DOCSLIB.ORG

Broad Beach Restoration Project Coastal Engineering Report Exhibit L to CDP Application 4-12-043

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

APPENDIX B COASTAL PROCESSES Broad Beach Restoration Project Coastal Engineering Report Exhibit L to CDP Application 4-12-043 PREPARED FOR: BROAD BEACH GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT PREPARED BY: 3780 KILROY AIRPORT WAY, SUITE 600, LONG BEACH, CA 90806 OCTOBER 2013 M&N FILE: 6935 Broad Beach Restoration Project, Coastal Engineering Report Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 2. Goals and Scope of Study ................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Study Goals ........................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................... 2 3. Problem Description .......................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Broad Beach Erosion ......................................................................................................... 4 3.2 Homeowners Take Action ................................................................................................. 7 3.3 Emergency Temporary Revetment Permits and Conditions ........................................... 10 4. Project Background .......................................................................................................... 13 4.1 Regional Coastal Setting .................................................................................................. 13 4.2 Previous Relevant Studies ............................................................................................... 16 4.2.1 Draft USACE Coast of California Storm and Tidal Waves Study (Noble Consultants, May 2009) ................................................................................................. 16 4.2.2 Shoreline Stabilization Study, 31302 to 31340 Broad Beach Road (TerraCosta, 2008) .............................................................................................................................. 18 4.2.3 Development of Sand Budgets for California’s Major Littoral Cells (Patsch and Griggs, 2007) .................................................................................................................. 19 4.2.4 National Assessment of Shoreline Change Part 3: Historical Change and Associated Coastal Land Loss along Sandy Shorelines of the California Coast (USGS, OFR 2006-1219) ................................................................................................. 20 4.2.5 Summary of Broad Beach Erosion and Beach Nourishment Investigation and Responses to Proposed Nourishment Plan (Griggs, August 2012) ................................ 22 4.2.6 Sediment Transport Along the Malibu Coast (Everts, 2012) ......................................... 24 4.3 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................... 25 4.3.1 Existing Biological Resources at Broad Beach ............................................................... 25 4.3.2 Discussion of Baseline Condition ................................................................................... 30 4.4 Existing Broad Beach Coastal Development.................................................................... 33 4.5 Public Access ................................................................................................................... 36 5. Oceanographic Site Conditions ......................................................................................... 38 5.1 Water Levels .................................................................................................................... 38 5.1.1 Tides ............................................................................................................................... 38 5.1.2 Extreme Water Level Statistics ...................................................................................... 38 5.1.3 Sea Level Rise ................................................................................................................. 39 5.2 Waves .............................................................................................................................. 43 5.2.1 Wave Exposure .............................................................................................................. 43 5.2.2 Wave Data Sources ........................................................................................................ 46 5.2.3 Extreme Waves .............................................................................................................. 48 5.2.4 Design Wave for Shoreline Structures ........................................................................... 50 6. Sediment Transport Analysis ............................................................................................ 52 6.1 Study Methodology ......................................................................................................... 52 6.1.1 Historic Shoreline Position Data .................................................................................... 53 6.1.2 Volumetric Shoreline Change Rates .............................................................................. 54 6.1.3 Sediment Bypass Data ................................................................................................... 54 Moffatt & Nichol i Broad Beach Restoration Project, Coastal Engineering Report 6.1.4 Wave Data ..................................................................................................................... 55 6.2 Sediment Transport within ZLC (Everts Coastal, 2009) ................................................... 55 6.2.1 Shoreline Changes ......................................................................................................... 55 6.2.2 Analysis of Historical Shoreline Positions within the ZLC .............................................. 62 6.2.3 Broad Beach Sediment Transport Rates ........................................................................ 65 6.2.4 Broad Beach and Zuma Beach Sediment Transport Interaction ................................... 69 6.2.5 Potential Causes of Sand Loss at Broad Beach .............................................................. 70 6.2.6 ZLC Sediment Transport Analysis Summary .................................................................. 72 6.3 Analysis of Sediment Transport Within Broader MMLC ................................................. 73 6.3.1 Shoreline Changes ......................................................................................................... 76 6.3.2 Sediment Volume Changes ............................................................................................ 78 6.3.3 Causes of Beach Change ................................................................................................ 80 6.3.4 Past Beach Performance Summary ............................................................................... 87 6.3.5 Beach Change Causes Summary .................................................................................... 87 6.4 Discussion of Variability in Shoreline Change Rates ....................................................... 88 7. Engineering Analysis of Baseline “No Project” Conditions ................................................. 90 7.1 Seasonal Changes in Beach Width .................................................................................. 90 7.1.1 Historic Beach Profiles ................................................................................................... 90 7.1.2 Fugro West, Inc. Beach Profile Surveys (2004-2005)..................................................... 93 7.1.3 Coastal Frontiers Beach Profile Surveys (2009-2013) ................................................... 94 7.2 Sand Loss Estimates from CFC Profile Surveys (2009 – 2013) ........................................ 99 7.3 Long-Term Beach Profile Changes Due to SLR .............................................................. 101 7.4 Numerical Modeling of Storm-Related Erosion & Runup ............................................. 102 7.4.1 X-BEACH Model Overview ........................................................................................... 103 7.4.2 CoSMoS Overview ....................................................................................................... 103 7.4.3 XBeach Model Development ....................................................................................... 104 7.4.4 XBeach Model Validation ............................................................................................ 109 7.4.5 Modeled 100-Year Storm Event Erosion ..................................................................... 110 7.5 Wave Uprush Limits – Baseline “No Project” Conditions ............................................. 114 7.6 Wave Uprush Impacts to Existing Development ........................................................... 121 8. Description of Proposed Project ...................................................................................... 124 8.1 Project Objectives.......................................................................................................... 124 8.2 Summary of Project Elements ....................................................................................... 124
Recommended publications
  • Doggin' America's Beaches

