FINAL Environmental Impact Report California State Clearinghouse No. 2005011071 Castaic Lake Water Agency Honby Pipeline Project June 2005 FINAL Environmental Impact Report California State Clearinghouse No. 2005011071 Castaic Lake Water Agency Honby Pipeline Project Prepared for Castaic Lake Water Agency 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road Santa Clarita, California 91350 Prepared by June 2005 525 Anacapa Street, Santa Barbara, California 93101 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 Other CEQA Actions Related to this EIR..................................................................................... 2 2.0 Public Comments............................................................................................................................. 3 List of Commenting Individuals and Agencies .......................................................................... 3 3.0 Responses to Comments............................................................................................................... 41 4.0 Changes to the DEIR Text ............................................................................................................ 52 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................i CLWA – Honby Pipeline i Final EIR 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2 The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) 3 Honby Pipeline Project contains two volumes. The first volume of the FEIR, incorporated 4 herein by reference, comprises the Draft EIR (DEIR), published in April 2005. The second 5 volume of the FEIR (this volume) contains public comments received on the DEIR during the 6 45-day public review period (April 26 to June 10, 2005), responses to the public comments, and 7 changes to the text of the DEIR. 8 BOTH VOLUMES OF THE EIR MUST BE READ TOGETHER. THE SECOND VOLUME 9 DOES NOT REPEAT THE INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THE FIRST VOLUME. 10 This second volume contains the following information: 11 Section 1—Introduction 12 Section 2—Public Comments contains the list of agencies and individuals that submitted 13 comment letters on the DEIR and copies of those letters. Each substantive comment is 14 numbered. 15 Section 3—Responses to Comments contains a matrix including each of the public comments 16 received and individual responses to those comments. The comments in the matrix were 17 excerpted directly from the comment letters. 18 Section 4—Changes to the Text of the EIR presents text changes since publication of the DEIR. 19 Copies of the second volume of the EIR and a notice of availability identifying the date of the 20 public hearing at which the CLWA Board of Directors is scheduled to consider certification of 21 the EIR were mailed to those who provided comments on the DEIR. 22 Copies of both volumes of the FEIR are available for review at CLWA or can be purchased by 23 contacting Michael Thompson, Senior Engineer, 27234 Bouquet Canyon Road, Santa Clarita, 24 California 93150-2173 or by calling (661) 297-1600. Both volumes of the FEIR also are available 25 for public review at the following local public libraries: 26 Los Angeles County Public Library, Newhall 27 22704 W. 9th Street 28 Newhall, CA 91321 29 30 Los Angeles County Public Library, Canyon Country Jo Anne Darcy Library 31 18601 Soledad Canyon Road 32 Canyon Country, CA 91351 33 34 Los Angeles County Public Library, Valencia 35 23743 West Valencia Boulevard 36 Valencia, CA 91355 CLWA – Honby Pipeline 1 Final EIR 1 OTHER CEQA ACTIONS RELATED TO THIS EIR 2 As required by Public Resources Code (PRC), Division 13, section 21092.5, CLWA will provide a 3 proposed written response to public agencies that commented on the DEIR at least 10 days 4 prior to certifying the FEIR. Those proposed responses are contained in Section 3 of this second 5 volume of the FEIR. 6 If the CLWA Board of Directors acts to certify the FEIR and approves the Project, a Notice of 7 Determination will be filed with Los Angeles County, Ventura County, and the California State 8 Clearinghouse. CLWA – Honby Pipeline 2 Final EIR 1 2.0 PUBLIC COMMENTS 2 LIST OF COMMENTING INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES 3 The following individuals and agencies submitted comment letters on the DEIR during the 45- 4 day review period. The comment letters are presented on the following pages. 