. Application of water (preferably reclaimed, if available) should penetrate to the depth of the proposed cuts.
• Throughout grading and construction operations, fugitive dust shall be controlled with the use of water trucks or other suitable means, generally at east three times a day (except during and immediately after rainfall).
All water used on the site for fugitive dust suppression shall be reclaimed water whenever possible.
• Dust produced during grading and construction activities shall be controlled by the following activities:
a) All exposed soil areas including unpaved on-site roadways and material stockpiles shall be watered and/or treated with environmentally-safe soils stabili7ation materials and roll compacted unless recent rainfall provides sufficient dust control.
Completed grading shall be monitored weekly for dust
stabilization.
b) All trucks exporting fill from the site shall use tarpaulins to cover the load in compliance with State Vehicle Code §23114. Material transported in trucks off-site shall comply with State Vehicle Code §23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2), and (3)(4) as amended. Material transported on-site shall June 14, i9S9
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LE ITER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust emissions.
c) All material transported on-site shall be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust.
d) All active portions of the construction site; including unpaved onsit roadways shall be sufficiently watered and/or 'treated with environmentally-safe soil stabilization additives..40, ...prevent excessive fugitive dust.
e) All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered or treated to prevent excessive generation of dust.
All inactive portions of the construction site should be seeded and watered until grass growth is evident, or treated with
environmentally-safe dust suppressants, to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
• Signs shall be posted on-site limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less. • Soil stabilization methods, such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally-safe dust control agents, shall be applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four days. • During periods of high winds (i.e., wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact adjacent properties), all clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary to prevent fugitive dust created by on-site activities and operations from being a nuisance or hazard, either off-site or on-site.' The site superintendent shall use his/her discretion in conjunction with the APCD in determining when winds are excessive.
•
• Adjacent streets and roads shall be swept at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and roads.
"June 14, 1999 1116116111.111161.01M
. - • • ill w SE -
80.3061)830.10
MIO••••••••
June 19, 1999
Froposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
Employees involved in grading operations should be advised to we face masks during dry periods to reduce dust inhalation.
These control techniques will be indicated on project grading plans.
Compliance with this measure will be subject to periodic site inspections.
Air-Politrtiert-C—entrol District's Rules and Regulations; On-sitc vehicle speed will bc limited to 15 miles per hour; All arcas with vchicic traffic will bc watftred periodically, and Streets adjacent to the projcct reach will be swcpt as nded to remove silt which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to Project grading plans will indicate
All trucks carrying soil to and from
. • ; ;
S 55
The plan shall include all feasible, but environmentally safe, dust control Si . . S.
Yage 12 01 Ii Proposed Responses to Comments
Route 101/Airport North Area interchange and Annexation No. 83 RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LE I I ER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
4. The Draft FIR is revised as follows:
Air Quality
No long-term unavoidable adverse impacts to air quality have been identified.
However, the following temporary unavoidable adverse impact has been identified:
Valley Fever
The project would result in an individual project and cumulative basis.
SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
No long-term unavoidable adverse impacts to air quality have been identified.
However, the following temporary unavoidable adverse impact has been identified:
Valley Fever
The project would result in topsoil disturbance on-site which may contain spores known to cause Valley Fever. Following implementation of recommended mitigation measures, impacts associated with the potential for Valley Fever would remain significant on both an individual project and cumulative basis.
Illawatimagualawzgless
June 14, 1999 -
vjwc JpUfl.v to Lornments
Route 101/Airport North AreaInterchange and Annexation No. 83 • RESPONSE TO MAY 7, 1999 LETTER
FROM
VENTURA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(Elaine Searcy)
5. This comment will be taken into consideration by the decision-makers during their deliberation on the project. No further response is required. ------- June 14, 1999
D ECE nll lE_FR
JUN 7 1999 gj
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF CAMARILLO
Control District
June 7, 1999
Matthew A. Boden, Director
Planning and Community Development
City of Camarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
Subject: Request for Review of Draft Environmental Impact Report for Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange 81 Annexation No. 83
Dear Mr. Boden:
Air Pollution Control District staff has reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Report for the subject project, which would approve a new interchange on Route 101 between existing interchanges at Las Posas Road and Central Avenue in Camarillo. The project would also include the construction of several local arterials connecting to the new interchanges, and annexation of approximately 270 acres along the north side of Route 101 to the City of Camarillo. We submit the following comments:
1. rage 4.4-3. Table 4.4-1, local AirQolity_lacillimairs,Witalb Ambient Air Monitorin_g_Station
This table shoild be updated to include data for years 1997 and 1998 (see attached).
2. Fitge4.4-) 1, De • ition
Because of the presence of asbestos materials, demolition activities have the potential to significantly impact local air quality in the immediate project vicinity, APCD Rule 62.7, Asbestos - Demolition and Renovation, governs activities related to demolition and renovation of buildings with asbestos-containing materials. This rule establishes the notification and emission control requirements for demolition activities Specifically, this rule requires that the owner or operator of a facility shall remove all asbestos-containing material (ACM) from a facility being demolished before any activity begins that would break up, dislodge, or similarly disturb the ACM, or permanently preclude access to the ACM for subsequent removal, Provided that the existing provisions of Rule 62.7 are implemented. asbestos-related air quality impacts are expected to be less than significant.
The EIR should imiale a discussion of asbestos as a localized air pollutant, and a discussion of the potential for the project to create localized air quality impacts due to asbestos containing materials from demolition of structures on the project site. APCD recommends the following mitigation measure to mitigate potentially significant localized air quality Route 101/Airport North Area Interchnnge& Annexation No 63 June 7, 1999
impacts associated with demolition activities:
The applicant shall be required to notify the APCD prior to the issuanze of demolition permits or the demolition of any of the onsite structures. All demolition activities shall be in Rill compliance with APCD Rule 62.7.
3. Mitigation Meaure_
Because this project involves substantial construction activitY. APCD staff recommends that fugitive dust mitigation meaawres in the ElR be replaced with the following fugitive dust mitigation plan to minimize fugitive dust and Valley Fever impacts as much as feasible; Fugitive Dust Mitigation Plan
1. The area. disturbed by demolition, clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations sh5.1'. be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust. 2 Pre-grading activities shall include watering the area to be graded prior to any land clearing and excavation operations. Application of water (preferably reclaimed, if available) should penetrate to the depth of the proposed outs.
3. Throughout grading and construction operations, fugitive dust shalt be controlled with the use of water trucks or other suitable means, generally at least three times a day (except during and immediately after rainfall). All water used on the site for fugitive dust suppression shall be relaimed water whenever possible.
4. Dust produced during grading and construction activities shall be controlled by the following activities:
a) All exposed soil areas including unpaved on-site roadways and material stockpiles shall be watered and/or treated with environmentally-safe soil stabilization materials and roll compacted unless recent rainfall provides sufficient dust control. Completed grading shall be r.ionitored (indicate by whom) weekly for dust stabilization. b) All trucks exporting fill from the site shall use tarpaulins to cover the load in compliance with State Vehicle Code §23114. Material transported in trucks off-site shall comply with State Vehicle Code §23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2), and (e)(4) as amended. Material transported on-site shall be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust emissions. c) All material transported on-site shall be sufficiently watered or secured to prevent fugitive dust.
d) All active portions of the construction site, including Unpaved on-site roadways shall be sufficiently watered and/or treated with environmentally-safe soil stabilization additives to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
e) All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered or treated to prevent excessive generation of dust.
Route 101/Airport North Arca Interchange & Annexr,tion Nu 83 June 7, 1999
f) All inactive portions of the construction site should be seeded and watered until .grass growth is evident, or treated with environmentally-safe dust suppressants. to prevent excessive fugitive dust
5. Signs shall be posted on-site limiting traffic to 15 miles per hour or less.
6. Soil stabilization methods, such as water and roll compaction, and environmentally-safe dust control agents, shall be applied to portions of the construction site that are inactive for over four days.
7. During periods of high winds (i.e., wind speed sufficient to cause fugitive dust to impact adjacent properties), all clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation operations shall be curtailed to the degree necessary. to prevent fugitive dust created by on-Fire activities and operations from being a nuisance or hazard, either off-site or on-site, The site superintendent shall use his/her discretion in conjunction with the APCD in determining when winds are excessive.
8. Adjacent streets and roads shall be swept at least once per day, preferably at the end of the day, if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent streets and roads.
9. Employees involved in grading operations should be advised to wear face masks during dry periods to reduce dust inhalation.
4. Page 4.4.23 ignificant Unavoidable Irripects_Vellev Fever The last paragraph on Page 4.4-23 is relevant to Section 4.5, Noise, and not to the Valley Fever Section,
5, Etigt1.4:2,1Ac, =AUL/is:LEI
Although the project does not include development of the property proposed for annexation. the ELR states that development may occur within the next five years. APCD recommends that any development activity in the Annexation No. 83 area be considered in a Specific Pk or Area Plan rather than on a piecemea! basis, This will allow review of potential air quality impacts for the entire site, rather than on a project-by-project basis. If significant air quality impacts are identified, APCD recommends inclusion of a coordinated, compreh_ensive Air Quality Mitigation Program in the environmental document for the area, If you have any questions, please call me at 645-1431.
Sincerely,
AJ
Elaine Searcy
Planning and Evaluation Division
Sand Equivalent > 20
Expansion index <50
25 - 5 0 %
Passing No.
200 Sieve
Gradation
Calleguas Creek Stockpile Results
Requirements Sampled 5-7-09
to
(.0 0
33 %Passing No. 200 Sieve
-<
co Co
Yes
•-<
0 en
Within Specification
:oJGIIeqeo .JA_lea°
Laboratory Testing, Call
eguas Creek stockpil
e, Ventura Count
y,
°Janet:leo noi AIN
1, 0
0 6
'01\11 `1.93M o
m 6 L m (i
lionA
) -i ?I
3 _Ci 73 D-
= CD
2 O ° 2 @ F a5 C 1D2- 3 E
--e, m
Cr
_
CD n CD Lt3 o ' 3
-o
o
K a ff a> (7) P) -1 8' al
Fr) D) I:30 CO 0 (T)
U) 1.7 -0
m = ii5 CD 0- o to c a)
T, 4 - T
=
ID-
° C 0-}
0 ,7!
-, 5. wco D Er Fe, ..., i s a_.. = -0
5' ° ......
C) ,-t 5-c-, ,5 . M " ' o ° - -4.. Et) rr, x cD 0
:t- o_ 5o
-.
M c
CO (1) 7.7--,•
rn 3 a)
= co o_
a
co m- a) co co - CD
-0 CD 71 OD (7 x 0-
u).=
0 O. CD rT1 al D CT
0 m C
0 •-••-•
2. C X C CO 0 (1)
= ri) 0 la al 0
m FT'i c o 3' 2 ox -.. cn co 3 = (-) -0 CI)0
ID- E -67
w
= =
a' 72
-.-
oD- c I n (1)
43 Cr)
> 0 > ('D 3 co SD 0
0" CT
3 _,
c a'
m° 0 in o_ E6
a
a:, _
c 5
c
(7) 0 co
= P
a 9 . ri) 0 C , n D)
3.n 0 (DU) CD = cnP) -s.
i•.) D Er = a)
J C.), co -I, (p -
9 az1 0,
a
CD) a)
‘ 3 'Z°÷ .
co CD -o
co co M L .1 cr)
-1:3 ca 0 0 5- al a) CD 0- =
Hd
Sulfates
Chlorides
Minimum Resistivity
Plasticity Index
Sand Equivalent
Test
Property Requirements
5.5 to 10.0
<500 pprn
<250 ppm
2000 oh
m-cm
6 maximum
...‘ 1..)
3 c
3 Requirement
643
4::.•
-,i
422
643 204 217
California Test
•
cp
A
ut
"Cs
-o
3 —.•
0 13
-c)
3 to
M1.3
2946 ohm-cm
o cA)
Calleguas Creek
Stockpile — Sampled
5-7-09
-<
CD
u)
Yes Yes
-<
a)
ui
Yes
-<
ID
ui
Within
specification
75 pm
o
o
- 5
4.75 mm
--4 ul
3 :33
crt co
3 Sieve Size
Gradation Requirements
a
1 —, cri
a
i
Cr)
a
,
78-100
100
Percentage
Passing
N)
a N)
to
a h)
es.)
a to
202
to
a r...)
California Test
r...)
co.
(0, cy)
100
.__,
a
a
Carieguas Creek
Stockpile — Sampled
5-7-09
No
ON
.
-< cr.
co
Yes
Within
specification
0 A
2 :pepl
uiqns se!doo
No. 4.75 mm sieve, the Sand Equivalent and Plasticity Index requirements shall not apply.