    Doggin' America's Beaches

    Doggin’ America’s Beaches A Traveler’s Guide To Dog-Friendly Beaches - (and those that aren’t) Doug Gelbert illustrations by Andrew Chesworth Cruden Bay Books There is always something for an active dog to look forward to at the beach... DOGGIN’ AMERICA’S BEACHES Copyright 2007 by Cruden Bay Books All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in writing from the Publisher. Cruden Bay Books PO Box 467 Montchanin, DE 19710 www.hikewithyourdog.com International Standard Book Number 978-0-9797074-4-5 “Dogs are our link to paradise...to sit with a dog on a hillside on a glorious afternoon is to be back in Eden, where doing nothing was not boring - it was peace.” - Milan Kundera Ahead On The Trail Your Dog On The Atlantic Ocean Beaches 7 Your Dog On The Gulf Of Mexico Beaches 6 Your Dog On The Pacific Ocean Beaches 7 Your Dog On The Great Lakes Beaches 0 Also... Tips For Taking Your Dog To The Beach 6 Doggin’ The Chesapeake Bay 4 Introduction It is hard to imagine any place a dog is happier than at a beach. Whether running around on the sand, jumping in the water or just lying in the sun, every dog deserves a day at the beach. But all too often dog owners stopping at a sandy stretch of beach are met with signs designed to make hearts - human and canine alike - droop: NO DOGS ON BEACH.
  • Rare Artifact Found on San Clemente Island Mass Communication Specialist 2Nd Class Shawnte Bryan July 16, 2013 (U.S

    Rare Artifact Found on San Clemente Island Mass Communication Specialist 2Nd Class Shawnte Bryan July 16, 2013 (U.S

