CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

South Subregion Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) Program (EIR 584) CEQA

The NCCP/HCP will focus on the formulation of a long-term conservation land management strategy fo coastal sage scrub (CSS) and other major habitat types indentified for inclusion and manangement within the strudy area. The NCCP/HCP will identify specific actions necessary to protect habitat fo the coastal California gnatcatcher and other identifed species. The NCCP/HCP also would provide the basis for authorizing future incidental taking pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act.

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

South Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan / Master Streambed Alteration Agreement / Habitat Conservation Plan CEQA

The proposed project includes: (1) the Conservation Strategy detailed in the Natural Community Conservation Plan, the Master Streambed Alteration Agreement, and the Habitat Conservation Plan; including establishment of a Habitat Reserve, a Habitat Reserve Management and Monitoring Program and funding for same; and (2) State and Federal regulatory authorizations and provisions for the Covered Activities identified for the County of Orange, Rancho Mission Viejo, Santa Margarita Water District.

Notice of Completion

Review Period Start

7/14/2006

Review Period End

8/28/2006

Local Action

Other Action Other Action: Natural Community

Project Issues

Aesthetic/Visual Agricultural Land Air Quality Archaeologic-Historic Drainage/Absorption Economics/Jobs Flood Plain/Flooding Geologic/Seismic Minerals Noise Population/Housing Balance Recreation/Parks Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading Traffic/Circulation Vegetation Water Quality Water Supply Wetland/Riparian Wildlife Growth Inducing Land Use Cumulative Effects

Reviewing Agencies

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, South Coast Region 5 California Department of Parks and Recreation California Highway Patrol California Native American Heritage Commission California Public Utilities Commission California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region 9 Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics Central Valley Flood Protection Board Department of Water Resources Resources Agency State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights California Department of Conservation California Department of Transportation, District 12

The draft environmental documents on the HCP were released for public review and comment on July 21, 2006. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP July 2006

Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP July 2006 at page 1-13 states:

1.2.3 Participating Landowners

Landowners within the Subregion, including both private and public agency owners, would be affected by the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. In recognition of the potential impact of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP process on their properties, the following Participating Landowners contributed funding and services to support completion of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP, Joint EIR/EIS, and IA:

• • • the Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD)
    • Rancho Mission Viejo (RMV); and
    • the County of Orange.

The largest undeveloped private ownership in the Southern Subregion is the RMV property. The undeveloped and non-entitled portion of RMV includes about 22,815 acres, more than 75 percent of the remaining undeveloped private land in the Subregion (Figure 7-M).

With respect to the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), the NCCP/MSAA/HCP EIR/EIS will analyze identified South Orange County Transportation Improvement Implementation Plan (SOCTIIP) alignment alternatives to identify impacts to both Habitat Reserve design alternatives and management of habitat supporting selected “planning species” (see Chapter 4) and Covered Species reviewed in Chapter 13 and the Part II Joint EIR/EIS. Any authorization of Take of listed species will be addressed through the Section 7 consultation for SOCTIIP rather than through the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. Future TCA regulatory coverage for unlisted species is not provided by this NCCP/MSAA/HCP but would occur to the extent that:

1. 1. 1. any final selected and approved alignment for the selected SOCTIIP alternative is determined to be consistent with the Southern NCCP/MSAA/HCP Conservation Strategy, including creation and implementation of the Habitat Reserve and HRMP;
      2. the TCA provides for mitigation measures required by the Wildlife Agencies for unlisted species coverage; and
      3. any required amendments to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and/or IA are processed and approved.

TCA application No. 06C-064 for a Clean Water Act section 401 Water Quality Certification (Water Quality Certification) was deemed complete.

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 

MOU FWS-OR-812.8 re: Bilogical Opinion 1-6-07-F-812.8 Issuance of an Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit (TEE144113-0, TE144140-0, and TE144105-0) for the Southern Orange Natural Community Conservation Plan/Master Steambed Alteraton Agreement/Habitat Conservation Plan, Orange County, California

The basis for regulatory coverage for the Permittees’ Covered Activities is set forth and reviewed in the draft and final EIR/EIS. The Covered Activities are provided for through the implementation of the County of Orange Southern Subregion Conservation Strategy, including the preferred alternative Habitat Reserve design, Alternative B-12. The Conservation Strategy selected to implement the HCP and provide the basis for incidental take authorization for Covered Activities consists largely of the following four elements:

1. Creation of a Permanent Habitat Reserve:

It may take as long as 15-20 years or more to assemble all of the lands designated for inclusion in the permanent Habitat Reserve assuming development of all planning areas. Within approximately the first 12 months following execution of the IA, approximately 16,282 ac (6,589 ha) will be available as part of the permanent Habitat Reserve. These lands will consist of the three existing County regional and wilderness parks, totaling about 11,950 ac (4,836 ha) and the previously set aside RMV easements and conservancies (e.g., Ladera Open Space, Upper Chiquita Canyon Conservancy, Donna O’Neill Land Conservancy) and CDFG open space in Arroyo Trabuco that total about 4,332 ac (1,753 ha). The remaining lands designated for inclusion in the approved Habitat Reserve will be dedicated in phases over time as development proceeds

We have defined the action area as the Southern Subregion (131,634 ac (53,270 ha)), excluding the Cleveland National Forest (40,001 ac (16,188 ha)) and other areas in the Subregion that are identified as Not a Part (5,557 acres (2,249 ha)). The Other/Not a Part areas include the cities of Lake Forest and Dana Point, portions of San Juan Capistrano, an “Existing Use” Girl Scout Camp, Ladera Ranch, Las Flores, Tesoro High School, the Foothill Transportation CorridorNorth, the Nichols Institute bounded by Caspers Wilderness Park, the sewage treatment facility in Chiquita Canyon and other areas that are in the Southern Subregion but are Not a Part of the Plan. After excluding the Cleveland National Forest and Not a Part areas, the action area contains 86,076 ac (34,834 ha) (Table 4). The action area is subdivided into 4 geographic Subareas: Subarea 1 (44,633 ac (18,062 ha)), Subarea 2 (3,872 ac (1,567 ha)), Subarea 3 (4,026 ac (1,629 ha)), and Subarea 4 (33,545 ac (13,575 ha)).