Au
edwoo 'pewoo
uEN[Ins 10
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Los Angeles Region
Recipient of the 2001 Environmental Leadership Award from Keep California Beautiful Linda S. Adams Arnold Schwarzeneggel Cal/EPA Secretary 320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90013 Governor Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Address: l~ttp//www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles June 29,2009
Mr. Tom Fox
Public Works Director
City of Carnarillo
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 9301 0
Dear Mr. Foxx:
GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS (ORDER NO. 93-010) FOR SPECIFIED DISCHARGES TO GROUNDWATER - CITY OF CAMARILLO, CALIFORNIA (Cl-9514, File No. 09-067)
We have completed our review of your application, which includes the May 5, 2009 Report of Waste Discharge (ROWD) submitted by Blois Construction, Incorporated on behalf of the City of Camarillo (hereafter the Discharger) for the discharge of groundwater produced during the Springville 54" Irrigation Waterline Relocation Project.
The project consists of building a new diversion water pipeline running approximately parallel to the existing pipeline to accommodate a future freeway off-ramp. The project is located south of the 101 Freeway alongside Ventura Boulevard between Bajo Aqua Avenue and the Carnarillo Town Center in Camarillo, California (Figure 1). The property is currently undeveloped land that is used in general as agricultural land for crops and the surface gently slopes to the southwest at about 0.007 feetlfeet. The installation of a new pipeline requires excavation below the local water table. The trenches to be excavated will be about 9 feet wide and vary in depth from 12 to 14 feet. The new pipeline will be approximately 3,500 feet long and will be the same size (54") and elevation (10 to 11 feet below ground level) as the existing pipeline.
The construction dewatering willl be achieved by a well point dewatering system. Shallow dewatering wells will be placed along the trench 10 feet apart for the length of approximately 600 feet. They will be activated as the trenching progresses to depress groundwater to eight inches below the trench sub-grade in the pipeline area. Each dewatering well will be about 20 feet deep, and will flow between three to four gallons per minute depending on the location of the well. Roughly 50 wells will be connected together by a vacuum manifold and will be pumped in concert. The dewatering discharge will be continuously during the six month life of the project. The maximum estimated total flow rate of the dewatering is 90 gallons per minute (gpm) continuously. The groundwater will be discharged to a 17-acres undeveloped former agriculture site. As construction progresses, the dewatering wells from the start will be removed while new wells will be jetted ahead of the progress.
California Environmental Protection Agency
*** The energy challenge facing California is real. Every California needs to take immediate action to reduce energy constimption*** ***For a list of sinzple ways to reduce denzand and cut your energy costs, see tlze tips at: lzttp://www.swrdb.ca.gov/news/ecIzalleng.l~t~nl*** ~2 Recycled Paper
Our nzission is topreserve and enhance the quality of California S u~ater reso~trces for the berieJit ofpresent and future generations.
Mr. Tom Fox -
City of Camarilla
June 29,2009
Cl-9514
Wastewater from the sub-grade of the trench will be handled by a sump pump. A sump within the trench will be over excavated and a submersible pump in the sump will pump out water from the trench. The dewatering activity is estimated to last approximately six months beginning in June and ending in December of 2009.
The pumped groundwater from the wells and the sump pump will be collectively discharged to a settlement tank for primary settling to remove suspended solids. Then it will be discharged through a sprinkler system onto an adjacent site (approximately 17 acres) south of the pipeline.
Blois Construction Inc. will be the construction company that will execute the project. Based on a. letter, dated June 22, 2009, from the construction company, Blois Construction field superintendent will continuously monitor the discharge throughout the construction and take action to modify the dewatering activities and implemented Storm Water pollution Prevention Plan as necessary to prevent any run-off from the discharge site at all time, including raining season.
This 17-acres site was previously used for discharge of groundwater from other project (Ventura Boulevard Extension Project). The'Project Extension utilized 50-60 wells at a depth of 30 feet which produced up to 400 gallons per minute. No run-off has been reported or observed during the May 29, 2009 inspection.
The Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region, has established groundwater quality objectives for the Oxnard Plain, Confined Aquifer. The water quality objectives are 1,200 milligram per, liter (mg/L) for total dissolved solids (TDS), 600 mg/L for sulfate, 150 mg/L for chloride, and 1.0 mg/L for boron.
Groundwater samples collected at boring GW1 on June 13, 2008 indicated that the total TDS is 2,620 mg/L, sulfate 1,600 mg/L, chloride 170 mg/L, boron 1.72 mg/L, and nitrate 45 mglL.
Waste Discharge Requirement (E.6.) of Board Order No 93-010 states: "Wastewater discharged to groundwater shall maintain the existing water quality, even if that existing water quality exceeds established objectives. A determination shall be made by the Executive Officer as to the applicability of water quality standards with regard to the "Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Water in California", with each discharge, on a site - specific basis".
Based on the results of the site specific groundwater samples collected from boring GWI, it is expected that the proposed discharge will exceed the water quality objectives for TDS, sulfate, chloride, and boron at the subject area. The exceedance of water quality objectives is attributed to the natural water quality of the Confined Aquifer. During the dewatering activity the Discharger will not be using groundwater in any activity that will result in the addition or incorporation of new pollutants. Groundwater will be pretreated to remove settable and suspended solids and discharges will be controlled through sprinkler system irrigation. The groundwater will be discharged over the same aquifer where the naturally occurring TDS, sulfate, chloride and boron exceed water quality objectives. As a result, the discharge is not California Environmental Protection Agency
*** The energy challenge facing California is real. Every California needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption*** ***For a list of sirnple ways to reduce demand and czrt your energy costs, see tlze tips at: 1zttp://www.swrdb.ca.gov/news/echalleng.1zt1ni*** e(Dd Recycled Paper
Our mission is topresewe and enhance the qtrality of California S water resources for the beneJit ofpresent arzdjirtzrre generations.
Mr. Tom Fox -
City of Camarilla
June 29,2009
Cl-9514
considered to be a threat to existing water quality, will not threaten existing beneficial uses of the local groundwater, and will be returned to the same formation from which it was withdrawn.
The discharge of groundwater to surface waters under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit is not possible because the Discharger will not be able to meet effluent limits for surface water discharge. In addition, there is no sanitary sewer available in close proximity to the site. Finally, this is considered to be a short term duration discharge that will last for approximately six months.
Therefore, based on the information provided and information gathered during the site inspection on May 29, 2009, Regional Board Executive Officer has determined that the proposed discharge meets the conditions specified in Order No. 93-010 "General Waste Discharge Requirements for Specified Discharges to Groundwater in Santa Clara River and Los Angeles River Basins" adopted by this Board on January 25, 1993.
Enclosed are your Waste Discharge Requirements consisting of Regional Board Order No. 93- 010, and Monitoring and Reporting program No. Cl-9514. The Monitoring and Reporting Program requires you to implement the monitoring program on the effective date of this Order.
All monitoring reports should be sent to the Regional Board, ATTN: Information Technoloay Unit. When submitting monitoring and technical reports to the Regional Board per these requirements, please include a reference to "Compliance File No. Cl-9514, which will assure that the reports are directed to the appropriate file and staff. Do not combine other reports with your monitoring reports. Submit each type of report as a separate document.
We are sending Board Order No. 93-010 only to the applicant. A copy of the Order will be furnished to anyone who requests it.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Project Manager, Mr. Orlando H. Gonzalez at (213) 620-2267 or Unit Chief, Dr. Rebecca Chou at (213) 620-6156. - I
Sincerely,
! Enclosures:
1. General WDR Board Order No. 93-010
2. Monitoring and Reporting Program No. Cl-9514
i 3. Priority Pollutants list
California Environmental Protection Agency
*** The energy challenge facing California is real. Evety California needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumnption*** ***For a list of simple ways to reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see tlte tips at: l~ttp://www.swrdb.ca.govhzews/ec1~alleng.html*** e.9 ed Recycled Paper
Our mission is topreserve and enhance the quality of California's wafer resources for the benefit ofpresent and future generations.
Mr. Tom Fox -
City of Camarillo
June 29,2009
Cl-9514
cc: Mr. Kurt Souza, Cal. DPH, Region 5 - So Cal. Branch, ~rinking Water Field Operation Mr. Jeffrey L. Stone, Cal. DPH, Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management, Recycled Water Unit
Mr. Ronald C. Coons, Director, Ventura County Public Works Agency Mr. James Evans, Ventura County Environmental Health Division, Liquid Waste , Ms. Melinda Talent, Ventura County Environmental Health Division, Land Use Unit .Mr. Ken Matsuoka, City of Camarillo
Mr. Dave Mirones, Blois Construction, Inc.
Mr. Craig Blois, Blois Construction, Inc.
California Environmental Protection Agency
*** Tlze energy challenge facing California is real. Evety California needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consuinptjon*** ***For a list of simple ways to reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see the tips at: Izttp://www.swrdb.ca.gov/news/eclzalleng.l~t~nl*** . - -- e(Dd Recycled Paper
Our mission is topresenre and enhance the quality of California S water resources for the benefit ofpr*eseizt andftlttae generations.
VICINITY MAP - Sprinqville Irriqation Water Main Relocation LEGEND: - Construction Site Perimeter - Existing Drainage Channel = -Proposed Irrigation Water Main = -Contour Lines - Silt Fence - Sand Bags - Dewatering Discharge Area Lu - Staging Area co
*Ca
marillo, California, United States
The California Regional Water Quality Cqntrol Board, Los Angeles Region (hereinafter Regional Board), f indhs:
1. Thei3alifornia~aterCode, Section 132600f Chapter4, Arkicle 4, requires that any person discharging wastes, or proposing to discharge wastes, vhf ch could affect the quality of the water& of the State, shall file rt Report of Waste Discharge with ae Regional Board. The Regional Board will then prescribe requixementg as to the nature of the proposed or existing df sdaarge.
2. A nwer of activities carried an witbin tho ~egion resilt in the discbarge of water that, because of its characteristics, results in little or no pollution when diochakged ka
groundwater, ExampXes of these activities include:
a) hydrostatic testing of tanks, pipes, and storage vessels t b) construction dewatering; c) dust control application; d) water irrigation storage systems;
e) subterranean seepage dewatering;
f) well development and test paping;
g) aquifer testing; curd
B) monitoring weU canstructiun*
The following discharges are spec3f f ch2lp excluded from this list: water produced from seawater earaction or wastewater treatment, reclaimed water, and water to be-i~j ected directly into an aquifer. .
3. , Tha Mter discharged from these activities results in discharges of relatively "clean* wastewater, containing few - pollutants. For the purposes of as Order, Awasteraaterw is , - defined as high quality wastewater, produced as a result of .the above-listed spec5 f ied act&vitias, and. other similar activities. ft is of a quality acceptable for use under State Department of Health Services standards and the Regional Board% Water Quality Control Plan.
4. These discharges occur in a manner where say wfll likely, througb recharge or percolation, enter the groundwater and may therefore, be considered a waste discharge which cculcl affect . the quality of the waters of the State, and for which a Report of Waste Discharge must: be file& vrdes Water Code Section 13260.
January 6, i993
General Was- Discharge Requirements Discharge to Groundwater Order No. 93-01Q .
5, Each month, this Regional Board receives a large n&er of requests :to discharge water from #a activities listed in Finding 2 above, and for other similar activities. For each such request, staff must determine the absence or presence of signff fcant pollutants in the discharge, the regulatory Limits for the pollutants, and the potential impact of the discharge on the waters of the State, and Men prepare individual Waste Discharge Requirements.
6. It is anticipated that the large number of such requests will continue to be filed, and far exceed the capacity of staff to review applications and prepare individual Waste Discharge Requirements lo bring to the Board for consideration, in a timely manner. These circmstances create the need for an expedited system for processing the numerous requests for discharge to groundwater.
7. The adoption of General Waste Discharge Requirements will:
a) sigplffy the application process for the Discharger, b) expedite the issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements and decrease the regulatory burden on the regulated community, C) free up Board staff fee higher priority work, and
d) reduce the Board's time involved by enabling #e
Executive Officer to notify the Discharger, in
appropriate cases, of' the applicability af these general xequlkements adopted by Ule Regional Board.
These General Maste Discharge Requirements would benefit the public, tho Board, and Board staff by accelerating the review process without loss of regulatory jurisdiction or oversight, -
8. The beneficial uses of gruundwater in thk'-bs Angeles River . Cu' and Santa Clara River Basins may include municipal and
domestic supply, agricultural supply, industrial service and process sugplty, and freshwater replenfshm~nt,
9. The Boor4 adopted revised Water Quality Control Plans for tho - Santa Clara River Basin and Los Angeles River Basin on October 22, 1990, and June 3, 1991, respectively, These Water Quality Control Plans contain water quality objectives for groundwater within #e Basins. The requirements containea in this order, as they are met, will be in onf for ma nee with the goals of these Water Quality Control Plans.
0. The State Water Resources Control BbZtrd adopted Resolution 68- 16, "Statement of Policy With Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters fn Californiau, on October 28, 1968, This Policy states that wherever the existing quality of water is better -an me quality established as otsjaotfveu or adopted ' policies, such existing quality shall be maintained. .. *
Ge-a1 Waste Discharge Reguirer~ents Df scharge to Grouradwater Order No. 9wQ
File NU, 92-60
31. The issuance of General Waste Discharge Requirements for the discharges subject to these general requiromsnts is exempt fmn +he provisions of Chapter 3 (ccmmencing with Section 22mo] of ~ivision 13 of the Public Resources Cede pursuant to .one or more of the fallowing:
The lead agency has prepared an Environmental Impact
Report or a negative declaration based on findings
pursuant to California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15070, which show that there will be no significant impact on water quality.
