DOCSLIB.ORG

Dominguez Channel and Machado Lake Watersheds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dominguez Channel and Machado Lake Watersheds LA SUSTAINABLE WATER PROJECT: DOMINGUEZ CHANNEL AND MACHADO LAKE WATERSHEDS This report is a product of the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, UCLA Sustainable LA Grand Challenge, and Colorado School of Mines. AUTHORS Kathryn Mika, Terri Hogue, Stephanie Pincetl, Elizabeth Gallo, Mark Gold AFFILIATIONS UCLA Grand Challenges, Sustainable LA 2248 Murphy Hall Los Angeles, CA 90005-1405 UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability La Kretz Hall, Suite 300 Box 951496 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1496 Colorado School of Mines 1500 Illinois Street Golden, CO 80401 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was supported by the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation (LASAN). Many thanks to LASAN for providing ideas and direction, facilitating meetings and data requests, as well as sharing the many previous and current research efforts that provided us with invaluable infor- mation on which to build. Further, LASAN provided edits which helped to deepen and improve this report. Any findings, opinions, or conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of LASAN. We would further like to acknowledge the many organizations which facilitated this research through providing data, conversations, and insights into the integrated water management world in the Los Angeles region: LADWP, LACDPW, LARWQCB, LACFCD, WRD, WBMWD, MWD, SCCWRP, the Mayor’s Office of Sustainability, and many others. 1 | LA Sustainable Water Project; Dominguez Channel & Machado Lake Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 4 Background ............................................................................................................................... 8 I. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8 A. The City of Los Angeles ............................................................................................... 8 B. Dominguez Channel and Machado Lake Watersheds .................................................. 9 a. Study Area, Hydrology, Geography ............................................................................. 9 b. Recycled Water and Groundwater .............................................................................. 11 II. Dry Weather Urban Runoff and Stormwater Runoff ................................................. 13 A. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 13 B. Regulations, Current Practices ................................................................................... 14 a. Dominguez Channel Policy Documents ..................................................................... 14 C. Proposition O projects ................................................................................................ 20 D. Dominguez Channel Modeling Background .............................................................. 21 a. Modeling Selection and Comparison ......................................................................... 21 b. Model Setup, Calibration, Validation ......................................................................... 21 c. BMP Technologies in SUSTAIN ............................................................................... 27 d. Cost Background ........................................................................................................ 28 e. BMP Scenarios ........................................................................................................... 28 E. Dominguez Channel Modeling Results ...................................................................... 34 a. Water Quality Modeling ............................................................................................. 34 b. Modeling to Further Improve Water Quality ............................................................. 38 c. DC TMDL Analysis ................................................................................................... 42 d. Industrial Land Use Modeling Analysis ..................................................................... 44 i. WQ Impacts of Industrial Land Uses ......................................................................... 44 ii. WQ Impacts of Varying Industrial Land Use EMCs ................................................. 45 e. Private Land Redevelopment ...................................................................................... 51 F. Policy Discussion ....................................................................................................... 53 a. Water Quality Monitoring Data Gaps ........................................................................ 53 b. Data Recommendations and Proposed Solutions ....................................................... 57 c. Industrial Stormwater ................................................................................................. 58 i. IGP Permit Background.............................................................................................. 58 2 | UCLA Grand Challenges, IoES, CSM July 2017 ii. Data Management- SMARTS .................................................................................... 61 iii. Data - EMCs ............................................................................................................... 65 d. Improving Water Quality in the DC watershed .......................................................... 70 III. Machado Lake ............................................................................................................ 71 A. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 71 B. Machado Lake Policy Documents .............................................................................. 72 a. TMDL Summary ........................................................................................................ 72 b. ML Nutrients background .......................................................................................... 73 c. Current Water Quality Improvement Efforts .............................................................. 75 C. Model Setup, Calibration, Validation ......................................................................... 78 a. Modeling Selection and Comparison ......................................................................... 