2. Development of a Habitat Reserve Management Program (HRMP)

The HRMP is designed to provide for permanent management and monitoring of biological resources and hydrogeomorphic processes that provide habitat for the 32 proposed Covered Species and to maintain net habitat value over the long term within the subregion.

The five individual components of the HRMP administrative structure are: (1) the County NCCP/MSAA/HCP Administrative Coordinator (“Administrator”); (2) the Rancho Mission Viejo Land Conservancy; (3) the RMV Reserve Manager (“Reserve Manager”); (4) the Independent Reserve Land Easement Holder; and, (5) the Science Panel.

3. Regulatory Coverage for Covered Activities and Designated Covered Species and CDFG Jurisdictional Areas

The HCP involves three Participating Landowners: the County, RMV and SMWD. The MOU specifies the covered activities for each landowner.

4. Implementation Agreement (IA) and Funding Provision:

U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 8

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service

Biological Opinion 

Document: FSW-OR-812.8

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-6-07-F-812.8 Issuance of an Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit (TEE144113-0, TE144140-0, and TE144105-0) for the Southern Orange Natural Community Conservation Plan/Master Steambed Alteraton Agreement/Habitat Conservation Plan, Orange County, California

Permit 75 years

Applicants: The County of Orange, Rancho Mission Viejo, and the Santa Margarita Water District

A Habbit Conservation Plan (HCP) must accompany an application for an Incidental Take Permit: The HCP is a "subregional" plan under the State of Califoria's Natural Conservation Planning ("NCCP") Act of 2001. 

Conclusion of Biological Opinion:

Since withdrawal of RMV from the HCP will result in the termination of SMWD’s permit, incidental take of the 32 Covered Species is not authorized for SMWD independent of participation by RMV in the HCP. In addition, if RMV withdraws from the HCP or invokes the severability clause in the Implementation Agreement, the take levels are authorized to the County of Orange only for arroyo toad, coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bells’ vireo, yellow warbler, yellow-breasted chat, and northern red-diamond rattlesnake. Lastly, each Permittee is not authorized to impact more of each habitat type than is shown in Table 6, and in accordance with the overall acreage impacts shown in Table 5.

February 12, 2007 letter from U.S. EPA Region IX Re: Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) (CEQ # 60543)

"EPA has concerns regarding how the alternatives analysis was conducted and the long-term IP for RMV. Specifically, EPA is concerned that the EIS does not sufficiently substantiate the selection of Alternative B-12 as the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) and that more stringent requirements should be placed on the IP for RMV to ensure protection of the Aquatic Resource Conservation Areas and to support low impact development." 

Attached in our detailed comments are specific recommendations for improvements to the SAMP and the IP that can be incorporated into the Record of Decision (ROD) for this project. In brief, the ROD should: 1) support the selection of B12 as the LEDPA based on objective economic criteria, 2) include protocols to ensure that the Rancho Mission Viejo Land Conservancy is established as soon as possible, and 3) incorporate low-impact development mitigation measures within the IP to lessen impacts to Waters of the U.S."

On February 6, 2008, the San Diego Water Board Executive Officer DENIED Water Quality Certification Application No. 06C-064 without prejudice and expressed concerns that the project, as proposed, would not meet water quality standards. Water quality standards include the water quality objectives and beneficial uses contained in the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9) (Basin Plan) and the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) Resolution 68- 16, Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters in California (Antidegradation Policy). The project application did not address outstanding concerns expressed by the San Diego Water Board regarding the proposed habitat mitigation plan, anti-degradation, the runoff management plan, and water quality monitoring.  California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022  page 1

On February 6, 2008, the SOCTIIP toll road extension was DENIED by the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) due to its recreational impacts to San Onofre State Park and San Mateo Creek, water quality effects, wetland impacts, and impacts to other environmental resources. The Coastal Commission staff report states,

"The project is fundamentally inconsistent with the spirit and letter of numerous resource protection policies of the Coastal Act.

" [The project would not] be compatible with the continuance of the ESHA [environmentally sensitive habitat area]. The ESHA includes habitat for the Pacific pocket mouse, tidewater goby, arroyo toad, coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, and southern California coast steelhead."

" [T]he toll road's impacts would be permanent, irreversible, and , for the most part, unmitigable. No other alternative alignment poses the threat of unmitigable and irrevocable impacts of such magnitude."

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022  page 2 and State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 3

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Master Streambed Alteration Agreement for the Ranch Plan, Ranch Mission Viejo CEQA

The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is issuing a Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) to the project applicant, Rancho Mission Viejo Community Development. The MSAA covers activities with the potential for significant impacts to habitat subject to CDFG jurisdiction under Fish and Game Coe 1602 in the San Juan Creek and western San Mateo Creek watersheds, including: 1) The San Juan Creek system and thirty-seven unnamed tributaries, the Verdugo Creek system and nine unnamed tributaries, the Gobernadora Creek system and six unnamed tributaries, the Trampas Creek System and two unnamed tributaries; and 2) the San Mateo Creek system, the Cristianitos Creek system and seventeen unnamed tributaries, the Gabino Creek system and thirty unnamed tributaries, the Blind Creek system and eighteen unnamed tributaries. The MSAA "Covered Activities" include: a) Development in Planning Areas ("PA") 2,3,4,5, and PA 10, b) Orchards, c) Roads, d) Bikeways and Trails, e) Sewer and water facilities, f) Drainage, Flood Control, and Water Quality Facilities, g) Maintenance of existing RMV Planning Area Facilities, h) Habitat Restoration, i) Geotechnical Investigations within Planning Areas, j) Relocation of RMV Headquarters. (SAA #1600-2006-0438-R5).

The SR 241 Toll Road is not a COVERED ACTIVITY under the MSAA.

Notice of Determination

Approving Agency

DFG

Approving Agency Role

Responsible Agency

Approved On

9/29/2008

Final Environmental Document Available at

County of Orange 300 N. Flower, Room 321 Santa Ana, CA 92702

Determinations

(1) The project will have a significant impact on the environment

No

(2a) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

(2b) A Mitigated or a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(2c) An other document type was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(3) Mitigated measures were made a condition of the approval of the project

Yes

(4) A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project

N/A

(5) A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project

No

(6) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

After these rejections, By letter dated February 9, 2009, the TCA formally withdrew Application No. 06C-064.