The replacement or reconstruction of existing structures will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced as defined in CCR, Title 14,
Section 15302.
The cunstruction of new structures or the conversion of existing small structures will have only minor
modifications in tho exterior of the structure as defined in CCR, Title Zd1 Section 15303,
The activity'will cause only minor alterations to land as defined in CCR, Title 14# Section 15304.
Minor alterations in land use will not result in any chanaes in land us. or density as defined in eml Title
12. These General Waste Discharge ~equirements are not intended to alter or supersede existing restrictions or conditions imposed by other government agencies.
The Boa233 has notified interested agencies and concerned persons of its intent to adopt General Waste Discharge- Requirements for specified discharges to groundwater, and has provided them with an . - opportunity to submi* their written views and roc;ommendatiom, The Bclud, ih a public meeting, board. and consiaered all comments . . pertaining to the tentative requirements. .
ST IS -BY ORDERED .that Me Dischargers authorized under this order &all comply with the following:
The General Waste Discharge Requirements, contained in
this Order, will regulate discharges to groundwater iron:
hydrostatic testing of tanks, pipes and storage vessels t eonstru&ion dewatering; dust control applicati~n; water %&gation storage systemst subterranean seepage
dewatering? well developnent and test pumping; aguif or testing: rmonitoting well construction; and other similar discharges, in accordan- with the California Code of
. General Waste Discharge Requirements -Discharge to Groundwater Order No. 93-01Q
TO qualify for coverage under this Order, the bischarger ' may 'be required tot a) submit speof f i c hydrogeologf cal site studies
sumarizirrg the following: regional and local
hydrogeology, . a site plan designating structures
and operations, descriptions and details of
representstive water supply and monitoring wells,
and water conveyance systems, soil engineering analyses of representative earth materiaxs including site lithology, permeability,
infiltration data, and any potential adverse
impacts on groundwater. B) demonstrate-' that .the discharge meets the crf tewia set forth herein, and that specified discharges to
groundwater will not adversely impact the overall
quality of the regional and local groundwater
basin[s) , and is in accordance with the appropriate
Basin Plan Water Quality objectives, State
Department of Health Services (DHS) Primary and
Secondary arinki ng Water Standards, and all water
quality standards assacfated with Priority
Pollutants.
c) demonstrate that disinfectants,' if used, will not
adversely f mpact water quality in the groundwater
basPn(s) . 2, The dischaxge must' not adversely impact the overall quality of tbe regional and local groundwater basins,
must not adversely affect beneficial uses, and aust have water quality characteristics in accordance with Basin - Plan Watar Quality objectives, State Department of Health c-. ? - .@ ~enrices (DHs) Primary and Secondaxg Drinking Water Standards, and a311 water quality stetndards associated with miority Pollutetnt8,
3. S his Order will 'serve na Genera2 wasfe Discharge ~equfrements.for'specified discharges to groundwater, i - 2. won receipt of the Report of Waste Discharge describing . such discharge, the Executive Officer shalz determine, as applicable, if such. discharge,
". , General Waste Discharge Requirements File No, 92-60 .,Discharge to Groundwater '
Order No. e3KkQ&Q
a) involves wastewater at limits Oower than, or equal
:'tat the acceptab~e~leveXe of the Basin Plan Water
Quality Objectives, the State DHS Primary and
Secondary ~rinking Water Standards, and all vater
quality standards associated with Priority Pollutants,
b will be conplated within a time frame stated by the
Discharger and approved by the Executive Of ffcer,
c) has been adequately characterized by hydrogeologic
assessment,
d) is not a threat to water quality,
e) does not cause the degradation of groundwater, and
f) does not threaten or. impair any designated beneficial uses of such waters.
3. Zn the event me Executive Officer so finds, be: shall notify the Discharger, in writing, that the proposed
wastewater discharge to groundwater is subject to this
order. Appropriate cases may also be brought to the
Board for adoption of individual requirements when the
Executive Officer deems it desirable or necessary,
4. Should individual Waste Discharge Requirements with more specific requirements be issued to a Discharger, the
applicability of these general requirements to the
individual will be automatfcally terminated on the
effective date of the individual Waste Discharge Ra~fufrements . f
All Oiscbargero shall file a Report of Waste Discharge at Peast 120 days before start of Ure discharge. !fbe
Executive Off ice# will determine the applicability, of General Waste Discharge Requiremmes,
Dischargers who fail to file a Report of Waste Discharge under Section 33260 of the California Water code are guilty of o misdemeanor and may be liable civilly in
accordance wim Section 13261 {b) of tbe Calif omia water Code.
General Waste Discharge Requirements
-Discharge to Groundwater ,
Oraer No. 93-QIQ
1. 'Discharge of wastewater is prohibited* except as
specified In the Report of Waste Discharge.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that me Discharger shall comply with the following:
2- Only those types of discharges specifically listed in the Report of Wasta Dfscharge are authorized to be discharged by the General Whste Discharge Requirements.
.2, Wastewater shall be analyzed, prior to discharie, to determine if it contains constituents in excess of %he . -.. -appropriate Basin Plan Water Quality Objectives, as Afsted in Tables 1 and 2 of Attachment "AH.
. Hydrologic and groundwater basin boundarf es are included in Figures 1 and 2 of Attachment
3, Wastewater shall be analyzed, prior to, discharge, to determine that it does not contain constituents in excess of the Haximum Contaminant Levels (HCL) as listed in the State DHS Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Standards in Attachment "Bn.o
4 Wastewater shail be analyzed, prior to discharge, to . determine the concentrations of the chemical constituents list& in the Priority3Po1lutants exhibited in ~ttachment *- WB,. , .
5. Wastewater which contains any constituent in excess of the MCL'sd the Drinking Hater Standards, or the Priority Pollutant standards, If sted herein, shall not be - dlischarged to groundwater*
6. Wastewater: discharged to groundwater shall maintain the existing. water quality, even Zf that existing water
quality exceeds established objectives, A determination shall be made by the Executive Officer as to' the
applicabi2fty of water quality standards with regard. to tbe mStstem%nt af Policy With Respect to Haintafnfng.Lfigb.
Quality of Waters in Californiaw, with each discharge,. on a site-specfffc basis.
7. Neither the treatment nor dl~iharge of wastewater sha3l cause a condition of pollution or nuisance.
General Waste rlfscharge Requirements
~ischarga to Groundwater
Order No. 93-
File NO. 92-60
8, The pH of wastewater discharged to groundwater, under this Order, shall at all times be within the range of 6.0 and 9.0 pH units, \
9. Wastewater to be discharged to groundwater, under this Order, shall be retained on the areas of use, and shall not be allowed to escape as surface flow, except as
provided in a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) pernit uniquely applicable to the
specified discharge. For the purpose of this
requirement, however, minor amounts of irrigation return water from peripheral areas shall not be considered a
violation of this Order,
f!
10. Wastewater discharged to groundwater shall be discharged at the site in accordance with these requirements, and
only on property owned or controlled by the Discharger.
11. Wastewater which does not meet each of the foregoing requirements shall be held in impervious containers, and if transferred elsewhere, the final discharge shall be at a legal point of disposal, and in accordance with the
provisions of Division 7.5 of the California Water Code* For me purpose of these requirements, a regal point of
disposal is defined as one far which Waste Discharge Repf~emants have been established by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and which is in
full compliance therewith.
32. Wastewater discharged to groundwater shall not contain any substance in concenttations toxic: to human, animal, . - plant, or aquatic 'life. -- *U I 13. Wastewater discharged to groundwater shall not impart . tast;es, odors color, foaming, or other objectionable characteristics to the receiving groundwater, . - 34. Neither disposal nor handling of 'wastes sharf cause a condition of pollution or nuisance or problems due to
breeding of moswitos, gnats, nidges, flies or other
pests.
35. The temperature of discharged wastewater shall. not exceed 100 'P.
1. A copy of this Order shall be maintained at the discharge facility an4 shall be available at all times to egierating persome%.
General Waste isc char go Requirements Discharge. to Groundwater Order No.
File NO. 92-60
2. In. the event the Discharger: is unable to comply with any of the conditions of this Order clue %q:
.(a) Breakdown of equipment,
(b) Accidents caused by human error or negligence, Ic) Other causes such as acts of nature, iaj Facility operations, the Discharger must notify this Board, by telephone, within 24 hours of the incident, and confirm it in writing within one week of the telephone notification,
In accordance with Section 13260(c) of the California
Water Code, the Discharger shall file a report with this Regional Board of any material change or proposed change in the character, location and/or volume of the discharge. -
In accordance with Section 13267 (b) of the ~alikornie
Water Code, the Discharger shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical monitoring program reports; such
rep~rts shall - be submitted In accordance with
specifications prepared by the Executive Officer, ,
The Regional Board and other authorized representatives shall be allowed:
' (a) Entry upon premlaes whem a .regulated facility or . activity is located or conducted, or where records are kept under the conditions of this Order;
(b} Access td copy any records that are .kept under the conditions of this Order;
(c} . To . inspect any facility, . equipment (including - monitoring and control equ%ptaentf, practices, ox c-,
operations regulated or require-nder this Order; aha
[d) To photograph, sample, and skitor for the purpose of aasuring -compliance with this Order, or as otherwise autfiorized by the California Water Code.
In accordance with Section 33263 (s) of the Califom5a
Water Code, these Waste Df scharge Requirements are
subject to periodic review an6 revision by this Regional Board.
These requirements, herein, do not authorize
the .contmissbn of any act, by the Discharger, which
causes injury to the property of another, do not protect the Discharger from his/her l iabf lities unaer Federal, State, or local laws, and do not guarantee the Discharger n capacity right - in 'the recef vf ng groundwater.
*
Genera& Waste Discharge Requirements Discharge to Groundwater Order No. 33-OIQ
8. ff hazardous ar toxic materials or hydrocarbons are
stored at the facility and the facility is not monitored at all times, a 24-hour emergency response telephone
number shall be prominently posted where it can be easily df scerned .
1. The Executive Officer may prescribe a Monitoring and Reporting Program for each authorized Discharger;
applicable parameters limited in the discharge shall be monitored as specified by the Executive Officer in the
Monitoring and Reporting Program. ., 2. The Discharger shall retain records of all monitoring information and data used to complete the Report: of.-Waste Discharge far at least three years from the date of
samp1ing, measurement, report, or application. The
retention period shall be extended during the course of any unresolved 3 it igatian regarding the discharge, or when requested by the Regional Board,
3. The Discharger shall maintain all sampling, measurement and analytical results, including: the date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurement; the indivi&ual(s) who performed the sampl f ng or measurement t the date (s) analyses were performed; analystsr names; and analytical techniques or metfiods used,
4, Representative samples of the discharge shall be taken prior to discharging to .the groundwater. .
Cu 5. A11 chcmica3 and bacteriological rmalysos shall be . conduated at a laboratory certf fied for such analyses by khe State af Caxifornia Department of Health Services.
The laboratory performing #e analyses must follow all
applicabla QAiQC pxotoeels. . . 5. ' The isc charger shall calf brate and perform maf ntenance procedures on all monitoring instruments ancl equipment to . . insure accuracy uf measurements, or shall insure that . - both activities will be conducted.
P. The Dischargerr shall file with #e Regional Board
(Attent ion: Technical Support Un f t) technical reports on self-monitexing work performed according to tbfi
Monitoring and Reporting Program specified by the
63cemtive Officer, and submit other reports as requested by the Regional Board.
General Waste Discharge Requirements -Dfscharge to Gxuundwater Order No* 93-0;a6
2* Xn reporting the rmonftorfng data, Discharger shall
arrange the data in tabular fonns such that the data,
constituents, andconcentrations arereadilybiscernable.
The data shall be surmnarized to demonstrate compliance with Waste Discharge Requirements.
3. All records and reparts submitted to the Regional Board are public documents and will be made available for
inspection by the public during normal business hours at tfie Regional Board office located at 101 Centre Plaza
.Drive in Monterey Park.
4. For every item where, the requf rements are not met, the .
Discharger shalb, submit a statement of the actions
undertaken, or proposed, which will. bring the discharge into full compliance with requirements at the earliest
time, and submit a timetable for correction.
Each monitoring report aust affim in writing that;
"All analyses were conducted at a laboratory certified
for such analyses by the State of California Department of Eealth Services, and in accordance wfth current EPA
guideline procedures or as specified in this Monitoring Program. 9 -
6, Each report shall contain the following completed declakation :
"I declare under penalty of law that f have personally examined, and am f amilf ar with, tfie iaf ormation submitted in this document and all attachments, ernd that, based on my inquiry of those indfvfduals immediately responsible . for obtaining the infdmation, f believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. X am aware "-' that there are significant penalties for submitting f alss infomatian, including the possibility if fine and
imprisoment. [a Sections 13263, 13267, and 13268)
7. Pn kbe event Wat wastes, -associated wfth the discharge under this Order, are transpotrted to a different df sposal. site, the following shall be reported in the monitorfng report: type and CpLntity of wastes; name and address of hauler (or method of transport if other than by hauling) r and, loeation of .the final point (s) of disposal,
8. In the event of any changes of subject land ownership or subject waste , discharge faciLity currently owned or
contralled by the Discharger, the- Discharger shaLX notify the sticceedin owner er operator of the existence of this Odar in writ P ng. A copy ef the docment shall be aigned by %he new owner accepting responsibility fox this Order an& shall be forwarded to fbis Regional Board.