78 b. SUSTAIN Setup, Calibration, Validation .................................................................. 78 c. SLAM Setup, Calibration, Validation ........................................................................ 83 d. BMP Technologies in SUSTAIN ............................................................................... 87 e. BMP Technologies in SLAM ..................................................................................... 88 f. BMP Scenarios: SUSTAIN ......................................................................................... 90 D. Modeling Results ........................................................................................................ 94 E. Attaining ML Nutrient TMDL Targets .................................................................... 101 IV. Wastewater and Recycled Water .............................................................................. 107 A. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 107 B. Terminal Island Water Reclamation Plant ................................................................ 108 C. Regulatory Requirements ......................................................................................... 110 V. Groundwater ............................................................................................................. 114 A. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 114 B. Fully Utilizing Existing Groundwater Pumping Rights ........................................... 115 C. Available Dewatered Space ...................................................................................... 117 D. WRD Plans for WCBCB Replenishment ................................................................. 119 E. Silverado Aquifer Saline Plume Remediation .......................................................... 124 F. Regulatory Requirements ......................................................................................... 125 a. Recycled Water Recharge ........................................................................................ 125 b. Stormwater Recharge ............................................................................................... 128 c. Salt and Nutrient Management Plans ....................................................................... 131 G. Potential to Expand Groundwater Recharge and Extraction .................................... 132 VI. Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 134 3 | LA Sustainable Water Project; Dominguez Channel & Machado Lake VII. Appendix A – City modeling efforts in Machado Lake ........................................... 136 VIII. Appendix B West Coast and Central Basins ............................................................ 138 i. Storage Rights..........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Land Use Element Designates the General Distribution and Location Patterns of Such Uses As Housing, Business, Industry, and Open Space
    CIRCULATION ELEMENT CITY OF HAWTHORNE GENERAL PLAN Adopted April, 1990 Prepared by: Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc. 1028 North Lake Avenue, Suite 107 Pasadena, California 91104 Revision Table Date Case # Resolution # 07/23/2001 2001GP01 6675 06/28/2005 2005GP03 & 04 6967 12/09/2008 2008GP03 7221 06/26/2012 2012GP01 7466 12/04/2015 2015GP02 7751 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. Introduction to the Circulation Element 1 Purpose of this Element 1 Relation to Other General Plan Elements 1 II. Existing Conditions 2 Freeways 2 Local Vehicular Circulation and Street Classification 3 Transit Systems 4 Para-transit Systems 6 Transportation System Management 6 TSM Strategies 7 Non-motorized Circulation 7 Other Circulation Related Topics 8 III. Issues and Opportunities 10 IV. Circulation Element Goals and Policies 11 V. Crenshaw Station Active Transportation Plan 23 Circulation Element March 1989 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure1: Street Classification 17 Figure 2: Traffic Volume Map 18 Figure 3: Roadway Standards 19 Figure 4: Truck Routes 20 Figure 5: Level of Service 21 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Definitions of Level-of-Service 22 Circulation Element March 1989 SECTION I - INTRODUCTION TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT Circulation and transportation systems are one of the most important of all urban systems in determining the overall structure and form of the areas they service. The basic purpose of a transportation network within the City of Hawthorne is the provision of an efficient, safe, and serviceable framework which enables people to move among various sections of the city in order to work, shop, or spend leisure hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 72 January 1950 INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 Prepared by San Francisco District UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director WASHINGTON, D. C. Free on application to the Director, Geological Survey, Washington 26, D. C. INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 EXPLANATION The index lists the stream-flow ana reservoir stations in the Pacific Slope Basins in California for which records have been or are to be pub­ lished for periods prior to September 30, 1948. The stations are listed in downstream order. Tributary streams are indicated by indention. Station names are given in their most recently published forms. Paren­ theses around part of a station name indicate that the enclosed word or words were used in an earlier published name of the station or in a name under which records were published by some agency other than the Geological Survey. The drainage areas, in square miles, are the latest figures published or otherwise available at this time. Drainage areas that were obviously inconsistent with other drainage areas on the same stream have been omitted. Some drainage areas not published by the Geological Survey are listed with an appropriate footnote stating the published source of the figure of drainage area. Under "period of record" breaks of less than a 12-month period are not shown. A dash not followed immediately by a closing date shows that the station was in operation on September 30, 1948.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX D SCIG Cultural and Paleontological Reports