The withdrawl was confirmed on February 19, 2009. 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022  page 2 

The TCA then authorized its staff to pursue a shorter extension of State Route 241. This shorter extension, the Tesoro Extension, would extend State Route 241 from its existing southern terminus at Oso Parkway approximately 5.5 miles south to Cow Camp Road. Cow Camp Road is immediately north of San Juan Creek in Orange County, so the Tesoro Extension would avoid the Coastal Zone and all waters subject to federal jurisdiction, thereby obviating the need for a consistency determination from the California Coastal Commission or a Clean Water Act section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 2

(SOCTIIP) was required to comply with: South Orange County Hydromodification Management Plan

Per the large river exemption defined in the South Orange County HMP, the San Juan Creek and San Mateo Creek Outfall to the Pacific Ocean is drainage exempt from the hydromodification control requirements. South Orange County Hydromodification Management Plan page 4-13

Addendum to the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Project (SOCTIIP) Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report SCH # 2001061046 TESORO EXTENSION PROJECT

Lead Agency: Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency

The Preferred Alternative is a refined alignment based on the A7C-FEC-M Initial corridor alternative. The A7C-FEC-M-Initial Alternative alignment evaluated in the Draft EIS was refined in order to minimize environmental impacts and address engineering requirements. The refined A7C-FEC-M Alternative was approved as the Preferred Alternative by F/ETCA Board at the time the Final SEIR was certified in February 2006. More specifically, the refinements included the following elements to further reduce environmental impacts:

• Reduction in footprint – the cross-section was reduced
• Consistency with RMV Ranch Plan to maximize open space 
• Consistency with Southern Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)
• Minimize impacts on wetlands and other natural resources
• Minimize utility relocation impacts • Inclusion of additional wildlife crossings
• Minimization of access road impacts
• Minimization of impacts of extended detention basins to cultural resources

The Tesoro Extension Project alignment is substantially the same as alignments previously evaluated between Oso Parkway and Ortega Highway. Refinements to the Project as well as previous refinements to the SOCTIIP Preferred Alternative and the SOCTIIP A7C-FEC-M which resulted in the SOCTIIP Preferred Alternative, have all been incremental refinements with minor adjustments made to reduce or avoid impacts or to respond to landowner requests. For example, the Preferred Alignment in the Final SEIR incorporated some minor revisions compared to the SOCTIIP A7C-FEC-M alignment. Between Planning Area 2N and Planning Area 2S the alignment was shifted slightly to the northeast for reasons as described on pages 2-3 and 2-4 of the Final SEIR. The only other notable difference between these alternatives was the elimination of two full diamond interchanges: one at K-Street and another further south at G-Street. The Preferred Alignment in the FEIR has only one interchange at Cow Camp Road near the southern boundary of PA-2. 

The Preferred Alternative design between Oso Parkway and Cow Camp Road was evaluated to determine if any further refinements were appropriate for the Project based on current conditions and input from the landowner and developer of the Ranch Plan. The difference between the Tesoro Extension and the Preferred Alignment in the Final SEIR relates to the conversion of the folded diamond interchange at Cow Camp Road to a simpler T-intersection configuration. The Tesoro Extension also shifted the alignment in PA-2 to the west to help minimize impacts to surface waters. In addition, near the northern end of PA-2, a slight shift of the alignment to the east was done to avoid an existing reservoir used for ranch operations.

The reduction in the total disturbance area limits for the Preferred Alternative was approximately 9 ha (23 ac) compared with the A7C-FEC-M-Initial Alternative, and 15 ha (37 ac) compared with the A7CFECM-Ultimate Alternative. The ultimate buildout assumption for the Preferred Alternative was a maximum of six lanes. Figure 3, SOCTIIP and Tesoro Comparison, shows the Preferred Alternative and the A7C-FEC-M Alternative for comparison.

The F/ETCA was the lead agency for the SEIR, which was subject to CEQA requirements and an approval process separate from the finalization of the EIS. The TCA Board of Directors acted in February 2006 to approve the Preferred Alternative and certify the Final SEIR.

In February 2008, the F/ETCA appeared before the California Coastal Commission (CCC) requesting a Consistency Determination for SOCTIIP, as required through our 404 Permit with the USACOE, but was denied. The CCC denied the F/ETCA request citing other alternatives were reasonable and available to the agency. The F/ETCA appealed this decision to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, which upheld the CCC’s previous decision. However, the ruling issued in December 2008 states:

"Based on the foregoing, the record establishes that the Project is not consistent with the objectives of the [Coastal Zone Management Act] because a reasonable alternative is available – namely, the [Central Corridor-Avenida La Pata Variation – CC-ALPV] alternative. The [CCC] stated that the CC-ALPV alternative can be implemented in a manner consistent with California’s Program, and has described the alternative with sufficient specificity. The CC-ALPV alternative is available because it satisfies the Project’s primary or essential purpose and presents no financial, legal, or technical barrier to implementation. The CC-ALPV alternative is reasonable because it costs less than [SOCTIIP] and presents a net advantage to coastal uses and resources."

"This decision in no way prevents TCA from adopting other alternatives determined by the [CCC] to be consistent with California’s Program. In addition, the parties are free to agree to other alternatives, including alternatives not yet identified, or modifications to the Project that are acceptable to the parties."

Subsequent to the February 2008 CCC decision, the F/ETCA received its Streambed Alteration Agreement for SOCTIIP from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), as well as a no jeopardy finding in the biological opinion issued by the USFWS as a result of the Section 7 consultation under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

In early 2009, the F/ETCA launched an outreach program and met with nearly 300 stakeholders over a two year period. The stakeholders included meetings with supporters and opponents of the Project, as well as local and government agencies with the goal of obtaining feedback on the need for the Project. The outreach process concluded that traffic was a major concern for those in South Orange County, especially with the approved development of The Ranch Plan moving forward and the severity of existing congestion on Interstate 5 and local arterials.