Genersl Waste Discharge Requirements File No, 92-60
Discharge to Groundwater
Order No. s-OlQ
C'
9. Tbe bischarger shall notify this Regional Board, within 24 hwrs. by +elephone, of any adverse condition
resulting from this discharge, and such notification
shall be nf f irmed in writing within seven calendar days.
I* EXPXRATXON DATE AND CQNTIK!ATION OP EXPIRED GEIZERAZ WASTE DXSCflARQE REQDXEZEMENTB
Xt is the Board's intent to review this Order within five (5) years of its adoption;
I, Robert P. Ghirelli, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of an Order adopted by the ~alifcrnia Regional Water Quality Control Board, L~S Angdes Region, on January 25, 1993.
\
Exeakive Officer .:
Groundwater Water Quality Objectives
Santa Clara River (4A)
Los hgeles River (4B)
Hydrologic Boundaries, CRWQCB-LA
Fig 1, Principal Surface Waters
Fig 2, Principal Ground Waters
; - Attachaant A, Table 1
'11000 300 200-
700 SO 100
West of San Antonio-Senior Cyn Creek 3,000 300 200
East of San Antonio-Senior cyn Creek 700 200 50 . 0.5
600 150 100
800 150 150 *
700 150 100
700 3.50 100
600 100 100
Eask of Piru Creekg 2,500 1,200 200
west of ~inr meek! - . 1,200 600 100
Upper Pi= HSA 1,100 400 200
Hungry VabPey IiSA
-
2,000 800 100 1.0
Santa Paula
East of Beck Rd -. - 1,200 600 . 100
West of Peck Rd 2,000 800 110 .. . 7.00 250 100
Oxnard Forebay 1,206 ' 600 150
Deep aquifers underly5ng ' 1,200 600 150
4,200 600. 150
900 350 150
East Us Pasas XSA~
of Grimes Cyn Rd, L.A. Avenue 700 300 100
and Sumis Rd
EastoLGr~as Cyn~d andHitch BLvd 2,5001,200 400'
South of L.A. Avs between §omis Rd 1,500 700 250
and Hitch Blvd
'~solated basin near Grimes Cyn Rd -r and Broadway Rd -, Arroyo Santa.Rosa HSA 900 300 150
~onejo Valley HSA 800 250 150 .- Tiema Rejada Valley HSA 700 250 100 300 350
,. wr qifsrc are of wry paor qmtiry and not MKI for demestlc, agrfrulturaL, or indrwtrial water ~wly in my slonfffeant quantity. Ua?w qurlfty In ahrtlov rquffcrc ohalt k ~intafntd at txlrtfng Levels In rctardarrca with MResolutfcm &-I&*. TbC+ is to k aeeo~p1trhbb an case-byeroo hsIo as pert of the wiraaents frpased &pxl clirctrrr-n to the rhrilw aqulfrrt.
ShPticv rltwiml rcplChr Ct of vty poor wtfty and not weS. YIter quslfty fn shollw rquifer shall be resintrIned at urlrtjnp &mi8 fn wtorrfonce uftb ~Rtoolutlon 68-16". ThSs ft to k accmplfshed en n crot:byw fwfr or prrt of the tequirsa3ntr 3-ed qxa dirdrar~rs ta the &at leu aquifw.
Itwtsdca 8epFfcr In S~wet lEMyorr lrrd trfkttufes but ucttuh aquifer fn bstric Cr~k md the Swth Fork of kntr Ctaro RCvtr ud trikrtari+0.
teatptrchtd Wttr k pmratly of poar c(wtfty, but toutty may be wed for agricutruret ad danestit PrpotrS fn notthucttern parts ef the QxMrd Plaln. Yhrn 8haltow wtl or dralnagc ditch water* cterrty excnd.tbn* &j~tivrr, raqufrclncnts dwld k rat an 8 t.cetby.crst bufo rccwdfng to *Resotution 68-?6@.
Seaa f~tatcd ndts alms Lo& Argcles A- In tht Arroyo La.8 Potu flood plrfn have hlghct ainerrl tcve'ts.
Ilupi~~nts fw fMe areas dwtd k set m a cmt-bp~.~ bash sscctrdillg to w~ltotutton 68*1P.
Attachment A, Table 2 Page It
s Arraes River win
Aaa
I !iEiiibu Hvdroloaic W&
ms --BYopanga Iiydtro~ogic Area (Ei) 2,000 500 500 2.0 Malibu Creek Hydrologic Subarea (=A) 2,000 500 500 2.0
Us Virgenes HSA 2,000 500 500 2.0
Lfndero Canyon HSA 2,000 500 506 2.0
Wiunf o Canyon ESA .2,000 500 500 2.0
&~ssell Valley ITS& -3,500 500 250 1.0
Shemood trSA lcOOO 2513 250 1.0
Point Oume HA 1,000 256 250 1.0
Camarilla HA 1,000 250 250 1,0
~amrfeRfver& -
Coastal Plain HA
3est Coast Basin 800 250 250 1+5
Santa ~onica %sin 1,000 250 250 0.5
Hollywood Basin - ..I- .. 750 - 100 100 1.0
Central Basin 700 250 250 1,O
San Fernando fyl
Sylmar Basin - - 600 150 TOO 0.5
Eagle Rock Basin 808 150 100 0.5
Verdugo pasin 600 150 100 0.5
San Fernando Basin-Overall 800 300 100 1.5
Narrows Areaa 800 300 150 1.5
~oothill wells Areab aao ZOO 50 1.0
Headworks AreaC 700 300 100 1.5
North Hollywaod-Burbank Aread 600 250 100 1.5
Raymond IU
Monk Hill BA. 450 1100 100 0.5
Pasadena ftSa 450 100 100 0.5
Santa Anita HSA 450 100 100 0+5
Sarr Gabriel Valley HA
Puente Bash* 2,000 300 150 1.0
Win San Gabriel pasin-Overall 550 150 100 1+0 - Westerly Portion 450 100 100 0.5 Easterly Portion0 600 1.00 100 0.gSpadra Hydro HA
spadra f3sA .- . , 550 '200 120 1.0
Ponona ESA 300 100 50 0.5
Oak =A 450 250 100 0.5
Anaheim HA 1,000 250 250 1.0
;an Pedro ch-slanb Hvdroloaic an&
santa Catalina HA ~,OOO 250 2.50 1.0
San Clernente Island ItA no significant sourc%s
Santa Barbara Island EZA no sf gnif f cant sources
janta Ana River HV&~IOQ' .- .- Middle Santa Ana River HA 220 50 50 0.5 . Attai3hment A, Table 2
a. wPtro# Area Is kfjtnd ms at WN of the On Fernando krfn bdjmt ?o th t.88 lhgtlrr Riwr lying of Va- hrh.
c, Wuddworkr Ama is that art* tyiw djacmt to the tw meln Btwr rprtrem of tht cmftucnte with VcrclLpo UP& 'enearpastfnp in gmrrl the Cfty of tar Artgel-* H~&&rks, Crystat Spriws, ud VeWo utllt Md the cfty of GirnQL048 WELLS r~mg ~thtm.
d. The Worth Holtyuood.ilrrrbsnk Area nftrr to thr prlncfpal atrrttiocr ares uhkh Indudat the Etty of swwt, welts, md tho City of Las metes, Ywih notiyuocd, Erwin, wd Yhltosll wettr mxu othcn. +. Thu Wmta Bbstn ltrt dfutcrt te Osn Jose Creek wtrem of the. Amt* Harrows. The Pwnte Sssfn ud-the Owte Wartows at& kscrfted fn thr JudOmcnt of the Upper Sari Eobriel Valley Hunfcfprl ktcr Dll;trjct vt~us City of lllhrmb~ et rl Uo.9241?l5.
4. l?~ westerly porttat of the Main SM Eabriel BdtI which ties wcst of Uelnut Creek, Btg Dplto~ Uash, +rd Lttrle Dalton Yboh.
*
-. 0. The aartctly portton of the Kafn Sari'Gabrfet lash vhich tfal ust of Uainut Creek, Big Dtttm Uash, ahd LIttle Oaltan Yaoh but W not ?nclude the Puente Basfn.
I nu! nrat~~if:%frf~ . I
I
I 0 - utini I } pedigifirotfpip,14,11Priii
I ionill'33151'nigIVIIMII I Mil 118
I •
11 114 I 111-11 04'1
fli pi* 4011141101141 1
unsi piiiinpiirrisa
I sill Ifni 4111011 1 ffi
winisspiiiisposinmsuis
State Department of Health Services
Primary Drinking Water Standards
Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Priority Pollutants
saueT4x SL*T
(3A) opTaartiO TAuTA •S0000 (ti uoaaj)auetaamoaonuoloTtioTaa. ST*0 (goI) auexpaoaoTgoTal SO0'0 euaTittpaoaoppIG-Z'T-sueaq TO °0 auatidgxoy S00"0 (Gawps) clauouactopm LOO
(aDd) aueinaoaoppea4a.T. SO0'0' (daouTaj) OUT 2S TWO
(mapao) awauTiow
. 40n..
ZO*0 aoplokcolpam T*0 • (0m-emme6)' auupuri t.00*0 aoTgoe4dell T00000 elnxoda aoppeldeH t0000'0 awesoudAT04 L*0
(8G3) erqmoicdTP euetAgga Z0000'0 (aueqqaTXuagj). auazuaqTAtna 089'0 2Tarma ZOOO*0 (lom) euedoadoaoploomoacrm Z000'0
, aumnamoaoTtioomoaqTa e* (dH3G) e4eTe14414d(TAxettikgpa-Z)Ta t00*0 ausTAills0a0TIPTG-Zst-sT° 900'0 waojoaoTto e*
(auezuecloaappouow)
. ausaue41040N3 OCO*0 auepaom T000°0, copporti3R14a4 umpeo S00060 (uOpuanj) u21n4o41lao 8T0*0 ma0I0m0ag WAI., aueglamoaoppTpomoas
euezuag TOO'O (uvabealaa) uozewaa 8TO*0
xeaurv) auTzuaw CO0s0 (xaATTS) 41X-S't4 Z SO*0
G-t Z T*0 (goo.d) euazuctoacrmola-/,‘T moo
ougdoado2oploTo-c T * auudoadoacluipTG-C'T ila *
, (2PTa0TIPTp euaTAdoa4)
auedoadaawmoTe.roT SO0'0 (1C3IG7z*T) euutraso10T40411-eT S00040 auemsoaoTgova4ear-VTq'T TOO*0 (OI-Z'Ist) eumqqaoaotgoTaX-Z'I'T ZCO*0 (m.uoaaj) pumpeoaonuTa4
Z'ZI T-0.10TuoTax-Z*Tit Z*I'(VOJA-Ist4 T) oulatpeoaottloTailoaq'T owe) goo T T ouaTAggeoaoTtioTa.T T
, .VVAPIPTVOPYWYMIVM,
_...., ... ..
900°0
11 ' (VOG-T'T) euatmeoa0TIPTG-T4T SOO*0
, m',. • spun.:. - ;' V, .• 0
Ime/a4T4suo0 WW1 41.16114T4suo3 /pita
_. ..
(rim) TaAaq 4ueulminuoa anmpvw ospaepue4s aelvm buTxuTaci AaeuTaj ma si4v4g lobed 1114UVARTIONI A4P0Ta4 puv OPIVPUU4S aavam buTX4P4 .1466 411211210244V N.
.• ••, . _
• _ (uz) =WI ..... libm ws
Awanclim Iniun s sPIT013PaATossTP Moils riga 00S
VW 04i4InS' --' 7/6m OSE _
(uw) esauvabuew a/6W ó.o
(o) war raba i'll -- SWIN) waft buTme0j swrun seg
. (to) ieddoo aibm 0°T AqTAT4onpu03 salmi 006
avroo
,
inTun ST (p) 9PTa0TU3 aible OGZ
quenliqsuo0 . (04Tuu) IOW quan4Tqsuo0 (o4Tun) flow
spaupusas ainum bupiuTici Aiepuopos sH0 s4e4s
AMIMMWOMM
iliV6a S
(q/104 sic
(28) 06-1nTquoi1g (I/10d) 8 (Remelt) Eaz4.9zz wnTPRII PauTelmaD (g) we 8804D (Iii3d) OS 00 eteTV ammo
,
Agantr,.,Z4WCANVI:.....,.,
• (by) JeATTS SO*0 • (es) unTuate8 TO*0
OW a4ea4IN 0*Sit! (6g) Aanoaaw ...-.