    Santa Cruz Archaeological Society Newsletter Rare Artifact Found on San Clemente Island Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Shawnte Bryan July 16, 2013 (U.S. Navy Story Number: NNS130716-29) The Navy discovered a significant prehistoric artifact 90 miles west of San Diego on San Clemente Island (SCI) located mid-island at a newly discovered archeological site. A boat effigy made of submarine volcano lava was spotted at the surface of the site during an archeology survey. The boat effigy represents a type of boat used by the California Indians who occupied the California Channels and adjacent southern California mainland at the time of the Spanish "discovery" in the AD 1500s. Dr. Andy Yatsko, Senior Archaeologist and Region Southwest Archaeologist for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest in San Diego, who has over 40 years experience in prehistoric and historic archaeology finds the boat effigy to be an uncommon find. "Boat effigies like the one found are exceedingly rare in the archaeological record, with this being my first one recovered during my 30 year tenure with SCI," said Dr. Yatsko [image courtesy U.S. Navy]. "Finding artifacts on the surface of archaeological sites at the island is not unusual, but a rare one like this is always exciting to come across." The effigy was created from submarine volcano lava. This lava differs from the lava that flows on the mainland because the vesicles are smaller, making it more brittle and more difficult to handle. “The vesicle volcanic material used is hard and brittle but somehow they were able to craft a fine little carving out of it to represent an important part of their culture," said Yatsko.
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Ancient Plant Use and the Importance of Geophytes Among the Island Chumash of Santa Cruz

    UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Ancient Plant Use and the Importance of Geophytes Among the Island Chumash of Santa Cruz

    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Ancient Plant Use and the Importance of Geophytes among the Island Chumash of Santa Cruz Island, California A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Kristina Marie Gill Committee in charge: Professor Michael A. Glassow, Chair Professor Michael A. Jochim Professor Amber M. VanDerwarker Professor Lynn H. Gamble September 2015 The dissertation of Kristina Marie Gill is approved. __________________________________________ Michael A. Jochim __________________________________________ Amber M. VanDerwarker __________________________________________ Lynn H. Gamble __________________________________________ Michael A. Glassow, Committee Chair July 2015 Ancient Plant Use and the Importance of Geophytes among the Island Chumash of Santa Cruz Island, California Copyright © 2015 By Kristina Marie Gill iii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my Family, Mike Glassow, and the Chumash People. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to many people who have provided guidance, encouragement, and support in my career as an archaeologist, and especially through my undergraduate and graduate studies. For those of whom I am unable to personally thank here, know that I deeply appreciate your support. First and foremost, I want to thank my chair Michael Glassow for his patience, enthusiasm, and encouragement during all aspects of this daunting project. I am also truly grateful to have had the opportunity to know, learn from, and work with my other committee members, Mike Jochim, Amber VanDerwarker, and Lynn Gamble. I cherish my various field experiences with them all on the Channel Islands and especially in southern Germany with Mike Jochim, whose worldly perspective I value deeply. I also thank Terry Jones, who provided me many undergraduate opportunities in California archaeology and encouraged me to attend a field school on San Clemente Island with Mark Raab and Andy Yatsko, an experience that left me captivated with the islands and their history.
  • Assigned Deferred Area Map 2