In October 2011, the F/ETCA Board of Directors authorized staff to proceed with completing updated environmental studies, engineering plans and develop a financing strategy for the Project. Additionally, in August 2012, the F/ETCA Board of Directors authorized staff to execute and obtain all necessary environmental permits and approvals for the Tesoro Extension Project.

The Tesoro Extension Project does not preclude a connection to any of the 19 toll road alternatives evaluated in the SOCTIIP Technical Reports, as illustrated by the various connections shown on Figure 4, Future Alignment Alternatives. These connections are preliminary layouts and have not been advanced to a concept level of engineering design; however, there is no indication that any of the connections cannot be successfully engineered and all can be constructed with standard cut and fill grading.

TCA was building the Tesoro Extension in segments to avoid NEPA.

Proposed Project As noted above, the Tesoro Extension Project is proposed to extend the existing SR 241 from Oso Parkway to Cow Camp Road. The alignment is proposed between Cañada Chiquita to the west and Cañada Gobernadora to the east, both of which are tributary to San Juan Creek to the south of the Project site; refer to Figure 2. The Project generally follows the same alignment as SOCTIIP Preferred Alternative/A7C-FEC-M up to Cow Camp Road, with minor alterations in the design to avoid impacts to existing uses and/or surface waters; refer to Figure 3. 

The Project, when added to the existing SR 241 facility, would provide for regional transportation circulation. F/ETCA and RMV have been coordinating on the Tesoro Extension Project as it relates to RMV’s approved development. As noted on Figure 3, these minor design alterations include a potential maximum shift of 500 feet for a distance of approximately 2,500 linear feet to the east to avoid impacts to an existing irrigation reservoir currently utilized by RMV for ranching activities. In addition, a slight shift of approximately 800 feet to the west for a distance of approximately 4,500 linear feet near the southerly terminus of the Project would occur in order to avoid impacts to an earthen streambed. These design alterations result in Project avoidance of discharge of dredged or fill material to all Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. The first segment avoids all NEPA Review and California Coastal Commission review.

The Project is located within the RMV, where the approved RMV Ranch Plan proposes up to 14,000 dwelling units, as well as retail, office, and recreational uses, within a development area of approximately 7,694 acres. Figure 5, Proposed Project illustrates the limits of the proposed Project and RMV Planning Areas. The remaining 15,121 acres would be retained as open space with infrastructure and other uses as provided for in the following documents: 

1. The Southern NCCP/MSAA/HCP Joint Programmatic EIR/EIS on the HCP: The Southern Subregion NCCP/Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA)/HCP was approved by the USFWS on January 11, 2006. It established a 32,818-acre permanent wildlife habitat reserve that includes 16,536 acres of the RMV. The HCP is intended to protect numerous sensitive animal species and vegetation communities, while allowing for buildout of the Ranch Plan on other portions of the RMV
2. San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed SAMP and EIS on the SAMP (the USACOE was the lead agency under NEPA for the EIS). The San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed SAMP is a watershed-level planning document that provides for reasonable economic development (e.g., buildout of the RMV) within the watershed, while also protecting and managing sensitive aquatic biological and hydrological resources. The SAMP established permitting procedures, aquatic resources preservation, aquatic resources restoration, and aquatic resources management

Full build-out is proposed to occur over a period of approximately 20 to 25 years. Planning Area (PA) 1, near the Antonio Parkway/Ortega Highway intersection, just west/southwest of the Project site, is currently under construction. As shown on Figures 2 and 3, the Project would traverse PAs 2 North (N) and 2 South (S), residential areas of this County-approved development. The EIR prepared for the RMV Ranch Plan was certified by the County in 2004. Area plans are being developed and reviewed for PA 2S. Related plans such as design studies and applications for applicable permits are being processed.

The Ranch Plan approvals require a certain level of transportation infrastructure to support the development. The Ranch Plan evaluated and incorporated both the Tesoro Extension Project (as part of the SR 241 extension) and, in the alternative, a local arterial (F Street). F Street would follow a similar alignment as the Tesoro Extension Project; however, it would not provide for regional connectivity and free flow of traffic. In addition, F Street is not required for RMV development until somewhere between the 7,501st and 10,000th Equivalent Dwelling Unit. Therefore, construction of F Street as Ranch Plan infrastructure is not projected to occur until several years in the future. Although F Street is not presently planned for implementation by RMV, and would not provide the same regional benefits as the Tesoro Extension, the footprint of F Street has been analyzed in several environmental documents, which provides additional background to the physical effects of a road in that location. These effects have been previously identified and evaluated in the Ranch Plan EIR, the Southern Subregion HCP EIR/EIS, and the SAMP EIS, in addition to the SOCTIIP Final SEIR.

On February 15, 2013, the Petitioner’s staff finalized a CEQA addendum to the 2006 FSEIR for the Tesoro Extension (Addendum) and submitted it to San Diego Water Board. The Addendum stated that the Petitioner proposed to construct the Tesoro Extension, and identified the Tesoro Extension as the project for the purposes of CEQA analysis. The Addendum concluded that, since the Tesoro Extension generally followed the same alignment as the first 5.5 miles of the sixteen mile extension preferred alternative that had been analyzed in the 2006 FSEIR, the Tesoro Extension would not result in any significant environmental effects that were not already discussed in the 2006 FSEIR. The Addendum also concluded that there was no need to prepare a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR, and that the 2006 FSEIR, coupled with the Addendum, satisfied the Petitioner’s CEQA obligations for the Tesoro Extension. 

Due to the last-minute submission of the Addendum by the TCA and the extensive written comments that related to the San Diego Water Board’s CEQA obligations if it were to approve the Tentative Order, the San Diego Water Board decided that its staff needed additional time to evaluate and respond to CEQA-related issues. The San Diego Water Board stated that it would proceed with the scheduled March 13, 2013 public hearing, but that it would not take any final action on the Tentative Order on that date. State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 4

On March 13, 2013, the San Diego Water Board opened a public hearing to consider adoption of the Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007, Waste Discharge Requirements for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project Orange County (Tentative Order). The San Diego Water Board received testimony and accepted written comments but did not take final action on the Tentative Order. 

At the March 13, 2013, public hearing, the San Diego Water Board directed TCA, the Save San Onofre Coalition (Coalition), and any interested persons to submit written responses to five supplemental California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) questions. The comment period was open from March 15, 2013 to March 29, 2013.  