ZOO°0
(41(a Peaa SO°0 A. S*06-C*6L &la: CO aPraouTa IrT
a V6t-t•OL da04 (a) oP1200TA VI . A. 9*OL-6°C9 dua4 (a) aPTIonTa . 8*T A 8°C9W8S dma4 (41) aPPconti 0*Z a ces-cocs dui al4 (a) elnaonTA Z*Z A t CO > dim: (4) epTacontj •17°E (ip) Tri4o4 unTmaro 50*0 (P3) wurupeo TO°0 (12g) unTieg ot
. (svi Inussav SO*0 • (Tv) unuTmnTv • 0.t
: ' 2 ielkofr ;0f9t.afrAkgiak::::VrAS*kgitt— ,:„...1:•., .- — , . ,,4j • P ...,4c..,,-, 1. ' _ quenwpsucrr 0, awmma".7a17727--m quan4T43uo3l !TOW
(low) Tom,' 4uleuTutrwoo wnmixew ispaepulaqs 'ainem buptuTaa AmiaTaa Silo avng - -- ....... -mmmimm
t *bud inueguTI0d A4Taapd pug spiepung JaIehit buTWiaa :$41014 4usatqcor44V I, 2P1 r11 1.1s4INTIP4
•• - •- :•
,V:.:•,,Av.,*9;4i, •
. . Gap SUB
- euea4d (13.E'z4 T) ouepu eue3eatnuezueciTa-9's'z'T eualegueueqd eueaonT eueTAaedozuag-zT T eueavain
• eueTAtplideueo euesAa euetrauvaonTj Cg) ozu-...
euetauwaonT; (g) ozue- eueaAd 0/1 ozueg eue3v1q4uy (y) ozueg sgsTsq4qd TAR4ssT sIsTs140 I41140TG e4eTingtid TA:too-44.p e4vrelatid TA4ng.g.Tc s4sTs114ild TAzueq TA4na o4sTsq40 (TAxetITAW42-) sT% euTinatLueildTposoalTg- euTuniticdo1d-u-Tposoa4TN-
..
GUS zuacto.114 suematideI euoaogdos
eUeTpuquedoToLloaoplotme eueTpe4ncloaoripexe ) "I'
asq4s TAdoadosToacepp.z) sT .20ine T./Eueild TiLueticlotttoag-v astr-4. .K. ici - 4 i 7. i elo eueegueaoni eUT zeapKtiptuaqdTg-z 't oupuT04041,TuTG-91 sUonToqoalTuT0.44z ouTpTzusgoloilloTa.wc euezuegoaoTqata.toT suszus4oioTIpT6;t4/ euezuectoaoi44:1,-z'1
•
--'eueTeinxideuaxopp.
atoms (.144001ovi3-z) OT: euegleoaoppexe I euezuego.zoTtraexe euezuegoaoTgoTaz.legol euTpTzueg • euetall ' 171.160 .
-A:, ,,,,„.111in ''t . ,r,§.r "r..E. lia :,,,k, •:e's - ' us: rt- . ct " A.,,. :se:•lo, ..,., '' •.',.': '.x,?" .. ::k•-?,..:•''..4.:.* ..,. ''.;::' '.'''' :. ".E.. •:,- .N,...: ,,,. .:...:is>:,:- .,... ,m. .:,..:•• -. !.%,•-!p, ., - .. *?.r,::.::•• ,: ' ,f.:••••••: , •:., ' - -:,,,i,.:'.....:-• , ' A.,...:... • ..,;.... ; :,:,;'..:,.;?. - :c.,.?1,..,'k..if.s3t:....,,, toueqd TouelidoaoTtiolnued
Tose.zo-o-oa4TuTC1-9 6
Toueudoalmq.z
Tsuslidoa4TsTG-V 8E
TouetidTAWBATia:ig Z
TouelidoluNwp
TouegdoaoTuoTa.iri
TousudoioTtp 'T OS eapv-14- 010 TUD-d TouevicaortioT4attat toted 1qus4nTIod A4TaoTa4 pus spaspue4g as4sig buTlituTaa sam4ussammw . ._. awn* TAuTA TAN4soaopor A
opTaorp TAuT euaT4tigeoacergoTa eueuto
eueTAineoaoppea4e • euetneuclaoppomoaqw . eummemoaottioTpottoaa UJOJONDIat epTucoaq Iittne eViTacitilo TA44ei
opTaottp suaTiiime i euezueqtAqqa euetAdoadoaorgoTa-git euedoadoacrimoTa.z0/ eusiAlmeoaoTtioTpsueaL-eq suetAxpeazoTIPTG-Ist maozoaot ellexPeoaoltm suutpeoaomua4e/-EIZIT T
euetmeommoTaz.et I eumeoacruput-TAT eummeoactrmoTaz.TIT I eummeoaopraTa.z 1 auezueqoao/u0 epTaoTqoua4e4 uogau
euezu-: erca4TuoTAa* I €Ii
144 , /.• c „IV ,./Z.,..7?„,
s • .. ,*:-:,,,,,,;:.k ' "t k ' grlr:M.;%,.s.t .4?A: ..,,, trW, . tiV9.4!.. 4 , 491.:. . 09gT 00d
tSZT 004 MT 03d • gtrE 03d
ZCZT 00d TZET.EIDd 910T asa
esueqdvxoz OHO g4Tel3 OHO likluin
OHS 12400 olig laildrit • epixodxs aws3e4deR
aorpu4dell epAgeptu uTapua uTapua
e4v;Tus uwansopua
.......--.....
ue;Tneopue v4ea . uermeopue aq Ty
OGO-ft, t aaa-ftq ima-e, t
uTapreTa
"114,449Tr.nar7r,.:M.„,t,,, ,.„,
euupaorio uTxPTV
•11' „ilk.,!:.. '. IC. .....„:„. ttOd:•• 49. . ... -
,:: ..,
1. * .::?.......,tk ,,,.v
r"'"'''. • ."-
*bid nunnno4 A4T1oTa4 pule upavpuuls ae4vm 4uptispa NONWitutionWV ,•••
C.
Li
tam.
Selenium (Se)
State of California
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
LOS ANGELES REGION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NO. Cl-9514
for
City of Camarilla
(Springville 54" Irrigation Waterline Relocation)
Enrollment under Regional Board Order No. 93-030 (Series No. 040) (FILE NO. 09-067)
I. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. The Discharger shall implement this monitoring program from the effective date of this enrollment (June 29, 2009) under Regional Board order No. 93-010. The first monitoring report under this monitoring program is due by July 15, 2009.
Monitoring reports shall be submitted monthly and must be received by the Regional Board by the fifteenth day of the second month following the sampling period. If there is no discharge, the report shall so state. Monitoring reports must be addressed to the Regional Board, Attention: Information Technology Unit.
9. By January 30 of each year, the Discharger shall submit an annual summary report to the Regional Board. The report shall contain both tabular and graphical summaries of the monitoring data obtained during the previous calendar year. In addition, the discharger shall discuss the compliance record and the corrective actions taken or planned, which may be needed to bring the discharge into full compliance with waste discharge requirements.
C. ~aboratory analysis - all chemical analysis shall be conducted at a laboratory certified for such analyses by the California Department of Health Services Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP). A copy of the laboratory certification shall be provided each time that a new and/or renewal certification is obtained from ELAP.
D. The method limits (MLs) employed for effluent analyses shall be lower than the permit limits established for a given parameter, unless the discharger can demonstrate that a particular ML is not attainable and obtains approval for a higher ML from the Executive Officer. At least once a year, the discharger shall submit a list of the analytical methods employed for each test and the associated laboratory Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QAIQC) procedures.
E. Waterlwastewater samples must be analyzed within allowable holding time limits as specified in 40 CFR Part 136.3. QAIQC samples must be run on the same dates as the Discharger samples are analyzed. The Discharger shall make available for inspection and/or submit the QAIQC documentation upon request by Regional Board staff.
Proper chain of custody procedures must be followed and a copy of the chain of custody documentation shall be submitted with the report.
June 29,2009
City of Camarilla
Order No. 93-01 0
Monitoring and ~e~ortin~ Program No. Cl-9514
File No. 09-067
F. Each monitoring report must affirm in writing that "All analyses were conducted at a laboratory certified for such analyses by the California Department of Health Services, and in accordance with current United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guideline procedures or as specified in this Monitoring Program." G. For every item where the requirements are not met, the Discharger shall submit a statement of the cause(s), and actions undertaken or proposed which will bring the discharge into full compliance with waste discharge requirements at the earliest possible time, including a timetable for implementation of those actions.
H. The Discharger shall maintain all sampling and analytical results, including strip charts; date; exact place, and time of sampling; dates analyses were performed; analyst's name; analytical techniques used; and results of all analyses. Such records shall be retained for a minimum of three years. This period of retention shall be extended during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding this discharge, or when requested by the Regional Board.
I. In reporting the monitoring data, the Discharger shall arrange the data in tabular form so that the date, the constituents, and the concentrations are readily discernible. The data shall be summarized to demonstrate compliance with the requirements and, where applicable, shall include results of receiving water observations.
J. Any mitigationlremedial activity including any pre-discharge treatment conducted at the site must be reported in the monthly monitoring report.
11. WATER QUALITY MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A. Maintenance Reportinq: The Discharger shall submit a monthly operation and maintenance report for the facility including the disposal system of the wastewater.
The information to be contained in the report shall include, at T a minimum, the following:
1. The name and address of the person or company responsible for the operation and maintenance of the facility;
2. Type of maintenance (preventive or corrective action performed);
3. Frequency of maintenance, if preventive;
4. Estimated amount of water used for compaction and for dust control;
5. Description of any change in the dewatering approach, if changed;
6. Verification that there is no runoff from the pumping and discharge systems to surface waters; and
7. Maintenance records for the pumping, discharge, and wastewater disposal system.
City of Camarilla
Order No. 93-01 0
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. (3-9514
File No. 09-067.
B. Effluent Monitoring: Sampling stations shall be located where representative samples of that discharge ground water from dewatering area can be obtained.
The following shall constitute the effluent monitoring program:
Minimum
I Type of13] Frequency
Constituent [I1 unitLz1 Sample of Analysis
Total flow
pH
Total dissolved solids
itr rate-nitrogenL4]
it rite-nitrogenf4]
Total ~itrogen~~]
Oil and grease
Sulfate I
Chloride
Boron
BOD5 20°C
Suspended solids
Turbidity
Total and Fecal coliform
Enterococcus
gallday
pH Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/~'
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
NTU
MPN/I 00mL
MPN/lOOmL
N/A
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
grab
Daily
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
monthly
Phosphate mg/l grab monthly
Priority pollutants[51 ma/L grab ~wice[~]
If anv constituent exceeds the baseline water aualitv data, then the freauencv of analvses shall increase to weekly until at least three test results have been obtained and there is no more exceeding constitllent, after which the frequency of analyses shall revert to monthly.
MPNI100mL: Most Probable Number per milliliter; mgIL: milligram per liter Samples shall be obtained at the outlet of the treatment system. 'I4] Nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + organic nitrogen as nitrogen Priority Pollutants are listed in Attachment A;
Two effluent samples shall be collected and analyzed during the dewatering operation. One sample shall be collected during the first day of dewatering and the other shall be collected by the last day of the dewatering activities.
Ill. MONITORING FREQUENCY
Monitoring frequencies may be adjusted to a less frequent basis and/or parameters dropped by the Executive Officer if the Discharger makes a request which is supported by statistical trends of monitoring data.
City of Camarilla
Order No. 93-01 0
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. CI-9514
File No. 09-067
IV. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
Each report shall contain the following completed declaration:
"I certify under penalty of law that this document, including all attachments and supplemental information, was prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of a fine and imprisonment.
Executed on the day of at
(Signature)
(Title)"
These records and reports are public documents and shall be made available for inspection during normal business hours at the office of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region.
Ordered by: Date: June 29, 2009
ATTACHMENT A
Metals
An timony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Miscellaneous
Cyanide
Asbestos (only if
specifically
required)
Pesticides & PCBs
Aldrin
Chlordane
Dieldrin
4,4'-DDT
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDD
Alphaiendosulfan
Beta-endosulfan
Endosulfan sulfate
Endrin
Endrin aldehyde
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Alpha-BHC
Beta-BHC
Gamma-BHC
Delta-BHC
Toxaphene
PCB 1016
PCB 1221
PCB 1232
PCB 1242
PCB 1248 '1
PCB 1254
PCB 1260
BaselNeutral Extractibles
Acenaphthene
Benzidine
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachloroethane
Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether
2-chloronaphthalene
1,2dichlorobenzene
1,3dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3'dichlorobenzidine
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
lsophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
BIS (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Dirnethyl phthalate
Benzo(a) anthracene
Benzo(a) pyrene
Benzo(b) fluoranthene
Benzo(k) fluoranthene
Chrysene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
1 ,I 2-benzoperylene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
1,2,5,6-dibenzanthracene
lndeno (1,2,3cd) pyrene
Pyrene
TCDD
Acid Extractibles
2,4,6-trichlorophenol I
Pchloro-mcresol
2chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
2,4-dinitrophenol
4,6-dinitro-ocresol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
Volatile Oraanics
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
1,2-dichloroethane
1 ,1,1 -trichloroethane
1 ,l -dichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Chloroethane
Chloroform
1 ,I -dichloroethylene
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Methyl chloride
Methyl bromide
Bromoform
Dichlorobrornomethane
Chlorodibromomethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
Xylene
vbc 6/6/00
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101
Interchange
ADDENDUM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Title: Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Clearinghouse No: 1999031099
07-VEN-101
K.P. 25.57/28.56
{PM 15.89/17.75}
EA 191600
Contact: Ron Kosinski, Deputy District Director
Division of Environmental Planning
Caltrans, District 7
120 S. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 897-0703
Date: December 11, 2002
ABSTRACT
This Addendum Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addresses modifications to the Springville Drive (formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Improvements with respect to environmental regulations since approval of the EIR on June 23, 1999. This Addendum EIR analyzes proposed improvements within existing State right-of-way (ROW) at the Springville Drive/Route 101 interchange for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Subsequent project modifications outside of Caltrans ROW within the jurisdiction of the City of Camarillo are evaluated independently where necessary to allow the City to make a separate CEQA determination with regards to local arterial and drainage modifications associated with the revised interchange design concept.