    APPENDIX D SCIG Cultural and Paleontological Reports Southern California International Gateway Draft EIR September 2011 Historical, Paleontological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Southern California International Gateway Project Area Phase II – Northern Section of Southern California International Gateway Project Area ADP #041027-199 Prepared for: Los Angeles Harbor Department 425 South Palos Verdes Street San Pedro, CA 90733-0151 Contact: Dennis Hagner 310/732-3949 Prepared by: 811 West 7th Street, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Contact: David Greenwood 213/627-5376 September 2008 Table of Contents Project Overview ................................................................................................................1 Previous Surveys ..........................................................................................................1 Summary of Findings – Phase I ...................................................................................5 Phase II Technical Report .................................................................................................8 Addendum: Northern Portion of California Cartage Warehouse .................................8 Project Description ............................................................................................................8 Historic Setting - Review .............................................................................................9 Site Context ................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Survey Report
    F.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT FOR THE SAN PEDRO WATERFRONT PROJECT LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Los Angeles Harbor Department Environmental Management Division 425 South Palos Verdes Street San Pedro, California 90733 Prepared by: ICF Jones & Stokes 811 West 7th Street, Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90017 213/627-5376 August 2008 Table of Contents SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 2 II. REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................ 3 FEDERAL REGULATIONS ................................................................................ 3 STATE REGULATIONS ...................................................................................... 4 LOCAL REGULATIONS ..................................................................................... 6 III. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 7 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................. 7 PREHISTORIC CULTURAL SETTING .............................................................. 7 ETHNOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 9 HISTORIC BACKGROUND .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment a 303(D) List for Bodies of Water from RWQCB Basin Plans in Southern California
    Attachment A 303(d) List for Bodies of Water from RWQCB Basin Plans in Southern California Regulatory_Issues_Trends.doc Attachment A-1 Lahontan RWQCB Basin Plan 303(d) List Regulatory_Issues_Trends.doc 2006 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENTS REQUIRING TMDLS LAHONTAN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD USEPA APPROVAL DATE: JUNE 28, 2007 CALWATER POTENTIAL ESTIMATED PROPOSED TMDL REGION TYPE NAME WATERSHED POLLUTANT/STRESSOR SOURCES SIZE AFFECTED COMPLETION 6 R Big Meadow Creek 63410011 Pathogens 1.4 Miles 2019 Range Grazing-Riparian and/or Upland Natural Sources Recreational and Tourism Activities (non-boating) 6 R Blackwood Creek 63420021 Iron 5.9 Miles 2015 Erosion/Siltation Natural Sources Nonpoint Source Nitrogen 5.9 Miles 2008 Nitrogen loading from creek to be addressed during development of Lake Tahoe TMDL, but a more specific TMDL may be needed for Blackwood Creek. Silviculture Resource Extraction Hydromodification Streambank Modification/Destabilization Erosion/Siltation Atmospheric Deposition Natural Sources Nonpoint Source Phosphorus 5.9 Miles 2008 Phosphorus loading from creek to be addressed during development of Lake Tahoe TMDL, but a more specific TMDL for creek may be needed. Grazing-Related Sources Silviculture Resource Extraction Hydromodification Streambank Modification/Destabilization Erosion/Siltation Natural Sources Nonpoint Source Page 1 of 26 2006 CWA SECTION 303(d) LIST OF WATER QUALITY LIMITED SEGMENTS REQUIRING TMDLS LAHONTAN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD USEPA APPROVAL DATE: JUNE 28, 2007 CALWATER POTENTIAL ESTIMATED PROPOSED TMDL REGION TYPE NAME WATERSHED POLLUTANT/STRESSOR SOURCES SIZE AFFECTED COMPLETION Sedimentation/Siltation 5.9 Miles 2008 Creek affected by past gravel quarry operations and other watershed disturbance including grazing and timber harvest.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic / Circulation / Parking
    IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS C. TRAFFIC / CIRCULATION / PARKING This section addresses the potential impacts of the proposed pipeline for both Phases 1 and 2 of the Project with regard to traffic on the surrounding street system during construction and on-going operations, including on- and off-street parking, access to transit service as well as pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The information and analysis in this section (except where footnoted otherwise) is based on the Transportation Report, (the “Traffic Report”), dated June, 2007, prepared for the proposed pipeline by Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants. This section is a summary of that report and includes an evaluation of the traffic conditions on the existing street network surrounding the proposed pipeline. The Traffic Report, which is incorporated herein by this reference, is included as Appendix E to this Draft EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The proposed pipeline is approximately 24 miles in length and would begin at the Vopak Inland Terminal, a tank farm and storage facility in the Wilmington area of the City of Los Angeles. In Phase 1 of the Project, leaving Vopak the pipeline would travel north along Alameda Street to the Watson Pump Station in the City of Carson, passing LAXFUEL’s off-airport storage facility at the Kinder Morgan Carson and Shell Carson terminals. In Phase 2, from the Watson Pump Station, the pipeline would then continue north along Wilmington Avenue passing through the communities of Carson, unincorporated Los Angeles County, Compton, additional areas within the City of Los Angeles as well as the cities of Gardena and Hawthorne before entering the LAX property, traversing twenty (20) separate roadways.