TCA and the Coalition responded to the supplemental questions. TCA stated that the Tesoro Extension is a modification of SOCTIIP, and it prepared an Addendum to the SOCTIIP FSEIR to document changes to the toll road extension.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 3 and State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 4

On April 18, 2013, the Board of Directors of TCA approved an Addendum to the SOCTIIP FSEIR for the Tesoro Extension. TCA determined that an Addendum and · FSEIR would serve as its environmental documentation for the Tesoro Extension Project.  California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 3 State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 5

The San Diego Water Board received an Addendum to the FSEIR (Addendum) filed by TCA on April 23, 2013 and considered the contents of the Addendum along with the FSEIR prior to reaching its decision. 

The Addendum notes that the Tesoro Extension as analyzed in the FSEIR and Addendum does not preclude a connection to any of the 19 toll road alternatives evaluated in the SOCTIIP technical reports.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 3

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Addendum to Final EIR 584 and Final EIR 589 for the Canada Gobernadora Multipurpose Basin Project, Canada Gobernadora Multipurpose Basin Project CEQA

CDFW is intending to execute a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code (#1600-2006-0438-0006-R5) to the project applicant, Rancho Mission Viejo. The project proposes to permanently impact 8.41 acres of streambed, including 4, 26 acres of vegetated riparian habitat (southern willow scrub, mulefat scrub, southern sycamore riparian woodland, and alkali meadow) 3.75 acres of oak woodland, and 0.40 acres unvegetated streambed. Impacts are due to new structures and related infrastructures for Subareas 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4.

Notice of Determination

Approving Agency

CDFW

Approving Agency Role

Responsible Agency

Approved On

5/2/2013

Final Environmental Document Available at

County of Orange 300 North Flower St., Santa Ana, CA 92703

Determinations

(1) The project will have a significant impact on the environment

Yes

(2a) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

(2b) A Mitigated or a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(2c) An other document type was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(3) Mitigated measures were made a condition of the approval of the project

Yes

(4) A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project

N/A

(5) A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project

No

(6) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

0n May 30, 2013 Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007, Waste Discharge Requirements for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project, Orange County was released for public review and comment. Written comments were limited to:

1) revisions to the Tentative Order since the March 13, 2013 public hearing; and

2) comments pertaining to CEQA. The comment period was open from May 30, 2013 to June 7, 2013. The San Diego Water Board received written comments from TCA, the Coalition and other interested parties. 

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 4

June 2013 - March 2015

Through a series of decisions made between, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”) denied TCA’s application for waste discharge requirements under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code §§ 13000 et seq.) for the Tesoro Extension (“WDR Denial”).

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Planning Area 2: Zone A and Zone 1 Reservoirs CEQA

The Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD) is proposing the construction of three water reservoirs, two for domestic water use and one for non-domestic (recycled) use. The improvements would require the grading of a building pad, grading and construction of access roads, and pipeline and power facilities and granting of additional access easement(s) to SMWD.

Notice of Determination

Approving Agency

Santa Margarita Water District

Approving Agency Role

Lead Agency

Approved On

7/27/2011

Final Environmental Document Available at

SMWD Offices 26111 Antonio Parkway Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688

Determinations

(1) The project will have a significant impact on the environment

No

(2a) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

(2b) A Mitigated or a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(2c) An other document type was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(3) Mitigated measures were made a condition of the approval of the project

Yes

(4) A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project

N/A

(5) A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project

No

(6) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

At a June 19, 2013 hearing a majority of San Diego Water Board members DENIED  adoption of Revised Tentative Order R9-2013-0007. The San Diego Water Board noted that it may issue waste discharge requirements for large projects in phases; however, phased projects should not segment a larger project into pieces to avoid or limit the Board's review of the project's impacts on water quality and beneficial uses.

The San Diego Water Board conducted the second hearing on June 19, 2013. At the hearing, the public was asked to limit their comments to the revisions to the Tentative Order and CEQA-related issues. San Diego Water Board staff explained that the revisions to were designed to address water quality concerns related to the Tesoro Extension that had been expressed by Board Members as well as the prior hearing. The revisions addressed sediment supply and hydromodification; the timing of the habitat mitigation monitoring plan and the runoff management plan.  The San Diego Water Board’s counsel described the Petitioner’s recent approval of the conceptual design for the Tesoro Extension and the Addendum, explained that, as a CEQA responsible agency, the San Diego Water Board was bound by the Petitioner’s 2006 EIR and the Addendum. Counsel explained that the Revised Tentative Order did not contain any specific findings about environmental impacts related to potential future segments of the toll road. 

The Tenative Order was DENIED because CEQA documents, particularly the description of the Tesoro Extension as the CEQA project in the Addendum, were inadequate.

State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 dated September 23, 2014 page 6 and California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 5

Order: The matter was remanded to the San Diego Water Board to provide the factual and legal basis for its decision. The Order did not require the San Diego Water Board to conduct any further hearings regarding the issuance of WDRs for the Tesoro Extension.

State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 dated September 23, 2014 page 15

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Middle Chiquita Recycled Water Facilities (Project); Water Recycling Funding Program (WRFP) No. 3925-030 CEQA

The District is proposing the construction of four reservoirs, two for domestic water use and two for non-domestic (recycled) use, to store treated the recycled water from the Chiquita Water Reclamation Plant. The reservoirs would be circular steel welded tanks. The tanks would have a heights of 32 feet, would be 106 feet in diameter, and would be constructed with aboveground welded steel plates. The site drainage from each reservoir would be collected in on site catch basins and conveyed through storm drain piping or channels to existing natural drainage courses. Pipe outlets would be protected with rock riprap energy dissipaters to reduce any impacts to the drainage channels.