Since the EIR was approved, there have been no significant design changes to the project that would require new analysis, cause adverse impacts, or cause the conclusions of the previous EIR to be invalid. The proposed project complies with the new environmental regulations adopted after the approval of the EIR. There are no new circumstances or new information relevant to the project that would result in substantial environmental impacts not identified in the previously approved EIR.
Therefore, a Supplemental EIR is not necessary.
SPRINGVILLE DRIVE(FORMERLY AIRPORT NORTH)/
ROUTE 101 INTERCHANGE
ADDENDUM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
07-VEN-101
KP 25.57/28.56 (PM15.89/17.75)
Prepared for:
CITY OF CAMARILLO
AND
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) — DISTRICT 07 DECEMBER 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. PROJECT TITLE 1
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
III. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION 2
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES 2
V. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 13
VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 14
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL PERSONNEL 14
VIII. APPROVALS AND CONCURRENCES 14
IX. REFERENCES 14
TABLES
1. Existing Carbon Monoxide Concentrations 7
2. Future (2025) Projections of Carbon Monoxide Concentrations with Project 8
3. PM,, Measurements at the El Rio-Rio Mesa School #2 Monitoring Station 9
4. Pollutants in Storm Water Runoff-Highways 10
5. BMP Pollutant Removal Efficiency 10
EXHIBITS
1. Springville Drive/Route 101 Interchange Receptor Locations 6
ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Site Vicinity
C. Revised Concept Plans
D. EIR Approved Concept Plan
E. Caltrans Correspondence
F. Air Quality Assessment
G. Biological Resources Memorandum
10-102315 Page -i- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ADDENDUM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Project 07-VEN-101
PM 15.89/17.75
KP 25.57/28.56
EA 191600
SCH No. 1999031099
PROJECT TITLE
Addendum Environmental Impact Report
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange The following represents an Addendum Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Springville Drive/Route 101 Interchange. This addendum addresses minor design modifications from the original design concept addressed in the August 1999 Project Report. A vicinity map is provided in Attachment A. A site vicinity map is provided in Attachment B and the revised design concept is illustrated in Attachment C. The ultimate interchange, as evaluated in the approved EIR, is shown in Attachment D.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Springville Drive/Route 101 Interchange is located in the City of Camarillo approximately halfway between the existing Las Posas Road interchange to the east and Central Avenue to the west (refer to Attachment A for the project location map). The existing Route 101 freeway mainline consists of three (3) 3.6 meter (m) (12') lanes and 3.0 m (10') outside shoulders,
1.5 m (5') inside shoulders and a variable width unpaved median.
Springville Drive (formerly known as Airport North Road) is proposed to accommodate two (2) 3.6 m (12') through travel lanes in each direction of travel, a 8.4 m (28') raised median, a 2.4 m (8') shoulder on each side and 1.8 m (6') sidewalks along both sides of the street.
The surrounding area consists of the Camarillo Airport to the south (separated by the Camarillo Hills Drain) and agricultural land to the north, south, east, and west, respectively.
Revised Design Concept
The 1999 EIR addressed a multi-phase project. The current improvements represent Phase ll of the ultimate interchange project. The Addendum EIR focuses on Phase II. The proposed modifications consist of the following as compared to the EIR description for Phase II improvements (refer to Attachment C):
Improvements within Ca[trans Right-of-Way
The currently proposed improvements are minor realignments of Route 101 northbound, southbound on-ramp and off-ramps. The northbound Springville Drive/Route 101 intersection will be relocated approximately 20 m north of the EIR approved alignment to accommodate adequate superelevation transition runoff lengths pursuant to the Ca/trans Highway Design Manual. The southbound Route 101/Springville Drive intersection will be moved approximately 20 m south of the EIR approved alignment to accommodate adequate superelevation transition runoff lengths pursuant to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. The infield area enclosed by Route 101 and the northbound on-ramp and off-ramp will potentially be used as detention basins. Project components are as follows:
10-102315 Page -1- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange 1 Springville Drive northbound on-ramp and off-ramp intersection will be moved approximately 20 m (66') north to provide increased superelevation transition runoff lengths along the ramps and adequate left turn pocket storage lengths.
2. Springville Drive southbound on-ramp and off-ramp intersection will be moved approximately 20 m (66') south to provide increased superelevation transition runoff lengths along the ramps and adequate left turn pocket storage lengths.
Improvements within City of Camarillo
1. Realignment of Springville Drive and Ventura Boulevard intersection to the south of previously evaluated location to immediately north of the Camarillo Hills Drive. Subsequently the Ventura Boulevard alignment east of Bajo Agua Avenue and west of its current alignment is relocated to the south (approximately 20 m) to meet the new terminus of Springville Drive.
2. MPD F-000-5 (Master Plan of Drainage Facility) will be added east of Springville Drive.
III. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
The Project Report for the Springville Drive/Route 101 Interchange project was approved by the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) on March 17, 2000. All documentation and analysis within the Project Report (PR) addressed the ultimate construction of the interchange and an approach to staged implementation. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified on June 23, 1999, for the Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange and Annexation No. 83 (SCH No. 1999031099).
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Background
The State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for improvements within the State's right-of-way (ROW). This Addendum EIR is based on the previous EIR for the Airport North/Route 101 Interchange approved by the City of Camarillo, and is intended to satisfy applicable CEQA requirements.
The environmental setting in which the project will be implemented will not be significantly impacted by the proposed project. The project, as addressed in the 1999 EIR, will involve Caltrans ROW and property acquisition from seven (7) adjacent privately owned parcels. Acquisition of one (1) parcel in the southeast quadrant of the interchange will require relocation assistance for one (1) residential farmhouse. The modified project will not require additional acquisition of properties or structures, or displacement of residents or tenants beyond those previously identified within the June 23, 1999 EIR.
Reevaluation Criteria
In accordance with CEQA and Caltrans policies, this Addendum EIR examines the potential for substantial changes in impacts mitigation measures or alternatives due to any of the following: 1) significant project revisions; 2) substantial new information, or 3) changes in environmental laws or policies.
10-102315 Page -2- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange New Circumstances/New Information
The following provides the environmental evaluation for the proposed interchange design modifications. Explanations are provided for each item below. The environmental analysis contained herein considers potential environmental impacts within Caltrans ROW including areas outside of the State's jurisdiction within the City of Camarillo. For the purposes of this Addendum El R, project components under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City of Camarillo are separated and discussed individually where appropriate.
Ca!trans Right-of-Way
Geology and Soils. Ventura County contains numerous regional faults, including the Camarillo Fault to the south, Bailey Fault to the east, and Springville, Simi-Santa Rosa and Oakridge Faults to the north. The Oakridge Fault, located approximately 8km (5 miles) north of the proposed interchange, has an average slip-rate of about 5 mm/year. Though the recurrence intervals for earthquakes along the Oak Ridge Fault are unknown, the fault poses a seismic hazard because the fault is extensive and has a large average slip-rate. The Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Fugro West, Inc. (July 1998), concluded that the largest median ground motion from a maximum credible earthquake near the site would be a magnitude 6.9 earthquake occurring on the Oakridge Fault system. Traces of the Springville Fault, which is part of a larger fault system (Simi-Santa Rosa), have been mapped under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act just north of the proposed interchange. This has the potential to expose commuters to seismic hazards. With implementation of standard engineering practices (i.e., trenching studies), adherence to required health and safety standards and remedial steps during grading operations potentially significant impacts associated with seismic shaking would be reduced to less than significant levels. In addition, adherence to City of Camarillo and Caltrans design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Subsidence or settlement is a loss of elevation of the land surface caused by the rearrangement of individual soil grains into smaller spaces. The more significant natural causes are seismically induced ground shaking, local or regional tectonic settling, and heavy rainfall. Man-induced causes of subsidence include groundwater, oil and gas withdrawal. Seismically induced settlement or collapse can occur in dry soils that are loose, soft, or moderately dense and weakly cemented.
Surface material would be removed and soils disrupted and displaced would be compacted during project construction. It should be noted, however, that it is anticipated that the soils within the site above the level of the perched groundwater probably contain zones of loose to medium dense alluvium. On the basis of data from nearby sites, there appears to be a potential for seismically induced settlement and collapse within the alluvium. However, adherence to standard engineering practices and the City of Camarillo and Caltrans design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards would reduce any potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Liquefaction is a response to severe ground shaking that can occur in loose soils. On-site soils include Pacheco silty clay loam (Pa), Anacapa sandy loam (AcC), Camarillo loam (Cd) and Hueneme loamy sand (Hm), with the Ponderosa Drive extension west of the proposed north/south arterial potentially affecting Zamora loam (ZmD2). Soil liquefaction is generally defined as a temporary buildout of excess pore water pressure resulting in a condition of near zero effective stress and the temporary loss of strength induced by earthquake ground shaking. Ground failures from liquefaction are limited to certain geologic and hydrologic conditions and certain types of materials. Soil materials considered to be susceptible to liquefaction include loose, saturated sand and non-plastic silt. Clay soils or sand and silt with more than 15 percent clay-sized particles (particles less than 0.005 mm) are typically considered to be non-liquefiable. Although no subsurface data is currently available for the area of the proposed structure, the available nearby data suggests that there is an opportunity for shallow ground water (10 - 15 feet below ground surface) and loose, granular soils to exist at the site. Liquefaction potential could be manifested as sand boils differential settlement, ground deformations, and reduced vertical and lateral pile 10-102315 Page -3- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange capacities. However, with the implementation of standard engineering practices, adherence to required design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards and remedial steps during grading operations, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Land/mudslide risk in the area is generally low, however landslides may occur in areas of steep topography. The project area consists of a relatively flat topography and surrounding areas are generally flat with no unusual geographic features. No impacts related to landslides or mudslides are anticipated.
Agricultural Resources. Based on the relatively nominal realignment of the on- and off-ramps within existing farmland, impacts to agricultural resources as a result of the revised design concept (within proposed State ROW) remain similar to those described in the 1999 EIR.
Aesthetics. The previous EIR did not indicate any significant aesthetic impacts and the proposed modifications will not affect any aesthetic issues not already addressed in the previous EIR.
Replacement planting shall be required if the improvements to the interchange will interfere with existing planting. Size and number of replacement trees will be determined by the District Landscape Architect in accordance with Chapter 29 of the Project Development Procedure Manual (page 27-7).
Biological Resources. BonTerra Consulting (BonTerra) prepared a letter dated December 9, 2002 which compares the findings of a biological resources survey, completed April 20, 1999 by BonTerra, to the updated project description for the new interchange in the City of Camarillo with U.S. Highway Route 101(refer to Attachment E). The following describes BonTerra's comparative analysis.
The site is located north of the intersection of Las Posas Road and U.S. Highway Route 101. The new project is located within the same survey boundaries as the original project site. The new project description alters the grading limits of the on and off-ramps and realigns Ventura Blvd. in the southern portion of the site. This comparison is based upon an office analysis of the original biological resources and the new project.
The vegetation to be impacted by the new project is located in the original footprint, which consisted of agricultural fields, disturbed habitat, ornamental landscaping and willow woodland. The original impacts were primarily in the agricultural fields and disturbed areas. It is assumed that the new project footprint will not impact any additional areas. These impacts as described in the original Biological Technical Report and still would not be considered significant unless there has been significant riparian woodland growth in the irrigation channels within the agricultural fields. it is still assumed that the detention basin would not be impacted.
A California Natural Diversity Data Base Search and a California Native Plant Society Electronic Search was completed for the special status species analysis. No additional special status plant species are expected or anticipated to be present. One additional wildlife species was added to the list, the arroyo chub (Gilia orcutti). Tth is species is not expected to occur due to the lack of suitable stream habitat. Therefore, the conclusion that no special status plant or wildlife species are expected to occur on the project site is still considered valid.
