DOCSLIB.ORG

Trabuco/Holy Jim Crossing Replacement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Trabuco/Holy Jim Crossing Replacement United States Department of Environmental Agriculture Forest Assessment Service February 2014 Trabuco District Dam Removal Project: Silverado, Holy Jim, and San Juan Creeks Trabuco Ranger District, Cleveland National Forest Orange County, California Location of Action: National Forest System lands on the Cleveland National Forest in Orange County, California Type of Document: Environmental Assessment Lead Agency: USDA Forest Service Responsible Official: Trabuco District Ranger, Cleveland National Forest Contact Person: Kirsten Winter, Forest Biologist Cleveland National Forest 10845 Rancho Bernardo Road, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92127 Non-Discrimination Policy The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) To File an Employment Complaint If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency's EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html. To File a Program Complaint If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at www.ascr.usda.gov/ complaint_filing_cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax (202) 690- 7442 or email at [email protected]. Persons with Disabilities Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and you wish to file either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish). Persons with disabilities who wish to file a program complaint, please see information above on how to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). Table of Contents 1 - Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Document Structure ............................................................................................................ .1 1.2 Location ............................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Purpose and Need for Action……………………………………………………………… 6 1.4 Decision Framework .......................................................................................................... 9 1.5 Public Involvement ............................................................................................................. 9 1.6 Issues .................................................................................................................................. 9 2 - Alternatives, including the Proposed Action ...................................................... 11 2.1 Alternative 1: Proposed Action ......................................................................................... 11 2.2 Alternative 2: No Action .................................................................................................. 16 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Not Analyzed in Detail ....................................................... 16 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................................................... 17 3 - Environmental Consequences .............................................................................. 19 3.0.1 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis ........................................................................... 19 3.1 Physical Environment ........................................................................................................ 19 3.1.2 Air Quality .................................................................................................................. 22 3.1.1 Hydrology and Soils .................................................................................................. 26 3.2 Biological Environment ..................................................................................................... 37 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species ......................................................................... 37 3.2.2 Regional Forester’s Sensitive List Species ................................................................. 40 3.2.3 Management Indicator Species………………………………………………………43 3.2.4 Migratory Bird Species .............................................................................................. 44 3.3 Social Environment ........................................................................................................... 44 3.3.1 Recreation and Public Safety ..................................................................................... 44 3.3.2 Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................... 46 4 - Persons, Groups, Organizations, and Agencies Consulted ................................ 48 5 - References .............................................................................................................. 49 Tables Table 1. Comparison of Alternatives………………………………………………………….18 Table 2. Daily Project Emissions ............................................................................................ 24 Table 3. Annual Project Emissions.......................................................................................... 25 Table 4. Daily Project Emissions, Regional Significance ...................................................... 25 Table 5. Total Project Emissions ........................................................................................... 25 Table 6. Sensitive species present in project area. ................................................................... 40 Table 7: Management indicator species. ................................................................................. 43 Figures Figure 1: Locality and watershed map for fish dam removal project. ........................................ 3 Figure 2: Dams in Silverado Creek. ........................................................................................... 4 Figure 3: Dams in Holy Jim Creek. ............................................................................................ 5 Figure 4: Dams in San Juan Creek. ........................................................................................... 