Notice of Determination

Approving Agency

State Water Board

Approving Agency Role

Responsible Agency

Approved On

8/6/2013

Final Environmental Document Available at

N/A

Determinations

(1) The project will have a significant impact on the environment

No

(2a) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

(2b) A Mitigated or a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(2c) An other document type was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

No

(3) Mitigated measures were made a condition of the approval of the project

Yes

(4) A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project

N/A

(5) A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this project

No

(6) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA

Yes

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Sub-Notification of Master Streamed Alteration Agreement No. 1600-2006-0438-0007-R5 for the Gobernadora Multipurpose Basin Project

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Temporary Water Right Permit for Santa Margarita Water District Multipurpose Basin Project

CEQA DOCUMENT SCH Number 2006061140 NCCP/MSAA/HCP 

Temporary Water Right Permit for Santa Margarita Water District Multipurpose Basin Project

On July 19, 2013, TCA submitted a timely petition to the State Water Board for: Reconsideration of Denial of Waste Discharge Requirements Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007 for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project. (SWRCB/OCC Fi le A-2259.) California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 page 5

Petition for Review and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Petition for Reconsideration of Denial of Waste Discharge Requirements Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007 for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project. (SWRCB/OCC Fi le A-2259.)

County of Orange/San Diego Region (WQMP) "F" Street from Oso Parkway to Cow Camp Road (Received vi Public Records Request.

Page 9: Property Ownership/Management-  "RMV Community Development, LLC along with other RMV entities own the land on which the “F” Street project site is located. Parts of Parcel 125-096-69 and the entire parcel 125-098-82 are owned by the Capistrano Unified School DIstrict since 1995 and 1997. These parcels have been placed into the right of way for modified "F" Street (actually SR 241 with a 10% shift in alinment closer to Tesoro High School and the Habitat Reserve) by entities that did not own them and had no right to encumber them. 

Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP NCCP Plan Summary  https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP/Plans/OCTA

The Agencies should simultaneously review permits granted under the Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP NCCP.

1971

Added April 3, 2021 

The California State Park at San Onofre State Beach Lines in the Sand p. 1129

"Encompassing 3,000 acres of scenic canyons and over three miles of sandy coastline near the border between Orange County and San Diego County, San Onofre State Beach is one of the most popular and beloved parks in California’s state park system. Created in 1971 by President Richard Nixon with the support of Governor Ronald Reagan, San Onofre is the fourth most visited state park in California, receiving over 2.5 million visitors a year. At the time of San Onofre’s dedication, State Parks Director William Penn Mott Jr. announced that “this beach and the backup land represents [sic] the finest beach in one contiguous stretch in the United States.”.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors initiate the Southeast Orange County Circulation Plan (SEOCCS) for the purpose of developing an information base to revise the Mater Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) in Southeast Orange County. The study was completed in 1975 . The SEOCCS identified four growth or land use alternatives, two included the Foothill Transportation Corridor (FTC) running parallel to the I-5 south of SR55 Eastern Transportation Corridor SEIS Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page 1-1

EPA has established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for six "criteria" air pollutants - which are widespread common pollutants known to be harmful to human health:

1. Carbon monoxide pollution
2. Lead air pollution
3. Nitrogen oxide pollution
4. Ozone pollution
5. Particulate matter pollution
6. Sulfur dioxide pollution

Under the Federal Clean Air Act, a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) must certify that the transportation projects it approves are in conformity with SIP. In the South Coast Air Basin SCAG is the MPO. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page IV-116

Final SOCTIIP EIR/SEIR 123 was certified by the County of Orange in 1981 and resulted in a conceptual alignment for a transportation corridor facility being placed on the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH).

The MPAH shows the alignment of the existing FTC-N and a conceptual alignment for the FTC-S. State Routes 73, 133, 241 and 261 were roughly sketched onto the county's road plans.  

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT: RMV STARTS CREATING NEW PARCELS

Certificate of Compliance CC 82-2 Instrument No: 198200313505, subdivided ranch land owned by Rancho Mission Viejo and established 9 new parcels of land shown on tract map 82-107.

Owner of Record: Rancho Mission Viejo
28811 Ortega Highway PO Box 9
San Juan Capistrano CA 92675
Phone: (714) 831-6450

The Orange County Environmental Management Agency (OCEMA) began Phase I (November 1983 to February 1986) of the ETC study commenced involving a 125 mile study area between I-5 and SR 91.Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1 and page II-15

ETC Master Environmental Baseline Study (Volume III) completed by the County. This Volume documented existing environmental conditions in the ETC study area south of I-5 where ETC facilities would transition to the arterial network.Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1 and page II-2 and page XIII-I

Report: Eastern Transportation Corridor Matrix Evaluation Process Phase I Scoping Report (May 1985)

ETC Master Environmental Baseline Study (Volume IV) completed by the County. Volume IV documented existing environmental conditions in the expanded ETC study area that ultimately became known as the East Leg. The County Board of Supervisors subsequently adopted a reduced number of alternatives to be addressed in more detail in Phase II of the ETC study in a Tier I Route Location Study EIR.Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1 and page II-2

Report County of Orange, Eastern Transportation Corridor Matrix Evaluation Process Supplemental Alternatives Analysis (January 1986)

The Orange County Environmental Management Agency (OCEMA) completed Phase I of the ETC study Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1 and page II-15

Phase I environmental baseline studies:

County of Orange Master Environmental Baseline Study (MEBS) Volume I (September 1984)

County of Orange Master Environmental Baseline Study (MEBS) Volume II: Appendices (September 1984)

County of Orange Master Environmental Baseline Study (MEBS) Volume III: Transition Area (May 1985)

County of Orange Master Environmental Baseline Study (MEBS) Volume IV: Supplemental Alternatives Analysis (January 1986)

In September 1986 Caltrans submitted its evaluation of the regional transportation plans to the CTC. With its evaluation was the recommendation that the existing guidelines be revised to reflect changes that have occurred since the previous guidelines were adopted,

Foothill Transportation Corridor Cristianitos Segment Alternative Alignment Analysis (County of Orange, September 1986) Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS page 11-16

Senate Bill 1413 passed authorizing Toll Roads Authorizing Toll Roads in Orange County

Chapter 1402 - Senate Bill 1413 (Seymour)

This act authorizes the construction of toll roads in Orange County. The purpose of the toll roads is to provide a funding mechanism for highways and to help reduce congestion. Prior to charging tolls on roads, a local resolution must be enacted declaring that funding is not available from any federal, state, or other source. Toll roads constructed pursuant to this act must be designed and constructed to the standards and specifications of the Department of Transportation, and be constructed parallel to other public highways and roads. The toll road may be transferred to the state, subject to an agreement on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director of the Department of Transportation. This act will have only a minor cost impact on the Department of Transportation to review and approve plans for any toll roads in Orange County.

https://lao.ca.gov/reports/1987/11_87_major_financial_legislation_enacted_in_1987.pdf page 19

The California Legislature establishes the framework for the state highway system by describing each route by statute, specifically, in the California Streets and Highways Code. Chapter 1363 (now codified at California Streets and Highways Code section 541) defines SR 241 as:

"Route 241 is from Route 5 south of San Clemente to Route 91 in the City of Anaheim". 