    Assigned Deferred Area Map 2

    Senate District 28 - LIEU Deferred Areas d C n a 7 Ve a n r 2 t n ura e v B o Moorpark 134 li g ST O 159 Colorado a ST Sherman Oaks Studio City DeferCred Places: ol Gllendalle V ora 134 e do ST r 710 d ST d Bevu erly Glen 0 Universal City n g 1 a o r Mulh Mulh d F 1 olland oll B nd Dr and an i Mulholla Dr l g l Beverly Hills u o e lh r Mu 101 York o a N ¤£ i n c z Brentwood h o l i o y Fe l s n o s L 2 a ST C R C i a v (Hollywood Hills) 0 e r n 5 y 7 rs e y e 1 id t r B o § ¨ e a ¦ e ood n Hollyw t e C n v w R S e Paciyfic Palisaodes e d t k p l unse d Hollywood u 405 S n r M r o a e 4 ly s R s 3 C e L s ¦¨§ G t r iv e e le v Palor s Verdes Estates t Topanga il s S n m i d n S u e e i o d p West Hollywood 110 West Hollywood m t Melrose a u t ST e e l s SPark La2 Brea r v 6 n F e Bel Air u d S Beverly 2 16 a Sun x 170 ST s a ST e f t r i g Rancrinho Palos Verdes a 3rd p 27 F ST Beverrlly Hiilllls S Va W 6th St lley Wilshire RT olling Hills Brentwood H e e e v m 10 a A 6 p th Westwood t Whitworth Dr le x ¨§ h ¦ e t v a A f Rolling Hills Estates A r e v i s a e 10 un n a 1 S a F st t n 8 ¨§ Pico ¦ n t o o S h s a M t Santa Catalina Island ic r e avez p r V Cesar E Ch t e e 7 4 m B n t t e Pacific Palisades y b i h h s 2 l ce 6 o a n O th B r L n u R u to o n t San Clemente Island S o dy g n 1 M n i r ST 10 l r a 60 e n l t a A ST ta 2 n § s ¨ Sante a Monica o ¦ a n ti 5 7 o a F 2 E M 20 N a ¨§ Rodeo ¦ th 187 t ST n t S a n West Hollywood o S o t l o n i m 7 a r r 8 a 1 t 710 e M n V B e Westwood an ¨§ d ¦ er C in Santta Moniica 87 Culver
  • The People of Quinquina: San Clemente Island's Original

    The People of Quinquina: San Clemente Island's Original

    The People of Quinquina: San Clemente Island's Original Inhabitants as Described in .Ethnohistoric Documents by John R. Johnson, M.A. Prepared for: Natural Resources Office Naval Air Station, North Island San Diego, CA 92135 Submitted by: Anthropology Department Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 2559 Puesta del Sol Santa Barbara, CA 93105 February, 1988 The People of Quinquina: San Clemente Island's Original Inhabitants as Described in Ethnohistoric Documents John R. Johnson Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History February, 1988 Introduetion Not much has been published regarding the indigenous population of San Clemente Island. This primarily ls due to the paucity of surviving documents per- taining to the early years of the island's history following European contact. After a brief review of early European descriptions of San Clemente Island and its inhabi- tants, this report will focus on a virtually untapped source of information regarding San Clemente Island's Native American population: the mission records from the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Using the mission register data, some inferences may be made regarding social interaction between the Gabrielino islanders and the mainland, and the history of the acculturation of these people into European society may be reconstructed. Finally, the potential for tracing descendants of San Clemente islanders into the twentieth century will be considered. Early European De1eription1 of San Clemente bland and It1 Inhabitant• The first historic mention of San Clemente Island may be found in the 1543 summary of Cabrlllo's voyage prepared after the expedition's return to the port of Navidad on the west coast of Mexico.
  • Pacific Coast SNPL 2012 Breeding Survey with WA OR CA