6 Appendices Appendix A - Photographs of Typical Dams Appendix B - Response to Comments Appendix C - Best Management Practices Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 DOCUMENT STRUCTURE This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended; 7 CFR part 1b; 36 CFR 220; 40 CFR parts 1500 to 1508; the Forest Service Manual parts 1920 and 1950; and the Forest Service Handbook part 1909.12. This EA will disclose the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and alternatives on the biological, physical and human environment. Analysis contained in this EA incorporates information from, and tiers to specialist reports in the project record, including but not limited to the air quality report, biological evaluation, historical assessment, engineering report, and hydrology report. The document is organized into the following parts: Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter includes the background information on project area, the purpose and need for the project, and a description of the proposed action. Chapter 2: Alternatives. This chapter details how the public was informed of the proposal and how the public responded. This chapter provides a more detailed description of the proposed action as well as any alternative methods for achieving the stated purpose that may have been developed based on significant issues raised by the public and other government agencies during the scoping period. This chapter includes possible mitigation measures. Chapter 3: Environmental Consequences. This chapter describes the affected environment for each resource, as well as the environmental effects of implementing the proposed action and any other alternatives. Chapter 4: Agencies and Persons Consulted. This section provides a list of preparers and agencies consulted during the development of the environmental assessment. Appendices. The appendices provide more detailed information to support the analyses presented in the environmental assessment. Additional documentation, including more detailed analyses
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geomorphic Setting
    DRAFT NCCP/MSAA/HCP CHAPTER 3: EXISTING BIOLOGICAL AND HYDROLOGIC/ GEOMORPHIC SETTING This Chapter describes the biological setting of the approximately 131,600-acre Southern NCCP/MSAA/HCP study area, including portions of the CNF (Figure 3-M). Within the study area, the approximately 91,660 acres of non-federal land defines the planning area for the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. Management of resources in the CNF is the responsibility of the USFS. Therefore, the description of the biological and hydrologic/geomorphic setting includes a general description of the CNF, but the main focus of this section is the 91,660-acre planning area. The 91,660-acre planning area is further subdivided into the four Subarea Plan areas described in Chapter 1 (Figure 3-M). The Subareas total approximately 86,339 acres. The remaining 5,321 acres are comprised on the cities of Lake Forest and Dana Point, and internal areas that are “not a part” of the Subareas, such as Ladera Ranch, Las Flores, the wastewater treatment plant in lower Chiquita, Tesoro High School, FTC-North, and the Nichols Institute bounded by Caspers Wilderness Park. To describe the biological setting of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP planning area, this Chapter includes the following sections: Section 3.1 Database development methods; Section 3.2 Vegetation communities that make up theplanning area and the key wildlife species that are typical of, or indicate, high quality vegetation communities; Section 3.3 Existing geomorphic and hydrologic conditions and processes; Section 3.4 Sensitive wildlife and plant species distribution in the planning areaand subarea plan areas; and Section 3.5 Regional and subregional wildlife habitat linkages.
    [Show full text]
  • Ebird Top 100 Birding Hot Sots
    eBird Top 100 Birding Locations in Orange County 01 Huntington Central Park 02 San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary 03 Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve 04 Seal Beach NWR (restricted access) 05 Huntington Central Park – East 06 Bolsa Chica – walkbridge/inner bay 07 Huntington Central Park – West 08 William R. Mason Regional Park 09 Upper Newport Bay 10 Laguna Niguel Regional Park 11 Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park 12 Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve 13 Mile Square Regional Park 14 Irvine Regional Park 15 Peters Canyon Regional Park 16 Newport Back Bay 17 Talbert Nature Preserve 18 Upper Newport Bay – Back Bay Dr. 19 Yorba Regional Park 20 Crystal Cove State Park 21 Doheny State Beach 22 Bolsa Chica - Interpretive Center/Bolsa Bay 23 Upper Newport Bay – Back Bay Dr. parking lot 24 Bolsa Chica – Brightwater area 25 Carbon Canyon Regional Park 26 Santiago Oaks Regional Park 27 Upper Santa Ana River – Lincoln Ave. to Glassel St. 28 Huntington Central Park – Shipley Nature Center 29 Upper Santa Ana River – Lakeview Ave. to Imperial Hwy. 30 Craig Regional Park 31 Irvine Lake 32 Bolsa Chica – full tidal area 33 Upper Newport Bay Nature Preserve – Muth Interpretive Center area 1 eBird Top 100 Birding Locations in Orange County 34 Upper Santa Ana River – Tustin Ave. to Lakeview Ave. 35 Fairview Park 36 Dana Point Harbor 37 San Joaquin Wildlife Area – Fledgling Loop Trail 38 Crystal Cove State Park – beach area 39 Ralph B. Clark Regional Park 40 Anaheim Coves Park (aka Burris Basin) 41 Villa Park Flood Control Basin 42 Aliso and Wood Canyons Wilderness Park 43 Upper Newport Bay – boardwalk 44 San Joaquin Wildlife Sanctuary – Tree Hill Trail 45 Starr Ranch 46 San Juan Creek mouth 47 Upper Newport Bay – Big Canyon 48 Santa Ana River mouth 49 Bolsa Chica State Beach 50 Crystal Cover State Park – El Moro 51 Riley Wilderness Park 52 Riverdale Park (ORA County) 53 Environmental Nature Center 54 Upper Santa Ana River – Taft Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Sec 05 11 Tribal and Cultural Resources