Route 241 was legislated to bypass San Clemente and connect to Route 5 in San Diego County. Neither TCA, the County of Orange or Caltrans has the authority to alter a route from it's statutory alignment. Without an amendment to California Streets and Highways Code section 541, SR 241 cannot connect to Route 5 in San Clemente, the connection must be south of San Clemente in San Diego County.

The Orange County Board of Supervisors certified EIR 451 as being complete, adequate and in full compliance with CEQA (Resolution No. 88-827) ETC Route Location Study EIR No. 451 certified by the County Board of Supervisors adopted a preferred set of route alternatives for further study in the subsequent EIR and Federal Environmental process.  TCA and the County of Orange adopted network alternative E1 as the proposed project to be carried forward for more detailed study in the current EIS. This included links 8, 12, 21A, 64, 64A, 72A and 83B Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 Table 1-1 and page 11-20 and page VI-17 and page XIII-2 and page XXX-2 and page XIII-2.

Foothill/Eastern TCA  Public Hearing and meetings on Phase II Route Location Study. Foothill/Easter Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) adopts alternatives to be carried forward into Phase III of the ETC study for construction level analysis in a Tier EIR/EIS accordingly.  Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page XIII-2

From 1989 to 1991, the TCA prepared TCA EIR No. 3, for the selection of a locally-preferred alignment for the Foothill-South.

TCA EIR No. 3 was circulated for a 60-day review period which included public hearings.

A Supplemental EIR ("SEIR") was then circulated containing changes to the "C" Alignment through San Onofre State Beach.  The "Modified C Alignment," which was selected as the locally-preferred alternative by the TCA and is consistent with the codified route for the SR 241.

Following input from the United States Fish and Wildlife Services, the "Modified "C" Alignment was further modified and named the "CP Alignment." The CP Alignment went around San Clemente and connected to Route 5 south of the San Clemente city limits at Basilone Road.

1989 (AQMP) Air Quality Management Plan. In 1989, SCAG, AQMD and CARB approved a new AQMP for the Basin. The AQMP has not beenn approved by the EPA as part of the SIP, but it is the most current regional air quality plan approved at the state level. Following disapproval of the 1982 SIP and failure to meet the dealine for attainment of CO and O₂ National Ambient Air Quality Standards, EPA initiated a (FIP) Federal Implementation Plan in Coalition for Clean Air v Reilly (1988). Development of the FIP was superseded by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page IV-116

TCA certified final Supplemental EIR 423, which evaluated the northern portion of the FTC as a toll facility. The northern portion of the FTC ("Foothill-North"), was constructed in segments from 1995 to 1998 and begins at Oso Parkway near Rancho Santa Margarita and proceeds north where it terminates at SR-91 near the Santa Ana River in the City of Anaheim. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page III-41 

USFWS lists 19 species of plants native to California that are endangered or threatened. USFWS lists 37 species of animals native to California that are endangered or threatened. Supplemental Environmental   Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page IV-41 and page XIII-9 and Appendix I USFWS Species List

In March 1991, the (ACOE) Army Corps of Engineers was contacted concerning wetlands and biological reports sent to the ACOE earlier.  Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page IV-28 and page XIII-9

An EIR was certified by the F/ETC Board of Directors on October 10, 1991 for the southern segment from the extension of Oso Parkway to an intersection with I-5 in San Clemente. Two basic alignment alternatives were evaluated for this segment. The BX Alignment would intersect with I-5 in the vicinity of Avenida Pico in San Clemente while the C alignment would intersect I-5 in the vicinity of Basilone Road.The Board of dDistrictors selected the C alignment as the locally prefered altrenative. Construction on this segment is not expected to begin until after 1995. SR 241 will be operated as a toll facility until the construction bonds are retired. Supplemental Enviornmental Impact Statement for the Eastern Transportation Corridor EIS 2-1 page III-42 and IX-9

Petitioner’s Petition for Review of Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. R9-2013-0007 (SWRCB/OCC File A-2259), p. 4.

MOU Between the Caliifornia Department of Fish and Game and the US Fish and Wildlife Services for Coastal Sage Scrub Natural Community Conservation Planning in Southern California. 

The Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) NCCP is the first such planning effort to be initiated under the Act. It was undertaken as a pilot project to develop a process for accelerated conservation planning at a regional scale which may serve as a model for other NCCPs elsewhere in the state. 

Because the CSS NCCP program is a pilot program for possible application elsewhere in California, it is sponsored jointly by the California Resources Agency and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Where these process guidelines refer to participation in agreements or other action by CDFG, it should be understood that for this program, this means both the Resources Agency and CDFG. Both state agencies are proceeding in cooperation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (See 12/4/91 MOU between CDFG and USFWS).

County Enrollment in NCCP Program 

City of Anaheim, 1992
City of Dana Point, 1992
City of Huntington Beach, 1992
City of Laguna Beach, 1992
City of Mission Viejo, 1994
City of Newport Beach, 1992
City of Orange, 1992
City of San Clemente, 1992
City of Tustin, 1992
City of Yorba Linda, 1995
Transportation Corridor Agencies, 1992
El Toro Marine Corps Air Station (Cooperator)
Arvida/JMBI (Talega), 1992
Arvida/JMBII (Coto de Caza), 1992
Chevron USA, 1992
Irvine Company, 1992
Pacific Coast Homes, 1992
Roberts Ranch, 1992
Santa Margarita Company, 1992

Planning Agreement signed by County, Service, CDFG and participating landowners. Two subregions created: Coastal/Central (Irvine Ranch) and Southern (Rancho Mission Viejo) 

Originally, participating landowners (those that provided funding or in kind services) included the County, SMWD, RMV, Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), Marblehead Coastal, and Talega Ranch.