    Pacific Coast SNPL 2012 Breeding Survey with WA OR CA

    2012 Summer Window Survey for Snowy Plovers on U.S. Pacific Coast with 2005-2011 Results for Comparison. Note: blanks indicate no survey was conducted. Total Adults 2012 Adult Breakdown REGION SITE OWNER 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 male fem. sex? Grays Harbor Copalis Spit State Parks 00000 00 00 0 Conner Creek State Parks 00000 00 00 0 Damon Point/Oyhut S. Parks, D. Nat R. F & W 500000 00 00 0 County Total 500000 00 00 0 Pacific Midway Beach Private, State Parks 23 25 22 12 16 18 22 11 65 0 Graveyard Shoalwater Indian Tribe 10 0 0 2 11 0 Leadbetter Point NWR USFWS, State Parks 9 42282926201215 10 4 1 South Long Beach Private 00000 County Total 32 67 50 42 42 38 34 28 17 10 1 Washington Total 37 67 50 42 42 38 34 28 17 10 1 Clatsop Fort Stevens State Park (Clatsop Spit) ACOE, OPRD 0 0 0 0 1 00 1 Necanicum Spit OPRD 0000 0 01 00 1 County Total 000000 02 00 2 Tillamook Nehalem Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 Bayocean Spit ACOE 00000 00 00 0 Netarts Spit OPRD 000000 00 00 0 Sand Lake Spit (S) USFS 000000 00 00 0 Nestucca Spit OPRD 0000 0 0 00 0 County Total 000000 00 00 0 Lane Baker Beach/Sutton Creek USFS 0200 1 00 00 0 Sutton Cr./Siuslaw River N Jetty USFS 0 0 0 0 00 0 Siuslaw River S Jetty to Siltcoos USFS 4 40 0 Siltcoos Spits N & S USFS 11 18 16 11 17 18 18 22 11 10 1 County Total 11 20 16 11 17 19 18 26 15 10 1 Douglas Siltcoos-Tahkenitch (Dunes Overlook) USFS 9 2 19 7 6 19 39 42 22 20 0 Tahkenitch Spit N & S USFS 515035132716 11 0 Umpqua River S Jetty to Tenmile Spit USFS 0 11 10 12 57 0 County Total 14 3 24 7 20 24 62 81 43 38 0 Coos Tenmile Spits USFS 13 15 27 24 24 36 13 16 88 0 Coos Bay N Spit BLM, ACOE 27 27 26 30 41 38 39 52 35 17 0 Whiskey Run to Coquille River OPRD 0000 00 00 0 Bandon State Park to New River OPRD, Private, BLM 22 12 15 8 14 40 16 14 95 0 County Total 62 54 68 62 79 114 68 82 52 30 0 Curry New River to Floras Lake BLM, Private, County 13 14 17 25 24 1 20 15 96 0 Blacklock Point to Sixes River (C.
  • Wind Power Plant Evaluation Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, San Clemente Island, California

    Wind Power Plant Evaluation Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, San Clemente Island, California

    December 2000 • NREL/SR-500-27527 Wind Power Plant Evaluation Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, San Clemente Island, California Period of Performance 24 September 1999—15 December 2000 T.L. Olsen and P.J. Gulman Tim Olsen Consulting Denver, Colorado E. McKenna National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 NREL is a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute ••• Battelle ••• Bechtel Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 December 2000 • NREL/SR-500-27527 Wind Power Plant Evaluation Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, San Clemente Island, California Period of Performance 24 September 1999—15 December 2000 T.L. Olsen and P.J. Gulman Tim Olsen Consulting Denver, Colorado E. McKenna National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden, Colorado NREL Technical Monitor: Ed McKenna Prepared under U.S. Department of Energy Interagency Agreement No. IAG-98-1449 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 NREL is a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute ••• Battelle ••• Bechtel Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof.
  • Birds on San Clemente Island, As Part of Our Work Toward the Recovery of the Island’S Endangered Species

    Birds on San Clemente Island, As Part of Our Work Toward the Recovery of the Island’S Endangered Species

