DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Subsequent Environmental Impact

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Subsequent Environmental Impact FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR FOCUSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE and Related Amendments to the Non-Coastal Zoning Ordinance and Zone Change ZN05-0008 The Environmental Report Review Committee recommends that the decision-making body of the proposed project find that this document has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Signed: (Nancy Settle) June 22, 2005 ERRC Chair Date Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Background/History ......................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose/Legal Authority............................................................................................2 1.3 Lead, Responsible and Trustee Agencies ................................................................3 1.4 Scope of EIR.............................................................................................................3 1.5 Areas of Known Controversy ....................................................................................3 2. Project Description .......................................................................... 5 2.1 Project Applicant.......................................................................................................5 2.2 Project Location ........................................................................................................5 2.3 Project Objectives.....................................................................................................5 2.4 Project Characteristics..............................................................................................5 2.5 Project Components That Have Potential for Adverse Environmental Impact..........8 3. Summary of Impacts and Alternatives......................................... 10 3.1 Unmitigated, Significant Adverse Impacts ..............................................................10 3.2 Mitigated, Significant Adverse Impacts ...................................................................18 3.1 Less than Significant Adverse Impacts ...................................................................21 3.4 Alternatives .............................................................................................................22 4. Environmental Setting, Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Residual Effects ............................................................................. 24 4.1 Air Quality ...............................................................................................................24 4.2 Mineral Resources..................................................................................................29 4.3 Biological Resources ..............................................................................................34 4.4 Agricultural Resources............................................................................................46 4.5 Scenic Resources...................................................................................................52 4.6 Paleontological Resources .....................................................................................55 4.7 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................57 4.8 Coastal Beaches and Sand Dunes .........................................................................61 4.9 Seismic/Geologic Hazards......................................................................................67 4.10 Hydraulic Hazards/Flood Control and Drainage .....................................................73 4.11 Fire Hazards/Fire Protection Services ....................................................................80 4.12 Hazardous Materials and Waste/Public Health.......................................................87 4.13 Noise and Vibration.................................................................................................92 4.14 Transportation/Circulation.......................................................................................98 4.15 Airports/Aviation Hazards .....................................................................................121 4.16 Water Supply/Resources ......................................................................................126 4.17 Waste Treatment and Disposal.............................................................................144 4.18 Utilities/Energy Resources....................................................................................168 4.19 Law Enforcement and Emergency Services .........................................................173 4.20 Education Facilities and Services .........................................................................180 4.21 Recreation Facilities..............................................................................................186 4.22 Community Character ...........................................................................................191 4.23 Housing.................................................................................................................208 4.24 Growth Inducement...............................................................................................211 5. Alternatives to the Proposed Project ......................................... 