5 Ted M. Doniguian, Private Mini Storage Ltd. (PMS), letter dated April 29, 2005 6 David Edward, Ojai Oil Company (OOC), letter dated May 3, 2005 7 C. F. Raysbrook, Regional Manager, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), letter 8 dated May 23, 2005 9 Antal Szijj, Acting Chief, North Coast Section, Regulatory Branch, U.S. Army Corps of 10 Engineers, Los Angeles District (COE), letter dated June 1, 2005 11 Brian Wallace, Associate Regional Planner, Southern California Association of Governments 12 (SCAG), letter dated June 7, 2005 13 Bryan Moscardini, Park Project Coordinator, Los Angeles County Department of Parks and 14 Recreation (LADPR), June 9, 2005 CLWA – Honby Pipeline 3 Final EIR 1 3.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS 2 This section includes excerpted comments from the letters included in section 2 and 3 corresponding responses in tabular format. The acronyms used to define the commenters are as 4 indicated in section 2. CLWA – Honby Pipeline 41 Final EIR Matrix of Comments on DEIR and Responses CLWA – Honby Pipeline Project Comments Received From: Name Company Date Ted M. Doniguian Private Mini Storage Ltd. (PMS) 4/29/2005 David Edward Ojai Oil Company (OOC) 5/3/2005 C. F. Raysbrook California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 5/23/2005 Antal Szijj Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (COE) 6/1/2005 Brian Wallace Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 6/7/2005 Bryan Moscardini Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation (LADPR) 6/9/2005 Comments and Responses Matrix Comment Commenter Comment Response No. Private Mini PMS-1 We would again like to point out to you, that the construction of As described in the Executive Summary of the DEIR, Storage the last 1,300 ft. of the pipeline (600 ft. along Ruether Avenue under “Areas of Known Controversy,” the project and 700 ft. along Santa Clara Street), would have a devastating description was clarified to address concerns expressed impact on our business, and also on most of our neighboring by businesses in response to the Notice of Preparation businesses. There are many entrances and a considerable regarding the routing of the pipeline in local streets. amount of traffic entering and leaving these businesses along Specific concerns involved loss of access to businesses these two sections of Ruether Ave. and Santa Clara St. during pipeline construction; impacts from noise, dust, and traffic congestion; and conflicts with a proposed It has also been brought to our attention that a new sewer sewer line in Ruether Avenue. In response to the pipeline extension will very shortly be installed in the 600 ft. concerns regarding loss of access to businesses, the section along Ruether Ave. that your are planning to put the project description was clarified to indicate that local water pipeline in. businesses would be contacted prior to construction to determine their hours of operation and that Instead of turning North and constructing the pipeline 600 ft. up construction would occur outside their normal business Ruether Ave., please consider continuing construction of the hours. The project description was further clarified to pipeline 700 ft. in an Easterly direction on Soledad St. to indicate that the pipeline trench would be covered each Furnivall Ave. At Furnival Ave. you would complete day at the end of the work day and streets would be construction of the pipeline in a 600 ft. Northerly direction to the patched with temporary asphalt or steel plates, thus Sand Canyon Pump Station. allowing continued vehicular access to businesses. Given the implementation of these measures, pipeline The main entrance to our facility is located along a relatively construction would not restrict access to businesses CLWA – Honby Pipeline 42 Final EIR Comment Commenter Comment Response No. busy stretch of Santa Clara Street. The entrances to many of our during normal business hours, and impacts from dust, neighboring businesses are also located on both sides of Santa and traffic congestion would be avoided or would be Clara Street, and also on both sides of Ruether Avenue. minimal. We provide only seldom used emergency entrances along In response to concerns regarding conflicts with the Furnival Avenue and Soledad Street. Only one neighboring proposed sewer line, the dimensions of existing and business has an entrance along the 600 Ft. Furnival. Ave. and 700 proposed utilities in Ruether Avenue were reviewed, Ft. Soledad St. stretches, of the pipeline route change we are and it was determined that there would be adequate suggesting. Please let us know if you have questions. space to accommodate both the proposed pipeline and the proposed sewer line without any service restrictions. The results of this analysis are shown in Appendix A of the DEIR. In response to the Notice of Preparation, a number of commenters suggested routing the proposed pipeline north along Furnivall Avenue to Santa Clara Street, but this was determined to be technically infeasible because it would require reconfiguring the already constructed