    Tribal and Cultural Resources 5.11 TRIBAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 5.11.1 PURPOSE This section identifies existing cultural (including historic and archeological resources), paleontological and tribal resources within the Study Area, and provides an analysis of potential impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan Update. Potential impacts are identified and mitigation measures to address potentially significant impacts are recommended, as necessary. This section is primarily based upon the Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Technical Report for the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan Update, Rancho Santa Margarita, Orange County, California (Cultural Study), and the Paleontological Resources Impact Assessment Report for the Rancho Santa Margarita General Plan Update, Orange County, California (Paleontological Assessment), both prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) and dated April 2019; refer to Appendix F, Cultural/ Paleontological Resources Assessment. 5.11.2 EXISTING REGULATORY SETTING Numerous laws and regulations require Federal, State, and local agencies to consider the effects a project may have on cultural resources. These laws and regulations establish a process for compliance, define the responsibilities of the various agencies proposing the action, and prescribe the relationship among other involved agencies (i.e., State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation). The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, the California Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Master Plan of Trails, Adopted Oct
    P.O. BOX 8, SILVERADO, CA 92676 SMRPD Draft Master Plan of Trails, Adopted Oct. 14, 2004 The Master Plan of Regional Riding and Hiking Trails Component is countywide in scope. It is a public trail system which traverses the entire county without regard for jurisdictional boundaries and, therefore, intergovernmental coordination is necessary for successful implementation. -from the Recreation Element of the Orange County General Plan The Silverado Modjeska Community Plan and EIR (DEIR 096), prepared by the Environmental Planning Agency and distributed on November 23, 1976, included a variety of non-paved multi-use riding and hiking trails which were in place and inventoried at the time of the DEIR’s adoption. The plan allowed for the addition of recreational trails as proposed by the community. In 2002, under the jurisdiction of the Silverado Modjeska Recreation and Parks District (a State sanctioned Independent Special District), the community and the SMRPD worked together to create an updated Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails. As a conceptual plan, it is considered a general expression of community values and is abstract in nature. Purpose The purpose of the Silverado Modjeska Master Plan of Trails is to provide goals and objectives to direct the development and operation of a District-wide public trail system that serves the recreational needs of equestrians, pedestrians (walkers, hikers and joggers), and mountain bikers (non-motorized). Goals Goal 1: Provide a useful, enjoyable, safe, and efficient riding and hiking trail system for the District and to meet the needs and desires of the community. Goal 2: Create trail linkages between open space and recreation facilities, between community, municipal, state, and federal trail systems, and create connectivity to surrounding communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Survey
    PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY PROPOSED ALTON PARKWAY EXTENSION PROJECT, INCLUDING BAKER RANCH, LAKE FOREST, CALIFORNIA Prepared for Mr. Gene Spindler Shea Properties Vice President, Commercial Development 130 Vantis, Suite 200 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangle: El Toro, California BonTerra Project No. Shea J003 Prepared by Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 T: (714) 444-9199 F: (714) 444-9599 August 2008 Proposed Alton Parkway Extension Project MANAGEMENT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT PURPOSE AND SCOPE BonTerra Consulting undertook this project as part of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements for the proposed Alton Parkway Extension project. The Phase I Cultural Resources Reconnaissance Report addresses the remaining approximately 380 acres of the Baker Ranch. This cultural study includes a literature review/records search, Native American scoping, and a pedestrian reconnaissance of the project area. The format of this report follows Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format (Office of Historic Preservation 1990). DATES OF INVESTIGATION BonTerra Consulting Archaeologist Patrick Maxon (see Appendix A: Personnel Qualifications), a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA), conducted the literature review at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton on July 23, 2008. The cultural resources survey of the property was conducted on July 30, 2008 by Patrick Maxon and Justin Partridge of BonTerra. Mr. Maxon visited the Lake Forest Historical Society at Heritage Hill Historical Park on August 6, 2008. This report was completed in August 2008. FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION In summary, four cultural resources (CA-ORA-40, CA-ORA-758, CA-ORA-1004 and CA-ORA-1150) are recorded within the Alton Parkway/Baker Ranch project area.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX J Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the Poseidon Seawater Desalination Project Prepared by Bonterra Consulting, December 2009