223 5.1 No Project Alternative ...........................................................................................223 5.2 Lower Traffic LOS Standard on Santa Rosa Road and Moorpark Road from “D” to “E” .........................................................................................................................223 Draft Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for Focused General Plan Update i 5.3 Additionally Lower Traffic LOS Standard on Highways 34 and 118 and Santa Clara Avenue from “D” to “E”..........................................................................................224 5.4 Highway 34 Bypass Around Somis.......................................................................226 5.5 Other Alternatives Considered and Rejected........................................................229 6. General Plan Consistency Analysis ........................................... 231 6.1 General Plan Goals and Policies ..........................................................................231 6.2 Coastal and Non-Coastal Zoning Ordinances and Subdivision Ordinance ..........235 7. References and Organizations, Agencies and Individuals Consulted...................................................................................... 236 8. Appendices – Separate Document Draft Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for Focused General Plan Update ii List of Figures Figure 4.2-1 Aggregate Resources – South Half......................................................32 Figure 4.2-2 Petroleum Resources – South Half......................................................33 Figure 4.3-1a Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Animals – North Half.................. 39 Figure 4.3-1b Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Animals – South Half ................. 40 Figure 4.3-2a Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants and Natural Communities – North Half..................................................................................................................41 Figure 4.3-2b Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants and Natural Communities – South Half .................................................................................................................42 Figure 4.3-3a National Wetlands Inventory Water Bodies and Wetlands of Ventura County– North Half....................................................................................................43 Figure 4.3-3b National Wetlands Inventory Water Bodies and Wetlands of Ventura County – South Half ..................................................................................................44 Figure 4.3-4 South County Habitat Linkages and Wildlife Corridors .........................45 Figure 4.4-1 Important Farmlands Inventory .............................................................51 Figure 4.5-1 Scenic Resource Protection Overlay ....................................................54 Figure 4.10-1 Flood Plains – South Half ..................................................................77 Figure 4.10-2a Flood Control – North Half ...............................................................78 Figure 4.10-2b Flood Control – South Half...............................................................79 Figure 4.11-1a Fire Hazard Map - North Half............................................................85 Figure 4.11-1b Fire Hazard Map - South Half ...........................................................86 Figure 4.13-1 2020 Noise Contours Map for Regional Road Network ......................97 Figure 4.14-1 Roadway Levels of Service...............................................................119 Figure 4.14-2 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Level of Service (LOS) Thresholds - County Roads/Conventional State Highways, and Freeways Table ....................... 120 Figure 4.16-1 Water Resources – South Half .........................................................139 Figure 4.16-2 Ventura County 2000 Water Survey ................................................. 140 Figure 4.16-3a Water Demand Projections Within Casitas MWD .......................... 141 Figure 4.16-3b Water Supply Projections
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Local Venturan Awarded Third Highest DOD Medal