    [Show full text]
  • Nitrogen Deposition on Coastal Watersheds in the Los Angeles Region
    Nitrogen deposition on coastal water- sheds in the Los Angeles region Rong Lu1, Kenneth C. Schiff and Keith D. Stolzenbach1 ABSTRACT - Many waterbodies throughout the nitric oxide (NO). Atmospheric photochemical reac- Los Angeles region are eutrophied by nutrients such tions subsequently convert originally emitted NO as nitrogen. While the loads of nitrogen from some into a family of nitrogen-containing pollutants, sources (i.e., water reclamation plants) are well mon- including nitrogen dioxide (NO2), nitric acid itored, the load of total nitrogen from atmospheric dry (HNO3), peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN), and aerosol deposition is almost completely uncharacterized. nitrates (PM NO ). Eventually, these pollutants are The goal of this study was to estimate nitrogen dep- 3 osition to coastal watersheds in the Los Angeles removed by dry and wet deposition. Dry deposition Basin. An atmospheric transport and transformation appears to contribute more pollutants than wet depo- model was used within the airshed for dry deposition sition in the Los Angeles Basin, largely because flux of total nitrogen to the Ballona Creek, there are so few storm events in the region (Lu et al. Dominguez Channel, Los Angeles River, Malibu 2003). Creek, San Gabriel River, Lower Santa Ana River In southern California, tremendous effort has (below Prado Dam), Upper Santa Ana River (above been expended on monitoring air quality for human Prado Dam), and Santa Clara River watersheds. health concerns (i.e., inhalation of fine particulates The estimated mean annual flux of total nitrogen and gaseous compounds), but virtually no effort has from dry deposition varied from 21 to 71 g N/ha/day been expended on monitoring deposition of con- among watersheds.
    [Show full text]
  • RANCHO SAN PEDRO COLLECTION, 1769-1972, Bulk 1900-1960
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt109nc51t No online items INVENTORY OF THE RANCHO SAN PEDRO COLLECTION, 1769-1972, bulk 1900-1960 Finding aid prepared by Thomas Philo. California State University, Dominguez Hills Archives & Special Collections University Library, Room G-145 1000 E. Victoria Street Carson, California 90747 Phone: (310) 243-3895 URL: http://www.csudh.edu/archives/csudh/index.html ©2006 INVENTORY OF THE RANCHO SAN Consult repository. 1 PEDRO COLLECTION, 1769-1972, bulk 1900-1960 Descriptive Summary Title: Rancho San Pedro Collection Dates: 1769-1972 Bulk: 1900-1960 Collection Number: Consult repository. Collector: California State University, Dominguez Hills Extent: 301 boxes, [155 linear ft.] Repository: California State University, Dominguez Hills Archives and Special Collections Archives & Special Collection University Library, Room G-145 1000 E. Victoria Street Carson, California 90747 Phone: (310) 243-3013 URL: http://www.csudh.edu/archives/csudh/index.html Abstract: This collection contains legal and business papers related to the Rancho San Pedro and to its owners, the Dominguez family. The Spanish crown gave the Southern California lands of the Rancho San Pedro to Juan Jose Dominguez in 1784, and in 1858 the United States government granted a patent confirming Dominguez family ownership of the Rancho. A few items predate the 1858 patent, but the bulk of the collection is from 1880-1960. Some materials concern the Rancho San Pedro itself, including partitions of land among family members, farming, oil and water development, and legal issues with neighboring cities, including Los Angeles and Long Beach. Much of the collection comprises records of the business, water, and real estate companies established by Dominguez heirs in and around the Los Angeles area.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation and Circulation
    3.12 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 1 3.12.1 Introduction 2 This section describes the environmental setting for transportation and circulation, 3 including marine transportation, within the PMPU area, identifies applicable 4 regulations, and analyzes the potential impacts that could result from implementing 5 the proposed Program. Mitigation measures and the significance of impacts after 6 mitigation also are described. 7 The transportation analysis includes eight freeway/roadway segments and 34 key 8 intersections that would be used by truck and automobile traffic to gain access to and 9 from the PMPU area. These include the nearest Congestion Management Program 10 (CMP) monitoring stations, assessed in conformance with Los Angeles County 11 Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) CMP guidelines (LACMTA 2010). 12 3.12.2 Environmental Setting 13 3.12.2.1 Ground Transportation 14 The PMPU serves as a long-range plan to establish policies and guidelines for future 15 development within the coastal zone boundary of the Port. In general, the PMPU area is 16 bounded by the community of Wilmington to the north, lands surrounding the 17 Consolidated Slip to the northeast, lands surrounding the Cerritos Channel and City of 18 Los Angeles boundary to the east, Los Angeles Harbor to the south, and the community 19 of San Pedro to the west. 20 Access to and from the Port is provided by a network of freeways and arterial routes, 21 as shown on Figure 3.12-1. The freeway network consists of the Artesia Freeway 22 (State route [SR]-91), Harbor Freeway (I-110), Long Beach Freeway (I-710), San 23 Diego Freeway (I-405), and the Terminal Island Freeway (SR-103/ SR-47).