    WESTERN BIRDS Volume 36, Number 3, 2005 THE BIRDS OF SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND BRIAN L. SULLIVAN, PRBO Conservation Science, 4990 Shoreline Hwy., Stinson Beach, California 94970-9701 (current address: Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, 159 Sapsucker Woods Rd., Ithaca, New York 14850) ERIC L. KERSHNER, Institute for Wildlife Studies, 2515 Camino del Rio South, Suite 334, San Diego, California 92108 With contributing authors JONATHAN J. DUNN, ROBB S. A. KALER, SUELLEN LYNN, NICOLE M. MUNKWITZ, and JONATHAN H. PLISSNER ABSTRACT: From 1992 to 2004, we observed birds on San Clemente Island, as part of our work toward the recovery of the island’s endangered species. We increased the island’s bird list to 317 species, by recording many additional vagrants and seabirds. The list includes 20 regular extant breeding species, 6 species extirpated as breeders, 5 nonnative introduced species, and 9 sporadic or newly colonizing breeding species. For decades San Clemente Island had been ravaged by overgrazing, especially by goats, which were removed completely in 1993. Since then, the island’s vegetation has begun recovering, and the island’s avifauna will likely change again as a result. We document here the status of that avifauna during this transitional period of re- growth, between the island’s being largely denuded of vegetation and a more natural state. It is still too early to evaluate the effects of the vegetation’s still partial recovery on birds, but the beginnings of recovery may have enabled the recent colonization of small numbers of Grasshopper Sparrows and Lazuli Buntings. Sponsored by the U. S. Navy, efforts to restore the island’s endangered species continue—among birds these are the Loggerhead Shrike and Sage Sparrow.
  • Regional Parks Service Area Map City of Los Angeles, California Current Recommended Guideline of 8.0 Acres Per 1,000 Residents

    Regional Parks Service Area Map City of Los Angeles, California Current Recommended Guideline of 8.0 Acres Per 1,000 Residents

    Regional Parks Service Area Map City of Los Angeles, California Current Recommended Guideline of 8.0 Acres per 1,000 Residents ¦¨§14 THE CASCADES GOLF CLUB 1 WILSON CANYON PARK THE CASCADES GOLF CLUB 2 EL CARISO REGIONAL COUNTY PARK O'MELVENY PARK EL CARISO GOLF COURSE Recreation LIMEKILN CANYON PARK KNOLLWOOD COUNTY GOLF COURSE and Parks BROWNS CREEK PARK ALISO CANYON PARK Ventura Department 118 ¦¨§ ANGELES NATIONAL FOREST Needs Assessment SANTA SUSANA PASS STATE HISTORIC PARK HANSEN DAM QUARRY LAKE HANSEN DAM RECREATION AREA CHATSWORTH PARK, SOUTH HANSEN DAM GOLF COURSE DEUKMEJIAN WILDERNESS PARK North Valley APC CHATSWORTH RESERVOIR SITE ¦¨§210 LA TUNA CANYON PARK VERDUGO MOUNTAIN PARK BELL CANYON OPEN SPACE 1 BELL CANYON PARK EL ESCORPION PARK ¦¨§170 KNAPP RANCH PARK VALLEY PLAZA PARK BEILENSON (ANTHONY C.) PARK BALBOA SPORTS CENTER WOODLEY AVENUE PARK BALBOA GOLF COURSE South Valley APC ¦¨§101 ENCINO GOLF COURSE LOS ENCINOS STATE HISTORIC PARK NORTH HOLLYWOOD PARK GRIFFITH PARK: L.A. EQUESTRIAN CENTER VAN NUYS ‐ SHERMAN OAKS PARK ¦¨§134 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE HARDING GOLF COURSE STATE PARK LAND 10 WILSON GOLF COURSE 5 STATE PARK LAND 8 ¦¨§ WESTRIDGE CANYONBACK PARK 1 FOSSIL RIDGE PARK WILACRE PARK GRIFFITH PARK DIXIE CANYON PARKSTATE PARK LAND 7 SEPULVEDA PASS OPEN SPACE 2SEPULVEDA PASS OPEN SPACE 1 STATE PARK LAND 4 GRIFFITH PARK: BRONSON CANYON FRYMAN CANYON PARK ROOSEVELT GOLF COURSE BEVERLY GLEN PARK WESTRIDGE CANYONBACK PARK 2 STATE PARK LAND 1 RUNYON CANYON PARK ARROYO SECO PARK STATE PARK LAND 5 STATE PARK LAND 2 ELYSIAN VALLEY
  • 2011 Pacific Coast Breeding Window Survey