    Does Ventura have enough water? Pages 2&10 Vol. Vol. 3, 12, No. No. 11 14 Published Every Other Published Wednesday Every Other Established Wednesday 2007 April 10 – April March 23, 2019 10 - 23, 2010 “I like seeing results and I like to make people happy whenever possible.” Jim Friedman’s Madhu Bajaj and Dr. Rice enjoyed the talents of Serena Ropersmith, Kelsa Ropersmith and Kamille Kada. new perspective Dennis Cam Kelsch received medal for on serving the 18th Annual Festival of Talent gallantry against an armed enemy. by Amy Brown Local Ventura people Talent is one of the Ventura Unified Beat”, on March 23rd. The show featured School District’s natural resources, as a range of dynamic performances, from by Maryssa Rillo evidenced by this year’s much anticipat- a big production opening act featuring Venturan Jim Friedman served as a member ed Festival of Talent event, “We Got The Continued on page 24 of the Ventura City Council from 1995- awarded third 2002. He also served as mayor in 1998 and 1999. Now, 15 years later, Friedman is back and was reelected in 2018 to highest DOD represent District 5. According to Friedman, money is a Medal bigger issue today than it was the first Ventura native, and 2008 graduate time he served. The break he had from of Ventura High School was presented a serving on the Ventura City Council Silver Star Medal during a ceremony at gave him the opportunity to gain a new the Mighty Eighth Air Force Museum, perspective of the city and see what was Pooler, Georgia on April 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Area Plan
    VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN COASTAL AREA PLAN Last Amended 9-16-08 Ventura County Planning Division Acknowledgements 1978-1982 Ventura County Board of Supervisors David E. Eaton First District Edwin A. Jones Second District J. K. (Ken) MacDonald Third District James R. Dougherty Fourth District Thomas E. Laubacher, Chairman Fifth District Ventura County Planning Commission Vinette Larson First District Earl Meek Second District Glenn Zogg Third District Curran Cummings, Chairman Fourth District Bernice Lorenzi Fifth District Resource Management Agency Victor R. Husbands, Director Planning Division Dennis T. Davis Manager Kim Hocking, Supervisor, Advanced Planning Jeff Walker, Project Manager Trish Davey, Assistant Planner Jean Melvin, Assistant Planner Kheryn Klubnikin, Assistant Planner This Plan was prepared with financial assistance from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under provisions of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. For Copies/More Info: To purchase the Ventura County Coastal Area Plan: Call 805/654-2805 or go to the Resource Management Agency receptionist 3rd floor of the Government Center Hall of Administration 800 S. Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA This Coastal Area Plan is also available on our website: http://www.ventura.org/planning VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN COASTAL AREA PLAN Ventura County Board of Supervisors California Coastal Commission California Coastal Act of 1976 adopted Plan Adopted - November 18, 1980 California Coastal Act amended, effective January, 1981 Amended - April 14, 1981 Conditionally Certified -August 20, 1981 Amended - March 30, 1982 Certified - June 18, 1982 Amended - October 15, 1985 Certified - February 7, 1986 Amended - December 20, 1988 Certified - May 10, 1989 Amended - June 20, 1989 Certified - October 10 & 12, 1989 Amended - December 11, 1990 Certified - March 15, 1991 Amended - October 19, 1993 Certified - February 16, 1994 Amended - December 10, 1996 Certified - April 10, 1997 Amended - Dec.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 9813 – Ventura County
    Section 9813 – Ventura County 9813 Ventura County (GRA 7)………………………………………………………………………………………. 473 9813.1 Response Summary Tables……………………………………………………………………….. 474 9813.2 Geographic Response Strategies for Environmental Sensitive Sites……………. 478 9813.2.1 GRA 7 Site Index……………………………………………………………………………….. 479 9813.3 Economic Sensitive Sites……………………………………………………………………………. 526 9813.4 Shoreline Operational Divisions………………………………………………………………….. 531 9813 Ventura County (GRA 7) Ventura County GRA 7 begins at the border with Santa Barbara County and extends southeast approximately 40 miles to the border with Los Angeles County. There are thirteen Environmental Sensitive Sites. Most of the shoreline is fine to medium grain sandy beach and rip rap. There are several coastal estuaries and wetlands of varying size with the largest being Mugu Lagoon. Most of the shoreline is exposed except for two large private boat harbors and a commercial/Navy port. LA/LB - ACPs 4/5 473 v. 2019.2 - June 2021 9813.1 Response Summary Tables A summary of the response resources is listed by site and sub-strategy next. LA/LB - ACPs 4/5 474 v. 2019.2 - June 2021 Summary of ACP 4 GRA 7 Response Resources by Site and Sub-Strategy Site Site Name Sub- PREVENTION OBJECTIVE OR CONDITION FOR DEPLOYMENT Strategy Equipment Sub-Type Size/Unit QTY/Unit 4-701 Rincon Creek and Point .1 - Exclude Oil Boom Swamp Boom 200 feet Boom Sorbent Boom 200 feet Vehicle ATV 1 Staff 4 Anchor 8 .2 - Erect Filter Fence Misc. Oil Snare (pom-pom) 600 Misc. Stake Driver 1 Vehicle ATV 1 Fence Construction Fencing 4 x 100 feet 2 Rolls Stakes T-posts 6 feet 20 Staff 4 .3 - Shoreline Pre-Clean: Resource Specialist Supervision Required Staff 5 Vehicle ATV 1 Misc.