    APPENDIX J Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the Poseidon Seawater Desalination Project Prepared by Bonterra Consulting, December 2009 PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE POSEIDON SEAWATER DESALINATION PROJECT, HUNTINGTON BEACH, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared for Alan Ashimine, Senior Associate Environmental Services RBF Consulting 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618 USGS 7.5-Minute Quadrangles Newport Beach and Tustin, California BonTerra Project No. RBF J499 Prepared by Joan C. Brown, M.A., RPA Patrick O. Maxon, M.A., RPA BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 T: (714) 444-9199 F: (714) 444-9599 December 2009 J-1 Proposed Poseidon Desalination TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Management Summary/Abstract ........................................................................................ MS-1 Section 1.0 Undertaking Information/Introduction ............................................................... 1 1.1 Contracting Data ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 Purpose ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 State ............................................................................................... 1 1.2.2 City of Huntington Beach ............................................................... 2 1.3 Undertaking ............................................................................................... 2 1.4 Exhibit .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Holy Fire Watershed Report
    Burned Area Emergency Response Holy Fire Cleveland National Forest Hydrology and Watershed Specialist Report August 25, 2018 Overview of Horsethief Canyon above Interstate 15 Submitted by: Kelsha L. Anderson, Angeles National Forest Hydrologist I. Objectives This report summarizes the results from the hydrologic assessment of the Holy Fire in the center of the Santa Ana Mountains as part of the Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER). II Potential Values at Risk Values at Risk (VARs) on Forest Service land (FS) are addressed in Appendix D. Many VARs that could be impacted by the fire are on adjacent private, state, county, or local government lands. The State Watershed Emergency Response Team conducted a detailed analysis of non-FS VARs that will be published in a separate document. The FS BAER team and State WERT team collaborate and share information during post-fire assessments to ensure VARs are identified. On private lands, the primary contact for treatments is the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). III. Resource Condition Assessment Fire and Site Description The Holy Fire started on August 06, 2018 at 1:30pm (suspected arson). As of August 21, 2018 the fire had burned 22,982 acres (90% contained). The burn occurred adjacent to California State Highway 74 and Interstate 15. Much of the Holy Fire last burned between 1940-80’s. Table 1: Fire History in Holy Fire Perimeter Holy Fire area impacted Fires of Note Coldwater Canyon Silverado (1987), Unnamed (1942) Mayhew Canyon Indian (1966), Wright Cyn (1942) Indian Canyon
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Packet
    MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY Jointly with the PLANNING & OPERATIONS COMMITTEE December 14, 2020, 8:30 a.m. Due to the spread of COVID-19 and as authorized by the Governor’s Executive Order, MWDOC will be holding all upcoming Board and Committee meetings by Zoom Webinar and will be available by either computer or telephone audio as follows: Computer Audio: You can join the Zoom meeting by clicking on the following link: https://zoom.us/j/8828665300 Telephone Audio: (669) 900 9128 fees may apply (877) 853 5247 Toll-free Webinar ID: 882 866 5300# P&O Committee: Staff: R. Hunter, J. Berg, V. Osborn, Director McVicker, Chair H. De La Torre, K. Davanaugh, Director Dick Director Yoo Schneider Ex Officio Member: Director Tamaribuchi MWDOC Committee meetings are noticed and held as joint meetings of the Committee and the entire Board of Directors and all members of the Board of Directors may attend and participate in the discussion. Each Committee has designated Committee members, and other members of the Board are designated alternate committee members. If less than a quorum of the full Board is in attendance, the Board meeting will be adjourned for lack of a quorum and the meeting will proceed as a meeting of the Committee with those Committee members and alternate members in attendance acting as the Committee. PUBLIC COMMENTS - Public comments on agenda items and items under the jurisdiction of the Committee should be made at this time. ITEMS RECEIVED TOO LATE TO BE AGENDIZED - Determine there is a need to take immediate action on item(s) and that the need for action came to the attention of the District subsequent to the posting of the Agenda.
    [Show full text]
  • GENERAL PLAN APPENDIX December 2012 TABLE of CONTENTS
    County of Orange GENERAL PLAN APPENDIX December 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS LAND USE ELEMENT Appendix III-1 Growth Management Program Guidelines …………………………………………… 1 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Appendix IV-1 Growth Management Transportation Implementation Manual ……………………… 9 Appendix IV-2 Planning Criteria for Determining Arterial Highway Classifications ……………….. 30 Appendix IV-3 Bikeway Designation Planning Guidelines ………………………………………….. 36 Appendix IV-4 County Designation Scenic Highways and Candidate Corridors ……………………. 38 Appendix IV-5 Scenic Highways Corridor Implementation Planning Guidelines …………………… 44 Appendix IV-6 List of Acronyms/Abbreviations …………………………………………………….. 48 RESOURCES ELEMENT Appendix VI-1 List of Acronyms/Abbreviations …………………………………………………….. 56 RECREATION ELEMENT Appendix VII-1 Local Park Implementation Plan Criteria: Private Parks, Facilities and Improvements 60 Appendix VII-2 Local Park Guidelines: Site Characteristics, Acquisition, Design, Maintenance & Funding 66 Appendix VII-3 Local Park Site Criteria ……………………………………………………………… 75 Appendix VII-4 Policy for Allocating Funds for Trail Development ………………………………… 81 Appendix VII-5 Trail Descriptions …………………………………………………………………… 85 Appendix VII-6 Staging Areas ……………………………………………………………………….. 109 Appendix VII-7 Trail Design Standards ……………………………………………………………… 115 Appendix VII-8 Regional Recreation Facilities Inventory …………………………………………… 119 Appendix VII-9 List of Acronyms/Abbreviations ……………………………………………………. 129 NOISE ELEMENT Appendix VIII-1 Noise Element Definitions and Acronyms …………………………………………