    2011 Pacific Coast Breeding Window Survey

    2011 Summer Window Survey for Snowy Plovers on U.S. Pacific Coast with 2005-2010 Results for Comparison. Note: blanks indicate no survey was conducted. Total Adults 2011 Adult Breakdown REGION SITE OWNER 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 male fem. sex? Date Primary Observer(s) Grays Harbor Copalis Spit State Parks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27-May Warren Michaelis Conner Creek State Parks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27-May Scott Harris Damon Point/Oyhut S. Parks, D. Nat R. F & W 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2-Jun Cyndie Sundstrom County Total 50 0 00 0 0 00 0 Pacific Midway Beach Private, State Parks 23 25 22 12 16 18 22 8 13 1 23-May Cyndie Sundstrom, Scott Harris, Warren Michaelis Graveyard Shoalwater Indian Tribe 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 18-May Cyndie Sundstrom, Scott Harris, Steve Spencer Leadbetter Point NWR USFWS, State Parks 9 42 28 29 26 20 12 5 6 1 24-May W. Ritchie, C. Sundstrom, S. Pearson, W. Michaelis, S. Harris, M. Fernandez South Long Beach Private 00000 County Total 32 67 50 42 42 38 34 13 19 2 Washington Total 37 67 50 42 42 38 34 13 19 2 Clatsop Fort Stevens State Park (Clatsop Spit) ACOE, OPRD 0 0 0 0 00 0 23-May Kathy Roberts, Andrea Barry Necanicum Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 27-May Dave Nuzum County Total 00 0 00 0 0 00 0 Tillamook Nehalem Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23-May Herman Biederbeck Bayocean Spit ACOE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27-May Charlie Bruce, Michelle Schuiteman Netarts Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-Jun Liz Kelly, Fran Recht Sand Lake Spit (S) USFS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27-May Jeff Everett Nestucca Spit OPRD 0 0 0 0 0 County Total 00 0 00 0 0 00
  • 3200 East Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Project

    3200 East Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Project

    3200 East Foothill Boulevard Mixed Use Project Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment prepared by City of Pasadena Planning & Community Development 175 North Garfield Pasadena, California 91109 prepared with the assistance of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 301 Los Angeles, California 90012 May 2018 Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Purpose of a Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment ............................................. 1 Project Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 Statutory Background ..................................................................................................................... 2 Organization of the SCEA ................................................................................................................ 2 Project Information/Project Description ................................................................................................ 5 1. Project Title ......................................................................................................................... 5 2. Lead Agency Name and Address ......................................................................................... 5 3. Contact Person and Phone Number ..................................................................................
  • Council Agenda Report

    Council Agenda Report

    Adjourned Meeting 09-29-20 Item 3.B.4. Council Agenda Report To: Mayor Pierson and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Yolanda Bundy, Environmental Sustainability Director Approved by: Reva Feldman, City Manager Date prepared: September 9, 2020 Meeting date: September 29, 2020 Subject: Response to the Los Angeles County Grand Jury’s Report Entitled “A Diet for Landfills: Cutting Down on Food Waste” RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to sign the City of Malibu’s response letter to the Los Angeles County Grand Jury’s report entitled “A Diet for Landfills: Cutting Down on Food Waste.” FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. WORK PLAN: This item was not included in the Adopted Work Plan for Fiscal year 2020-2021. This is part of normal staff operations. DISCUSSION: In the State of California, civil grand juries are authorized to “investigate and report upon the operations, accounts, and records of the officers, department, functions, and the method or system of performing the duties of any such city or joint powers agency and make such recommendations as it may deem proper and fit.” (Cal. Penal Code 925(a)). On July 31, 2020, the Los Angeles County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) issued the report entitled “A Diet for Landfills: Cutting Down on Food Waste” (Report). In the Report, the Grand Jury identified several opportunities for supportive public policies that can incentivize and create avenues to increase food waste recycling and organic waste diversion rates. At the conclusion of the Report, the Grand Jury requested a response from the City of Malibu (City) to Recommendations 1.1, 1.3, 1.8, and 1.14.