    [Show full text]
  • 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
    3. Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality This section describes and evaluates potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality that could result from construction and operation of the Proposed Project. The section contains: (1) a description of the existing hydrology and water quality conditions of the Project Site and the surrounding areas, as well as a description of the Adjusted Baseline Environmental Setting; (2) a description of the regulatory federal, State, and local regulations related to hydrology and water quality; and (3) an analysis of the changes in hydrology and water quality associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project, as well as the identification of potentially feasible measures that could mitigate significant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP for the EIR can be found in Appendix B; however, no specific comments regarding hydrology and water quality were provided. The analysis included in this section was developed based on information contained in the City of Inglewood General Plan, City of Inglewood Urban Water Management Plan, Golden State Water Company (GSWC) Urban Water Management Plan, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), Groundwater Basins Master Plan, Enhanced Watershed Management Program for the Dominguez Channel Watershed, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Plan, the project-specific Water Supply Assessment (Appendix M), the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center Low Impact Development (LID) Report (LID Report) (Appendix Q), and the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center Preliminary Hydrology Report (Preliminary Hydrology Report) (Appendix Q).
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Report Stormwater Report Acronyms
    STORMWATER REPORT STORMWATER REPORT ACRONYMS AF - Acre-feet BC - Ballona Creek BMP - Best Management Practice CIMP - Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Program CWA - Clean Water Act DC - Dominguez Channel DCE - Dominguez Channel Estuary DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane EWMP - Enhanced Watershed Management Program FIB - Fecal Indicator Bacteria LA - Los Angeles LAR - Los Angeles River LID - Low Impact Development MC - Malibu Creek MCW - Malibu Creek Watershed MdR - Marina del Rey MS4 - Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System NGO - Non-Governmental Organization PCB - Polychlorinated Biphenyl RAA - Reasonable Assurance Analysis SCWP - The Safe, Clean Water Program SGR - San Gabriel River SMB - Santa Monica Bay TMDL - Total Maximum Daily Load USCR - Upper Santa Clara River WMP - Watershed Management Program TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ……………………………………………………..…………………… ES-1 Introduction ………………………………………………………...……..………………… 1 Los Angeles’ Stormwater Pollution Problem ..……………………..…………….. 1 Water Quality in Los Angeles County …………………….……..……….………… 1 History of the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit ………………….………..……… 2 The Need for Assessment of EWMP Compliance ……………….………..……… 3 Methods …………………………………………………………………….…………..……… 4 Data Collection ………………………………………………………..……….……… 4 Compliance Assessment ………………………………………….………………… 6 Development of Reporting Framework …………………………………….……… 6 Results ………………………………………………………………………………….……… 7 Assessment by Retention Capacity (AF) or Area Addressed (acres)…………… 7 Assessment by Number of Projects Completed………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 Safety Element
    CHAPTER 6 SAFETY ELEMENT CHAPTER 6 SAFETY ELEMENT GUIDING PRINCIPLE The City of Carson is committed to promoting safety in order to enhance the livability, quality of life, business environment, positive image of the community, and reduce the effects of crime and environmental hazards to all citizens. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Safety Element is an official guide for the City Council, government agencies, and individuals to identify and understand potential hazards confronting the City of Carson. The Element evaluates natural and man-made hazards that have the potential to endanger the welfare and safety of the general public and aims to reduce the potential risk of death, injuries, property damage and the economic and social dislocation resulting from them. The concerns are subsequently incorporated into goals, policies and implementation actions to reduce the impacts of hazards. 2.0 STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS The State of California Government Code Section 65302(g) requires that a General Plan include: “...a safety element for the protection of the community from any unreasonable risks associated with the effects of seismically induced surface rupture, ground shaking, ground failure, tsunami, seiche, and dam failure; slope instability leading to mudslides and landslides; subsidence, liquefaction and other seismic hazards identified pursuant to Chapter 7.8 (commencing with §2690) of the Carson General Plan SAF-1 Chapter 6 SAFETY ELEMENT Public Resources Code, and other geologic hazards known to the legislative body; flooding; and wild land and urban fires.” Policies and information for this element are contained in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code Section 2621, et seq.), the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources Code Section 2690, et seq.), and the Unreinforced Masonry Law (Government Code Section 8875, et seq.).
    [Show full text]