Within the agricultural areas adjacent to Ponderosa Drive, a man-made irrigation drainage is present. As stated in the original report, this drainage may be determined to be subject to permit conditions regulated by the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1601 of the California Fish and Game Code. In addition, the ACOE requires a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, or a waiver from, by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 10-102315 Page -4- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Cultural Resources. The proposed modifications would not have any significant effects on cultural resources in the area beyond those identified in the 1999 EIR for the project. The mitigation measures outlined within the previous EIR would serve to reduce impacts to cultural resources to less than significant levels (refer to Attachment F).
Air Quality. The previous EIR indicated no long-term adverse impacts to air quality, however site preparation and construction activities may increase the level of exposure risk associated with Valley Fever to construction personnel. Potential Valley Fever impacts remain similar for the proposed interchange modifications.
The project is included in the 1998/99-04/05 federally approved Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and therefore conforms to the requirements of the CAAAs of 1990.
The project is also consistent with the Circulation Element of the City of Camarillo's General Plan and consistent with the goals and objectives of the region in that the project is identified in the Ventura County Congestion Management Program (CMP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Project revisions do not substantially change the alignment of the interchange and do not result in an increase in design capacity. Therefore, the project will not result in new air quality violations and the project remains consistent with the RTIP and circulation goals of the region. The 1999 EIR indicated no long-term adverse impacts to air quality, however a temporary impact from Valley Fever may result in some individuals. The proposed modifications would result in similar impacts associated with temporary construction and long-term operational air quality issues.
Carbon Monoxide Modeling
The project was analyzed using the Carbon Monoxide (CO) screening analysis provided in Section
4.4 of the Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (Protocol), UCD-ITS-97-21.
Based on the results of the screening, a detailed CO analysis was determined necessary and completed using the CALINE4 CO prediction model (refer to Attachment G).
Existing and future CO concentrations with the project were forecast utilizing the CALINE4 computer model. CALINE4 is a fourth generation line source dispersion air quality model developed by Ca!trans ("CALINE4", Report No. FHWA/CATTL-84/15, June 1989). The purpose of the model is to forecast air quality impacts near transportation facilities in what is known as a microscale region.
The microscale region encompasses the area of a few thousand feet around the pollutant source.
Given source strength, meteorology, site geometry, and site characteristics, the model can reliably predict pollutant concentrations. The CALINE4 CO modeling was based on the peak hour traffic data, in this case the a.m. peak hour data.
Eight-hour CO levels were projected using the Ca!trans methodology described in the Protocol. The method places a persistence factor, which is multiplied against the 1-hour emission rates. The projected 8-hour ambient concentrations are then added to the product. The persistence factor can be estimated using the highest ratio of 8-hour to 1-hour second annual maximum concentrations from the most recent three years that data are available. The data and the results of the CALINE4 modeling are also provided in appendices.
Generally, the 1-hour CO level is considered the peak maximum CO level since it is the highest CO measured within an hour increment. Changes in meteorology and traffic over time disperse the CO concentration levels and cause it to be less severe. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the 1-hour CO levels would persist for a full eight hours. As a result, the 1-hour data is generally considered peak level, and is higher that the 8-hour CO level.
The CALINE4 modeling was conducted for along Ponderosa Road, Springville Drive and the Route 101 Northbound on-ramp and off-ramp. A total of eight (8) receptors were modeled, primarily along Ponderosa Road. The location of these receptors is illustrated on Exhibit 1, Springville Drive/Route 101 Interchange Receptor Locations.
10-102315 Page -5- December 2002
0 0 -J
a)
a)
c7)
..c
2 Cj
a)
C-t-5
• E.-.
> cm
NOT TO SCALE
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange The existing background CO concentrations were estimated using the highest CO monitoring data for the last three (3) years. The nearest available CO data was obtained from the El Rio Mesa School #2 Station. The existing background 1-hour CO concentration is estimated to be at 3.7 parts per million (ppm), and will be added to the worst-case meteorological projections to account for background CO levels'. The modeling results of the CO levels are presented in Table 1, Existing Carbon Monoxide Concentrations, below.
Table 1
EXISTING CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
Receptor Location 1-Hour CO Concentration
(ppm)
8-Hour CO Concentration
(ppm)
1 3.8 ppm 2.3 ppm
2 3.7 2.2
3 3.7 2.2
4 4.0 2.4
5 4.0 2.4
6 4.1 2.5
7 4.0 2.4
8 4.0 2.4
Notes:
1. As measured at a distance of 50 feet from the corner of the intersection predicting the highest value. CO values include modeled background concentrations of 3.7 ppm for 1-hour. Eight-hour concentrations are based on a persistence factor of 0.6 of the 1- hour concentration for Rural and Urban locations as specified in Table B.15 of the Protocol.
Table 1 presents the modeling results for CO concentrations at the receptor site. The results show that the existing CO concentrations at these receptor locations are currently below the 1-hour and 8- hour State and Federal standards. Therefore, the existing CO levels are currently in compliance with both state and federal standards.
The future ambient (background) concentrations are not available. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the background CO levels for the year 2025 are the same as year 2002. This can be considered the conservative worst-case scenario, since the background CO levels are expected to decrease steadily in the future years. The pollutant levels in 1-hour and 8-hour concentrations are expressed in terms of parts per million (ppm). The CO levels reported in the following table is a composite of the background levels of CO coming into the area plus those generated by the local roadways.
1 Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines, Section 6.4.2 - Detailed Procedure for Carbon Monoxide Analysis, November 2000.
10-102315 Page -7- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Table 2
FUTURE (2025) PROJECTIONS OF CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
WITH PROJECT
Receptor Location 1-Hour CO Concentration
(PPrn)
8-Hour CO Concentration
(ppm)
1 3.8 ppm 2.3 ppm
2 3.7 2.2
3 3.7 2.3
4 3.8 2.3
5 3.8 2.3
6 3.8 2.3
7 3.8 2.3
8 3.8 2.3
Notes:
1. As measured at a distance of 50 feet from the comer of the intersection predicting the highest value. CO values include modeled background concentrations of 3.7 ppm for 1-hour. Eight-hour concentrations are based on a persistence factor of 0.6 of the 1- hour concentration for Rural and Urban locations as specified in Table B.15 of the Protocol.
The potential for CO hotspots primarily exists in areas where there are high ambient CO levels, where existing or projected levels of service are at LOS D or worse (creating long vehicle idle times), or where the intersection has high peak hour traffic volumes. The CALINE4 modeling predicts a Year 2025 maximum 1-hour CO concentration of 3.8 ppm. These worst-case levels are well below the State and Federal standards of 20 ppm and 35 ppm respectively. Maximum Year 2025 8-hour CO concentration with the project has a CO concentration of 2.3 ppm, which is well below the State and Federal standard of 9 ppm. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in adverse CO emissions.
PM,, Qualitative Analysis
The following PM,, qualitative analysis was conducted in accordance with the Guidance for Qualitative Project Level Hot Spot Analysis in PM,, Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas published by the Federal Highway Administration Office of Natural Environment, September 2001.
Currently, the project is located in an attainment area for PM10. As CO levels have consistently improved over the years, PM10has shown little change. Therefore, PM10is becoming more of a concern along busy roadways. Areas of most concern are where high levels of traffic operate under heavily congested conditions, where snow removal routinely occurs, or where unusually large number of diesel-powered vehicles can be expected to occur. None of these conditions occurs in the project area. The nearest air monitoring station (El Rio-Rio Mesa School #2) has not shown an exceedance of the Federal PM10standard for the last three years (1999 through 2001). Fugitive dust from potential future demolition, grading, remediation, and construction is expected to be shortterm and would cease following project completion. Most of this material is inert silicates, rather than the complex organic particulates released from combustion sources, which are more harmful to health. Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem. The amount of PM10(particulate matter smaller than 10 microns) generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions is of particular concern to health.
The PK() monitoring station nearest the project site is at El Rio-Rio Mesa School #2. The Air Quality Summary for the station from 1999-2001 is provided in Table 3, below. The following is a summary of Caltrans/University of California, Davis (UCD) studies pertaining to PM10violation:
10-102315 Page -8- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange If no violations have been recorded in the project vicinity by air district monitors, and the monitored concentrations are not close to the NAAQS (meaning within about 80 to 90 percent of the NAAQS concentration threshold), Caltrans/UCD studies strongly suggest that no PIV110 hotspot can occur as a result of a typical project.
Table 3
PK°MEASUREMENTS AT THE EL RIO-RIO MESA SCHOOL #2 MONITORING STATION Philo Statistics 1999 2000 2001
Annual Ptv110 High 1 i 50.8 52.2 1 51.5
Table 3 indicates that PK()has not exceeded the Federal standard of 150 ug/m. Two prevailing factors support the assertion that future PM10violations as a result of the project is unlikely. The 2000 and 2001 average exhibits declining ambient levels and the data is not within the 80-90% threshold stated in the Caltrans/UCD studies, suggesting that no PMio "hotspot" can occur.
Water Quality: The proposed project will include temporary erosion control measures to protect the facilities from water and debris flowing from the construction area and to avoid impacts to area water resources.
Any runoff draining into Caltrans ROW must fully conform to the current discharge requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to avoid impacting water quality. Contractor shall fully conform to the requirements of the Caltrans Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm Water Permit, Order No. 99-06-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000003, adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board on July 15, 1999, in addition to the BMPs specified in the Caltrans Storm Water Management Plan (SW MP). When applicable, the Permittee shall also conform to the requirements of the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities, Order No. 99-08-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, and any subsequent General permits in effect at the time. These permits regulate storm water and non-storm water discharges associated with yearround construction activities.
Please note that project activities should pay extra attention to storm water pollution control during the "Rainy Season" (October 1StMay 1st) and follow the Water Pollution Control BMPs to minimize impact to receiving waters. Measures must be incorporated to contain all vehicle loads and avoid any tracking of materials, which may fall or blow onto Caltrans ROW.
For all projects resulting in 2 hectares (5 acres) or more of soil disturbance or otherwise subject to the NPDES program, the Contractor will develop, implement, and maintain a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) conforming to the requirements of the Caltrans Specification Section 7-
1.01G "Water Pollution Control", Caltrans Statewide NPDES Permit, the General NPDES Permit for Construction Activities, and the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SW PPP) and Water Pollution Control Program (WPCP) Preparation Manual", and "Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual" effective November 2000, and subsequent revisions. In addition, the SWPPP must conform to the requirements of the SWRCB Resolution No. 2001-046, the Sampling and Analytical Procedures (SAP) Plan. It should also be noted that the RWQCB may require a dewatering permit for groundwater that may be impacted during construction of the interchange.
Deployment of standard construction measures as stipulated in the Caltrans statewide NPDES permit will serve to reduce construction-related water quality impacts to less than significant levels. 10-102315 Page -9- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Interchange/Highway Runoff Water Quality
In general, introduction of new roadway surfaces may cause adverse impacts on surface and groundwater by: (1) increasing the load of constituents generated by vehicular use and human activities in a watershed, and (2) reducing the amount of water that percolates into the soil. An increase in impervious surface decreases the amount of water that infiltrates into the ground and consequently increases the amount of runoff to waters. Interchange/highway projects are also a potential source of a variety of pollutants to surrounding surface and subsurface waters. Storm water runoff pollutants generated by use of interchange/highways generally include: nutrients, metals, particulates, and gross pollutants (trash). Table 4 lists expected pollutants in runoff from highways.
Table 4
POLLUTANTS IN STORM WATER RUNOFF-HIGHWAY
Constituents — Highway Runoff
TSS Dissolved Copper
NO3-N Dissolved Zinc
TKN Dissolved Lead
Ortho-phosphate Particulate Copper
Particulate Phosphorus Particulate Zinc
Particulate Lead
Measures may be implemented to mitigate for the increase in runoff and reduction of storm water runoff pollutants generated by roadway projects. Implementation of water quality treatment Best Management Practice (BMP) devices will reduce the concentrations of pollutants to downstream receiving waters. Post construction BMPs applicable to interchange projects may include, but not limited to the installation of:
o Extended Detention Basins (EDB)
o Infiltration basins
• Biofiltration (Vegetated) Strips/swales
o Hydrodynamic devices
o Drain Inlet Inserts
The following table summarizes expected removal efficiencies (`Yo reduction of various pollutants) for various BMPs applicable to interchange projects.
Table 5
BMP POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFIECIENCIES
BMP TSS % Total Cu
%
Total Zn % Total Pb
eh)
Nox % TP %
Extended Detention Basin 78 87 85 81 34 73
Biofiltration Swales 73 89 91 83 32 55
Biofiltration Strips 83 94 91 93 10 3
Drain Inlet Inserts <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Notes:
Removal Efficiencies based on published and unpublished recent research studies. 10-102315 Page -10- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Projects developed within the State's ROW are obligated to comply with the latest Caltrans and RWQCB water quality standards relative to the treatment of post construction storm water runoff. As noted above in Section 2, Project Description, the infield area enclosed by Route 101 and the northbound on-ramp and off-ramp is currently being evaluated as possible areas for the construction of detention basins. Overall BMP selection and sighting within the ROW is being defined based on the evaluation of existing site constraints, constituents of concern at the receiving waters, soil conditions, and hydraulic conditions. Prior to approval of final PS&E for the project, proposed post construction BMPs would be reviewed to ensure that applicable Caltrans selection and sighting criteria have been achieved. Deployment of BMPs noted above, or any combination thereof, would serve to reduce long-term water quality impacts due to implementation of the proposed interchange.