    [Show full text]
  • National List of Beaches 2004 (PDF)
    National List of Beaches March 2004 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington DC 20460 EPA-823-R-04-004 i Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 States Alabama ............................................................................................................... 3 Alaska................................................................................................................... 6 California .............................................................................................................. 9 Connecticut .......................................................................................................... 17 Delaware .............................................................................................................. 21 Florida .................................................................................................................. 22 Georgia................................................................................................................. 36 Hawaii................................................................................................................... 38 Illinois ................................................................................................................... 45 Indiana.................................................................................................................. 47 Louisiana
    [Show full text]
  • Looking Back at 2018, Page 2 Ventura Music Festival 25Th Season Expands
    Looking back at 2018, page 2 Vol. Vol. 3, 12, No. No. 11 7 Published Every Other Published Wednesday Every Other Established Wednesday 2007 January 3 – January March 15, 102019 - 23, 2010 Newly appointed Mayor Matt LaVere spoke during the event, recalled watching the devastation and wondering how the city could ever recover from the catastrophic event that leveled over 500 homes in Ventura. LaVere said, “But we sat down that next week and we were talking about the idea of Ventura strong and the amazing strength and resiliency of this community. We said our number one priority in 2018 has to get homes rebuilt and back into their homes. And here we are one year later, celebrating the first two homeowners who have rebuilt and are moving back into their homes and I think that is a momentous occasion.” Ribbon cutting for first two homes Ed Fuller is an avid singer and was at a rehearsal for his barbershop quartet in Camarillo when news of the spreading Helen always remained glamorous. rebuilt after the Thomas Fire Thomas Fire reached him. Fuller raced by Richard Lieberman back to his Ventura home, but like 500 VCF receives Ed and Sandy Fuller celebrated the Ventura city officials was held in front other Ventura families, his home would completion of their home rebuild after of the new home and another across the be destroyed. donation from the Thomas fire devastated their neigh- street at the newly completed residence On the morning of the ribbon borhood and reduced their beloved home of Michael and Sandra Gustafson who cutting ceremony, Ed and his barber Helen Yunker to ashes.
    [Show full text]
  • 22Nd in Beachwater Quality 10% of Samples Exceeded National Standards in 2010
    CALIFORNIA† See Additional Information About California’s Beach Data Management 22nd in Beachwater Quality 10% of samples exceeded national standards in 2010 Polluted urban and suburban runoff is a major threat to water quality at the nation’s coastal beaches. Runoff from storms and irrigation carries pollution from parking lots, yards, and streets directly to waterways. In some parts of the country, stormwater routinely causes overflows from sewage systems. Innovative solutions known as green infrastructure enable communities to naturally absorb or use runoff before it causes problems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is modernizing its national rules for sources of runoff pollution and should develop strong, green infrastructure-based requirements. California has more than 500 miles of coastal beaches, spread among over 400 beaches along the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay coastline. The California Department of Health Services administers the BEACH Act grant. Current approved methods for determining fecal indicator bacteria counts in beachwater depend on growth of cultures in samples and take at least 24 hours to process. Because of this, swimmers do not know until the next day if the water they swam in was contaminated. Likewise, beaches may be left closed even after water quality meets standards. There is a great deal of interest in technologies that can provide same-day beachwater quality results. During the 2010 beach season, researchers funded by the California State Water Board and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act tested a rapid method called quantitative polymerase chain reaction, or qPCR, at nine sampling locations in Orange County five days a week.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea Level Rise Adaption Strategies.Pub