    [Show full text]
  • November 1, 2011 To: Interested Parties Subject: NOTICE OF
    November 1, 2011 located along Modjeska Canyon Road, which runs southeast off of Santiago Canyon Road To: Interested Parties and is approximately 1 mi south of Williams Canyon Road. Subject: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE Project Description: IRWD is proposing DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED replacement of the portable generators at SANTIAGO CANYON AREA BOOSTER each of the five BPS sites identified to PUMP STATION (BPS) PERMANENT improve the reliability of the water system GENERATORS PROJECT during power outages, particularly when the outages are caused by fires in the canyons. The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) is This Proposed Project would replace the proposing replacement of the existing portable portable generators at each of the sites with generators at five BPS sites with permanent permanent electrical emergency generators, electrical emergency generators set with a each set with a diesel engine and integral 24- diesel engine and integral 24-hour fuel storage hour fuel storage on a concrete pad. Four of set on a concrete pad. As the Lead Agency the five permanent generators would be under the California Environmental Quality contained within a concrete masonry unit Act (CEQA), the IRWD has prepared an (CMU) block wall for protection against Initial Study/Draft Mitigated Negative fires. Construction is anticipated to be phased Declaration (IS/MND) which evaluates the to allow work at no more than two sites at potential environmental effects of the any given time in order to minimize proposed project. disruption to local residents and avoid extended work stoppages at any individual Project Location: The Proposed Project site site.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Availability and Public Meeting Notice – Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the San Juan Watershed Project
    Notice of Availability and Public Meeting Notice – Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the San Juan Watershed Project San Juan Watershed Project To: California Office of Planning and Research; Responsible and Trustee Agencies; County Clerks; and Other Interested Parties Subject: Notice of Availability of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report and Public Meeting Notice Project: San Juan Watershed Project Lead Agency: Santa Margarita Water District Project Description: The Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD), in conjunction with South Coast Water District (SCWD), is proposing to the San Juan Watershed Project (proposed project) that would develop facilities to manage surface water resources to enhance groundwater resources of the San Juan Groundwater Basin. The proposed project would increase the capture and storage of urban runoff and stormwater, optimize the use of recycled water for beneficial reuse, minimize the potential for undesirable impacts, and augment local groundwater supplies to reduce the region’s dependence on imported water. SMWD, acting as Lead Agency, has prepared a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to provide decisionmakers, the public, and trustee agencies with information about the potential effects on the local and regional environment associated with implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project would occur within the San Juan Creek Watershed, within Southern Orange County on the western flank of the Santa Ana Mountains, and would be constructed in multiple phases. The first phase (Phase I) would include installation of three rubber dams within San Juan Creek that would act as in-stream detention facilities for both dry weather and wet weather flows within San Juan Creek and Arroyo Trabuco.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Revisions Municipal Water District of Orange County Amended
    REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY 18700 Ward Street, Fountain Valley, California December 16, 2020, 8:30 a.m. Due to the spread of COVID-19 and as authorized by the Governor’s Executive Order, MWDOC will be holding all upcoming Board and Committee meetings by Zoom Webinar and will be available by either computer or telephone audio as follows: Computer Audio: You can join the Zoom meeting by clicking on the following link: https://zoom.us/j/8828665300 Telephone Audio: (669) 900 9128 fees may apply (877) 853 5247 Toll-free Webinar ID: 882 866 5300# AGENDA MOMENT OF SILENCE ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENTS/PARTICIPATION At this time, members of the public will be given an opportunity to address the Board concerning items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. Members of the public may also address the Board about a particular Agenda item at the time it is considered by the Board and before action is taken. If the item is on the Consent Calendar, please inform the Board Secretary before action is taken on the Consent Calendar and the item will be removed for separate consideration. The Board requests, but does not require, that members of the public who want to address the Board complete a voluntary “Request to be Heard” form available from the Board Secretary prior to the meeting. ITEMS RECEIVED TOO LATE TO BE AGENDIZED Determine need and take action to agendize items(s) which arose subsequent to the posting of the Agenda. (ROLL CALL VOTE: Adoption of this recommendation requires a
    [Show full text]