STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CUCAMONGA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES CALIFORNIA 1. ' As District Engineer, Los Angeles District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, I have reviewed and evaluated, in what I believe to be the public interest, the project Tor Cucamonga Creek, West Cucamonga Creek, and Deer Creek channel improvements, from the Sari Gabriel Mountains to Prado Reservoir, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, which is outlined in the project description section of this environmental statement. In evaluating this project, I have considered all project documents, comments by concerned agencies and individuals, and possible alternatives. 2. My staff has (a) compiled an environmental statement that covers the fundamental and basic environmental impacts; (b) computed the cost and economic impacts of the proposed project; (c) considered the project effects on the surrounding community; (d) considered alternatives; and (e) prepared engineering plans for the project. I have reviewed their findings and the comments of Federal, State, local agencies, and interested parties. \ 3. In my evaluation the following points were considered: a. ' Economic considerations. The proposed project will provide flood damage reduction for floods up to standard-project-fiood magnitude to developed areas consisting of valuable residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial property, important -r-utilities, arterial and interstate highways, an international airport, and transcontinental railroad lines serving the area. b. ‘ Engineering considerations. The project is designed to provide flood protection by providing debris basins and increased channel capacity. The channel is also designed to divert runoff into spreading basins for ground water recharge. c. ' Social well-being considerations. The well-being of the people in the project area will be improved because of flood protection that will reduce the possibility of loss of life, injury', disease, and inconvenience. Recreation facilities associated with the project will also benefit the social well-being of the people. d. 1 Environmental considerations. The proposed project will result in a decrease in wildlife habitat, as a result of urbanization of 1,468 acres. This urbanization is an indirect consequence of the project. There may be a long-term adverse effect on air quality in the local area of the proposed project, as an indirect effect of local population growth. ' 4.~ I recognize that achieving beneficial effects on flood, damage will involve some detriment effects on wildlife habitat, open space and esthetics. However, in the overall public interest, I find the project warranted. I find the desired purposes of the project can best be obtained by the recommended plan. I have studied alternatives, including no action and those concerning flood plain management, and I have found them less satisfactory than the recommended plan. I am satisfied the project is feasible. Further, I am satisfied, that based on reduction in flood damages, the present project formulation is adequate and the project is in the general public interest. V '• H. McK. ROPER, JR. COL, CE District Engineer . 13 August 1973 ■ 9 STATEMENT OF FINDINGS - Cucamonga Creek and Tributaries, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California I have reviewed the statement and concur with the findings of the District Engineer. GEORGES. FINK Brig/dier General, U. S. Army Division Engineer I concur in the preceding statement of findings. FOR THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS: /. W. MORRIS /Major General, USA DATE Director of Civil Works FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT CUCAMONGA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA PREPARED 3Y UlS. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA AUGUST 1973 STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CUCAMONGA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES CALIFORNIA 1. As District Engineer, Los Angeles District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, I have reviewed and evaluated, in what I believe to be the public interest, the project for Cucamonga Creek, West Cucamonga Creek, and Deer Creek channel improvements, from the San Gabriel Mountains to Prado Reservoir, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, which is outlined in the project description section of this environmental statement. In evaluating this project, I have considered all project documents, comments by concerned agencies and individuals, and possible alternatives. 2. My staff has (a) compiled an environmental statement that covers the fundamental and basic environmental impacts; (b) computed the cost and economic impacts of the proposed project; (c) considered the project effects on the surrounding community; (d) considered alternatives; and (e) prepared engineering plans for the project. I have reviewed their findings and the comments of Federal, State, local agencies, and interested parties. v 3. In my evaluation the following points were considered: a. Economic considerations. The proposed project will provide flood damage reduction for floods up to standard-project-flood magnitude to developed areas consisting of valuable residential, commercial, agricultural, and industrial property, important utilities, arterial and interstate highways, an international airport, and transcontinental railroad lines serving the area. b. Engineering considerations. The project is designed to provide flood protection by providing debris basins and increased channel capacity. The channel is also designed to divert runoff into spreading basins for ground water recharge. c. Social well-being considerations. The well-being of the people in the project area will be improved because of flood protection that will reduce the possibility of loss of life, injury, disease, and inconvenience. Recreation facilities associated with the project will also benefit the social well-being of the people. d. Environmental considerations. The proposed project will result in a decrease in wildlife habitat, as a result of urbanization of 1,468 acres. This urbanization is an indirect consequence of the project. There may be a long-term adverse effect on air quality in the local area of the proposed project, as an indirect effect of local population growth. 4.- I recognize that achieving beneficial effects on flood damage will involve some detriment effects on wildlife habitat, open space and esthetics. However, in the overall public interest, I find the project warranted. I find the desired purposes of the project can best be obtained by the recommended plan. I have studied alternatives, including no action and those concerning flood plain management, and I have found them less satisfactory than the recommended plan. I am satisfied the project is feasible. Further, I am satisfied, that based on reduction in flood damages, the present project formulation is adequate and the project is in the general public interest. H. McK. ROPER, JR. COL, CE District Engineer SUMMARY CUCAMONGA CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES SAN BERNARDINO AND RIVERSIDE COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA ( ) Draft (X) Final Environmental Statement RESPONSIBLE OFFICE: U.S. Army Engineer District, Los Angeles, California 1. NAME OF ACTION: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Local interests in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, desire protection from flood damage in the Cucamonga Creek drainage area. The channel improvements will provide flood protection to transcontinen­ tal transportation facilities, utilities, and to a rapidly-urbanizing area. The recommended plan will minimize a potential hazard to health and safety and will provide flood protection necessary for the orderly development of the flood plain. Water recharge mitigation, esthetic treatment and recreational measures are added benefits. 3a. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The most beneficial impacts include: (1) a high degree of flood protection; (2) the minimization of flood hazards to health and safety; (3) allowance for future development of riding and hiking trails along the valley floor; and (4) increased water recharge. U 3b. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS. The more important adverse impacts include: (l)the probable loss of wildlife habitat to developments accelerated by flood protection; (2) the loss of the earth bottom channels; (3) the commitment of about 193 acres of land to the project; anu (4) long-term effects on air quality of the area resulting from urbanization of 1,468 acres. 4. ALTERNATIVES. The alternatives considered to the recommended plan are: (a) no Federal project; (b) concrete-lined rectangular channels along Cucamonga and Deer Creeks with and without an Alta Loma Canyon debris basin and outlet channel; (c) the proposed plan without the West Cucamonga Creek channel and with the Alta Loma Canyon debris basin and outlet channel; (d) detention basins in place of debris basins; (e) earth-bottom channels; (0 combinations of structural and nonstructural measures; and (g) nonstructural measures. 5. COMMENTS RECEIVED ’ - FEDERAL Department of Agriculture Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of Interior Department of Transportation Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Environmental Protection Agency STATE State Clearinghouse OTHER AGENCIES Santa Ana Watershed Planning Agency Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Southern California Gas Company Chino Basin Municipal Water District PRIVATE GROUPS Citizens Advisory Committee 6. Draft statement to CEO May 23, 1973 Final statement to CEQ