    COUNTY OF VENTURA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY | PLANNING DIVISION August 30, 2019 County of Ventura Resource Management Agency - Planning Division 800 South Victoria Ave Ventura, CA 93009 Acknowledgements ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared by the following individuals: County of Ventura ▪ Tricia Maier, Long-Range Planning Manager ▪ Aaron Engstrom, Senior Planner ▪ Abigail Convey, Planning Biologist ▪ Angela Kim, CivicSpark Climate Fellow Revell Coastal, LLC ▪ David L. Revell, PhD, Project Director ▪ Phil King, PhD, Lead Economist ▪ Matt Jamieson, MFA, GIS Analyst and Coastal Scientist ▪ Jeffrey Giliam, Economist The sea level rise models used to compile this report were developed by the following organizations: 2012 Coastal Resilience Ventura Model: ▪ The Nature Conservancy, California Chapter ▪ County of Ventura ▪ Environmental Science Associates (ESA) 2017 Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS v3.0): ▪ United States Geological Survey ▪ California Coastal Conservancy County of Ventura August 30, 2019 VC Resilient Coastal Adaptation Project i Adaptation Strategies Report Acknowledgements This page was intentionally left blank. County of Ventura August 30, 2019 VC Resilient Coastal Adaptation Project ii Adaptation Strategies Report Contents CONTENTS Figure ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................. i ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ventura County General Plan Public Facilities & Services Appendix
    VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES & SERVICES APPENDIX Adopted by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors May 24, 1988 Last Amended – March 26, 2002 Ventura County General Plan PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES APPENDIX 1988 Decision-Makers and Contributors Ventura County Board of Supervisors Ventura County Planning Commission Susan K. Lacey First District William T. Bennett Madge Schaefer Second District Mary Alice Henderson Maggie Erickson Kildee Third District Laura Newman James R. Dougherty Fourth District Irma Jones John K. Flynn Fifth District Betty Taylor Ventura County Planning Division Thomas Berg, Division Manager Bruce Smith, Supervisor, General Plans Section Daniel Price, Project Manager Joseph M. Eisenhut Steve Offerman Word Processing Graphics Karen Avers- Mary Stevenson Kay Clark-Carlos Mendoza Janette Landon- Barbara Bean-Joyce Evans Shelah Bernstein-Yvonne Tello Mary Monahan County of Ventura Resource Management Agency Planning Division 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009-1740 (805) 654-2494 FAX (805) 654-2509 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES APPENDIX Table Of Contents 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 4.2 Transportation/Circulation .......................................................................... 2 4.2.1 Roads And Highways............................................................................................................... 2 4.2.2 Transit Service ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Integrated Pest Management Approach to Roof Rat Control in Oceanfront Riprap, Ventura County, California
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Proceedings of the Twelfth Vertebrate Pest Vertebrate Pest Conference Proceedings Conference (1986) collection March 1986 AN INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT APPROACH TO ROOF RAT CONTROL IN OCEANFRONT RIPRAP, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Daniel P. Claffey Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District, Moorpark, California Minoo B. Madon Vector Surveillance and Control Branch, Los Angeles, California Randall T. Smith County of Ventura, Ventura, California Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/vpc12 Part of the Environmental Health and Protection Commons Claffey, Daniel P.; Madon, Minoo B.; and Smith, Randall T., "AN INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT APPROACH TO ROOF RAT CONTROL IN OCEANFRONT RIPRAP, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA" (1986). Proceedings of the Twelfth Vertebrate Pest Conference (1986). 12. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/vpc12/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Vertebrate Pest Conference Proceedings collection at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Proceedings of the Twelfth Vertebrate Pest Conference (1986) by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. AN INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT APPROACH TO ROOF RAT CONTROL IN OCEANFRONT RIPRAP, VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DANIEL P. CLAFFEY, Moorpark Mosquito Abatement District, Moorpark, California 93020-0062. MINOO B. MADON, Department of Health Services, Vector Surveillance and Control Branch, Los Angeles, California 90026. RANDALL T. SMITH, Department of Environmental Health, County of Ventura, Ventura, California 93009. ABSTRACT: During the summer months of 1979, public agencies in Ventura County received complaints which pointed to a rodent infestation of campground areas along the north coastal strip. Investigations re- vealed a widespread infestation of oceanfront riprap by roof rats (Rattus rattus).