Thus, significant water quality impacts are not anticipated.
Noise. It should be noted that no development plans have been approved in the area impacted by the project. The area surrounding the proposed interchange remains under agricultural production today. Adjoining land to the north of the proposed interchange is zoned as Rural Exclusive on 40 acres (RE-40) in the City of Camarillo General Plan. Areas to the south are zoned for industrial uses.
The minor revisions to the design concept would not result in new noise impacts beyond those previously addressed in the 1999 El R. Section 4.5 of the 1999 El R does not identify the need for noise barriers as a result of interchange development.
Hazardous Materials/Wastes. ENSR performed limited Phase II soil and groundwater assessments to evaluate subsurface conditions at the South Farm Area within the future State ROW. Based on the results of the assessments, one (1) pesticide, Endosulfan sulfate, was detected in only one soil sample from the area assessed. Endosulfan sulfate was present at concentrations well below the U.S. EPA's PRG value. TPH-FF petroleum hydrocarbons were detected at low concentrations in three of the 18 soil samples tested. However, TPH-FF was not detected in the groundwater sample collected from the subject site. The low concentration of TPH-FF in the soil combined with the absence of detectable concentrations of TPH-FF in the groundwater sample suggests that the impact of TPH-FF in the subsurface soil is minimal. VOCs and BTEX compounds were not present in detectable concentrations in the soil samples. With respect to the groundwater sample collected from the subject site, VOCs, chlorinated pesticides (in addition to TPH-FF) were not present in detectable concentrations in the shallow groundwater sample collected at approximately 10 feet bgs at the subject site. Based on the findings of the Phase II Assessment performed on May 12, 1999 ENSR recommends no further assessment be performed at this Site.
Based on the age of the existing structure to be removed (constructed prior to 1978), hazardous materials such as asbestos containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paints (LBPs) may exist within the new ROW to be acquired. Implementation of the following measures will ensure that potential ACM and LBP issues are reduced to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measures:
1. The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) mandates that building owners conduct an asbestos survey to determine the presence of asbestos containing materials (ACMs) prior to the commencement of any remedial work, including demolition. Prior to demolition work, it is recommended that areas be sampled as part of an asbestos survey. Any demolition of the existing buildings must comply with State law, which requires a contractor, where there is asbestos-related work involving 100 square feet or more of AGMs, to be certified and that certain procedures regarding the removal of asbestos be followed.
2. If during demolition of the structures, paint is separated from the building material (e.g., chemically or physically), the paint waste should be evaluated independently from the building material to determine its proper management. According to the Department of 10-102315 Page -11- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange Substances Control, if paint is not removed from the building material during demolition (and is not chipping or peeling), the material could be disposed of as construction debris (a nonhazardous waste). It is recommended that the landfill operator be contacted in advance to determine any specific requirements they may have regarding the disposal of lead-based paint materials.
Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL) in the soil was found to be above background levels. Statistical Analysis indicated that there is no need to invoke the variance for the handling and disposal/reuse of the contaminated soil. However, the following measures shall be deployed by the project contractor during construction activities to ensure that all issues regarding workers' health and safety have been taken into consideration:
Mitigation Measures:
1. Contractors must implement dust control mitigation measures during any activity involving the disruption of soil to minimize the generation of dust (e.g., soil excavation, stockpile moving). In order to prevent nuisance, dust control measures are to be implemented regardless of whether chemicals are present in the soil. Applicable activities include, but are not limited to the following: excavating, moving, stockpiling, loading, off-hauling, driving, and wind blowing across soil stockpiles. Accordingly, suitable measures to minimize the generation of dust include, but are not limited to, the following. • Water all active construction areas at least twice a day or as necessary to prevent visible dust plumes from migrating outside of the parcel under development. • Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed construction stockpiles.
• Mist or spray water while loading transportation vehicles. • Minimize drop heights while loading transportation vehicles. • Use tarpaulins or other effective covers for loaded trucks that will travel on streets. • Pave, apply water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily all paved access routes, parking areas, and staging areas. • Sweep daily if visible soil material is carried onto public streets. • Limit traffic speed on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. • Suspend excavation and grading activities when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour.
2. Covering potentially contaminated or confirmed contaminated soil stockpiles with plastic is required for a number of soil management reasons (e.g., controlling dust, fugitive vapors, and runoff control). Where management measures specified to control dust are different from those specified to control off-site runoff, the more stringent of the measures will apply.
Implementation of the proposed project may require the removal of yellow paint or thermoplastic traffic stripes, which are known to contain elevated levels of lead and chromium. If removed during construction activities, the generated wastes must be disposed of to an appropriate permitting landfill. Construction workers shall be provided appropriate information/training to observe necessary safety procedures during removal of yellow paint or thermoplastic traffic stripes.
City of Camarillo
Agricultural Resources. The EIR indicated a loss of approximately 13.25-acres of land on Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, which was considered a significant unavoidable impact. The City has now incorporated Drainage Facility F-000-5 into the design, which will run 1 0-1 02315 Page -12- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange parallel to Springville Drive and ultimately terminates at the Camarillo Hills Drain. This facility represents a minor increase in farmland acreage to be converted (approximately 2.5 acres) beyond the 13.25 acres identified in the previous EIR. Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance remain impacted under the proposed modifications, however the impacts will not significantly exceed assumptions previously anticipated in the 1999 EIR.
Noise. The EIR did not indicate the need for noise barriers as a result of the interchange. The minor modifications to the design concept would not result in new noise impacts beyond those already addressed in the EIR.
Other Environmental Issues
As part of the 1999 EIR, an Initial Study was prepared by the City of Camarillo to determine significant effects of the project. Certain impacts of the project were found to be less than significant and therefore not included in the EIR. The Initial Study identified the following issue areas as resulting less than significant or no impacts:
• Population and Housing
• Mineral Resources
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation/Traffic
• Utilities/Service Systems
The 1999 EIR identified that Land Use and Relevant Planning, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Hydrology and Water Quality as having impacts "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation". Except for loss of agricultural land, temporary impacts from Valley Fever and noise impacts, the previous EIR concluded that neither of the impacts would be significant or with the implementation of the mitigation measures mentioned, the impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Due to the scope of the proposed modifications, including the minor realignments and addition of Drainage Facility MPD F-000-5, the above issues were not evaluated in detail within this Addendum EIR.
Environmental Summary
The Environmental Summary prepared for the Executive Summary (Section 1.9 of the 1999 EIR contained as Attachment E to this document) is applicable to the improvement project discussed in this Addendum EIR. A re-evaluation of specific elements of the checklist resulting frOm new regulations and reconfigurations is described above.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Analysis of the proposed concept design plans, the project's relationship to the current surrounding environment, the approved final environmental document and impacts identified therein, and the preceding Addendum EIR provide the basis for the following determination:
• The proposed design modifications do not result in any adverse impacts, and there are no new circumstances, or new information relevant to the project that would result in substantial environmental impacts not identified in the EIR previously approved. Therefore, a Supplemental EIR is not necessary.
10-102315 Page -13- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange VI. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Due to the limited scope of the proposed project and minimal ROW acquisition, a public hearing is not required.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL REEVALUATION/ADDENDUM PERSONNEL
CALTRANS DISTRICT 7
Ron Kosinski, Deputy District Director, Division of Environmental Planning Gary Iverson, Senior Environmental Planner
RBF CONSULTING
Kevin Thomas, CEP, Environmental Services Manager
Bruce R. Grove Jr., REA, Project Manager
Eddie Torres, Air Quality Specialist
Youji Yasui, Environmental Analyst
VIII. APPROVALS AND CONCURRENCES
Ron Kosinski Date
Deputy District Director
Division of Environmental Planning
Caltrans District 7
IX. REFERENCES
1. Biological Memorandum, BonTerra Consulting, December 2002.
2. Draft Environmental Impact Report, Route 101/Airport North Area Interchange & Annexation No. 83, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, June 23, 1999.
3. Memorandum, Cindy T. Quon from Bill Koval, Department of Transportation Landscape Architecture on Caltrans' Policy on Replacement of Trees Removed for Construction, January 16, 1991.
4. Microscale Carbon Monoxide Analysis and PM,,, Qualitative Analysis, RBF Consulting, December 2002.
5. Proiect Report Route 101 at Airport North Interchange, City of Camarillo, March 17, 2000.
6. Thomas Guide, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties, 2001.
7. U.S. Geological Survey Map, Camarillo, CA 1981.
8. Ventura Boulevard Realignment Improvements From Existing Ventura Blvd to Aviador Street and Baio Aqua Avenue Improvements From Existing Ventura Blvd to Ventura Blvd Construction Notes and Detail, City of Camarillo Department of Engineering Services.
January 16, 2001.
10-102315 Page -14- December 2002
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ATTACHMENT A
VICINITY MAP
10-102315 Page -13- December 2002
\Pyramid
Lake
KERN
COUNTY
Lebec
Gorman
SANTA
BARBARA
COUNTY
0 0
-4
Castaic
Lake
VENTURA
COUNTY
Lake
Pin'
Castaic
Carpinteria
Fillmore
Slmi
Valley
Santa
Susana Chatsworth
Canoga
Park
Port
Hueneme
Thousand
Oaks _Hidden
_I Hills
Agoura Hills
Calabasas
Westlake
Village -7
Woodland
Hills
0 Anacapa
Island
11/
SAN LUIS
OBISPO
COUNTY
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
not to scale Regional Vicinity
CONSULTING 6/5/02 JN 10-102315-9503
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ATTACHMENT B
SITE VICINITY
10-102315 Page -14- December 2002
/
nottoscale
z
• z
a
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ATTACHMENT C
REVISED CONCEPT PLANS
10-102315 Page -15- December 2002
UeldIrde3UO3 p
aSlAeld £096
-SleZ01-01 NI` ZO/9
0 D.)
'Qui 'poi e.J1a1:awnos
t
BAJO
mon=rilV44441,171,, N
-
EARL JOSEPH DROVE
CALLA CORTINA
I
AVIADOR STREET
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ATTACHMENT D
EIR APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN
10-102315 Page -16 December 2002
Source: ASL Consulting Engineers
r I
ocaoa --a
—cacaz
00 (Al la
0 0 Z
0 CI1
Z
r
0 (Al
-0
rueid 4
cia3uo3 p
ans:L ddy
i Hi3
CO96-SLCZOl-01. Nf O/S/9
SIEDS 01 IOU
Addendum EIR
Springville Drive (Formerly Airport North)/Route 101 Interchange
ATTACHMENT E
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE
MEMORANDUM
10-102315 Page -17- December 2002
RECEIVED
DEC 1 0 2002
ii8F CONSULTING
,
CONSULTING
An Environmental Planning/Resource
Management Corporation
151 kalrnus Drive
Suite E-200
Costa Mesa
California 92626
(714) 444-9199
December 9, 2002
Mr. Bruce Grove VIA FACSIMILE AND MAIL
RBF Consulting (949) 472-8373
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine, CA 92618-2027
Subject: Comparison Analysis for Airport North Road/U.S. Route 101 Interchange Dear Mr. Grove:
This letter compares the findings of a biological resources survey, completed April 20, 1999 by BonTerra consulting, to the updated project description for the new interchange in the City of Camarillo with U.S. Highway Route 101.
The site is located north of the intersection of Las Posas Road and U.S. Highway Route 101. The new project is located within the same survey boundaries as the original project site. The new project description alters the grading limits of the on and off-ramps and realigns Ventura Blvd. in the southern portion of the site. This comparison is based upon an office analysis of the original biological resources and the new project.
The vegetation to be impacted by the new project is located in the original footprint, which consisted of agricultural fields, disturbed habitat, ornamental landscaping and willow woodland. The original impacts were primarily in the agricultural fields and disturbed areas. It is assumed that the new project footprint will not impact any additional areas. These impacts as described in the original Biological Technical Report and still would not be considered significant unless there has been significant riparian woodland growth in the irrigation channels within the agricultural fields. It is still assumed that the detention basin would not be impacted.
A California Natural Diversity Data Base Search and a California Native Plant Society Electronic Search was completed for the special status species analysis. No additional special status plant species are expected or anticipated to be present. One additional wildlife species was added to the list, the arroyo chub (Gilia orcutti). Tthis species is not expected to occur due to the lack of suitable stream habitat.
Therefore, the conclusion that no special status plant or wildlife species are expected to occur on the project site is still considered valid.
Within the agricultural areas adjacent to Ponderosa Drive, a man-made irrigation drainage is present. As stated in the original report, this drainage may be determined to be subject to permit conditions regulated by the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1601 of the California Fish and Game Code. In addition, the ACOE requires a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, or a waiver from, by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). - .
(714) 4444599 fax
.bonterraconsulting.com
Mr. Bruce Grove
December 9, 2002