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan Central Coast from Pt. Conception to Pt. Mugu Final Report January 2009 Coastal Regional Sediment Management Plan Central Coast from Pt. Conception to Pt. Mugu Beach Erosion Authority for Clean Oceans and Nourishment Board of Directors Staff County of Santa Barbara Brian Brennan, Executive Director Salud Carbajal, Supervisor 1st District Janet Wolf, Supervisor 2nd District Gerald Comati, Project Manager County of Ventura James Bailard, Technical Advisor Steve Bennett, Supervisor District 1 John C. Zaragoza, Supervisor District 5 Patrick Barnard, Special Technical Advisor City of Goleta Karl Trieberg, Staff Advisor Ed Easton, Councilmember Rick Raives, Staff Advisor City of Santa Barbara Das Williams, Councilmember Kevin Ready, Legal Counsel City of Carpinteria Gregg Carty, Mayor City of Ventura Brian Brennan, Councilmember City of Oxnard Bryan MacDonald, Councilmember City of Port Hueneme Jon Sharkey, Mayor Prepared in cooperation with the California Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District Kim Sterrett, Program Manager for the California Department of Boating and Waterways Clif Davenport, Project Manager for the CSMW Heather Schlosser, Acting Section Chief, Coastal Planning for the USACE January 2009 BEACON CRSMP Page i Final Report Table of Contents Introduction 1 Understanding Our Coast 3 Challenges and Opportunities 16 The Plan 19 Public Comment 33 List of Tables Table 1 Estimated Sediment Supply to the Coast from Rivers and Streams 10
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 3.5 Updated Cultural Resources Technical Report
    THE 2020-2045 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/ SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY OF THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS PROPOSED FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT APPENDICES APRIL 2020 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #20199011061 APPENDIX 3.5 Updated Cultural Resources Technical Report Cultural Resources Technical Report for the 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Southern California Association of Governments SEPTEMBER 2019; REVISED MARCH 2020 PREPARED FOR Impact Sciences PREPARED BY SWCA Environmental Consultants CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE 2020–2045 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY FOR THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Prepared for Impact Sciences 811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Attn: Jessica Kirchner Prepared by Chris Millington, M.A., RPA, and Trevor Gittelhough, M.A.., RPA Principal Investigator Heather Gibson, Ph.D., RPA SWCA Environmental Consultants 51 W. Dayton St Pasadena, CA 91105 (626) 240-0587 www.swca.com SWCA Project No.049443 SWCA Cultural Resources Report No. 19- 557 September 2019; Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. Cultural Resources Technical Report for the 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Southern California Association of Governments CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Regulatory
    [Show full text]
  • Attachments 6
    HEAL THE BAY 2007 – 2008 18th Annual Report Heal the Bay’s 18th Annual Beach Report Card May 21, 2008 Heal the Bay is a nonprofit environmental organization dedicated to making Southern California coastal waters and watersheds, including Santa Monica Bay, safe, healthy and clean. We use research, education, community action and advocacy to pursue our mission. The Beach Report Card program is funded by grants from the Ford Motor Company, the Goldhirsh Foundation, the James Irvine Foundation, and simplehuman. ©2008 Heal the Bay. All Rights Reserved. The fishbones logo is a trademark of Heal the Bay. The Beach Report Card is a sevicemark of Heal theBay. Heal the Bay’s 18th Annual Beach Report Card May 21, 2008 Executive Summary ...............1 Beach Types and Water Quality ....40 Introduction .....................6 BRC Impacts 2007–2008 ..........42 The California Beach Report Card . 7 Recommendations What Type of Water Pollution is Measured? for the Coming Year ........... 45 Heal the Bay’s Grading System Acknowledgements ...............51 What Does This Mean to the Beach User? Why Not Test for Viruses? Appendix A ....................53 Appendix B .....................58 2007-2008 California Analyses .....10 Credits .........................83 The Beach Report Card by County . 12 San Diego Orange Los Angeles Ventura Santa Barbara San Luis Obispo Monterey Santa Cruz San Mateo San Francisco Contra Costa and Alameda Marin Mendocino Sonoma Humboldt Del Norte EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Heal the Bay’s 18th Annual Beach Report CardSM provides water quality information to the millions of people who swim, surf, or dive in California coastal waters. Essential reading for ocean users, the report card grades more than 375 locations year-round (517 locations in dry weather from April to October) on an A to F scale based on the risk of adverse health effects to beachgoers.
    [Show full text]