The NCCP/HCP was prepared in accordance with the terms of a May 7, 1993, Planning Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed by CDFG, USFWS, the County of Orange and "participating landowners".

Local Government jurisdiction that contain lands included in the reserve are the:

• City of Anaheim
• City of Coasta Mesa
• City of Irvine
• City of Laguna Beach
• City of Newport Beach
• City of Orange
• City of San Juan Capistrano and
• Unincorporated Orange County

"Participating Landowners" include:

• Southern California Edison
• Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
• Irvine Ranch Water District
• Transportation Corridor Agencies
• MH Sherman Company/Chandis Securities Company/Sherman Foundation
• The Irvine Company
• University of California- Irvine
• California Department of Parks and Recreation
• California Department of Fish and Game
• County of Orange

The Habbitat Reserve System is owned and operated by public agencies and administered by  a Non-profit Management Corporation consisting of representatives of individual reserve owners, the CDFG, CDF, USFWS and three "public" members appointed by the Board of Directors.

Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts 1 & 11: NCCP/HCP ES-6, Species Covered page ES 17 

CDFG in cooperation with the USFWS and based on extensive public review and comment during 1992 and 1993 published Process Guidelines that were intended to provide guidance concerning the required content of NCCPs and the steps that should be followed during preparation of subregional NCCPs.

The NCCP Conservation Guidelines (Appendix D) set forth three fundamental conservation planning principles that, in effect, provide the subregional and regional planning framework for the coastal sage scrub NCCP program. These principles involve the following:

• • Creation of a Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat Reserve.
  • Focus on Reserves Designed to Provide “Connectivity.”
  • Implement Adaptive Management Within Reserves

 Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-26, 1-28 and Appendix D

USFWS Special Rule and Section 10(a)(1)(B) Coastal California Gnatcather

On December 10, 1993, USFWS finalized the Special Rule for the coastal California gnatcatcher. The Special Rule stated:

“ . . . incidental take of the coastal California gnatcatcher will not be considered a violation of Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), if it results from activities conducted pursuant to the State of California’s Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991 (NCCP), and in accordance with a NCCP Plan for the protection of coastal sage scrub habitat, prepared consistent with the state’s NCCP Conservation and Processing Guidelines, provided that:

(i) The NCCP Plan has been prepared, approved and implemented pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code Sections 2800-2840; and

(ii) The USFWS has issued written concurrence that the NCCP plan meets the standards set forth in CFR 17.33(b)(2). The Service shall issue its concurrence pursuant to the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding dated December 3, 1991, between the California Department of Fish and Game and the Service regarding coastal sage scrub natural community conservation planning in southern California. (Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 236, December 10, 1993, emphasis added) 

The above excerpts from the Special Rule indicate that:

(1) the NCCP planning process can serve as a means of comprehensively addressing coastal sage scrub habitat conservation concerns at a regional and subregional scale;

(2) the standard of review of such plans by the USFWS will be consistency with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines and compliance with the requirements of Section 10(a)(1)(B) of FESA (the Habitat Conservation Plan provisions of FESA); and

(3) the 1991 USFWS/CDFG MOU is to serve as the guiding document for USFWS involvement in the review and approval of NCCP plans. Thus, the Special Rule provides the regulatory bridge for integrating the State’s NCCP program into the HCP/incidental take requirements of Section 10(a)(1)(B) of FESA.

The addition of the state MSAA to the NCCP as a component of the combined NCCP/MSAA/HCP does not affect the above discussion. Because the MSAA and NCCP definition of riparian habitat are essentially the same, the identification and mitigation of impacts to streambeds and related habitat meeting the riparian definition support both the regulatory and long-term management goals, objectives and requirements under FESA. Arguably, the addition of the state MSAA regulatory provisions to the original NCCP/HCP strengthens the ability of the County, participating landowners and Wildlife Agencies to implement the NCCP/MSAA/HCP in a manner that addresses the long-term conservation requirements of all three statutory programs.

Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-25

RMV DID NOT SIGN THE NCCP AGREEMENT FOR THE SOUTHERN REGION

A combination of the lengthy recession and a need by RMV to re-think its estate planning resulted in the Southern Subregion program going into hiatus, a pause that lasted until the middle of 1997. During this pause in the process, RMV and the County re-considered the overall scope of the NCCP/HCP process and decided to expand the overall planning process to address aquatic resources concurrent with upland resources through preparation of a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) under the direction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) under the direction of CDFG as companion pieces to the NCCP/HCP.

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT: RMV STARTS CREATING NEW PARCELS

Certificate of Compliance CC 95-01 Instrument No: 199500112516, further subdivided Parcel 7 of CC-82-2 and established 8 new parcels.

Owner of Record: San Juan Partnership No. 1
28811 Ortega Highway PO Box 9
San Juan Capistrano CA 92693
Anthony Moiso, General Partner
Richard J O'Neill, General Partner

The 241 Subdivides Parcel 3 and Parcel 4. Oso Parkway splits Parcel 1 from Parcel 3 and Parcel 2 from Parcel 4.

The NCCP/HCP, Joint EIR/EIS and Implementation Agreement were distributed under a single cover by the County of Orange to facilitate public review of the project, The Overall project documentation is presented in several parts:

• Introduction (PART 1) that provides planning and regulatory background information.
• NCCP/HCP (PART II) that contains the substance of the adopted subregional conservation strategy
• Joint EIR/EIS (PART 3) that evaluates environmental consequences of the alternatives
• Implementation Agreement (PART 4) that outlines specific enforceable measures and mechanisms that are required to effectively implement the NCCP/HCP
• a MAP Section, separately bound, containing all figures referenced in the texts of Parts I through IV; and
• appendices.

Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts 1 & 11: NCCP/HCP page ES-1

NCCP approved for Coastal/Central Subregion Implementation Agreement signed by 

• California Natural Resources Agency
• California Department of Fish and Game
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
• California Department of Parks and Recreation
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service
• County of Orange
• Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency
• San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency
• The Irvine Company
• Irvine Ranch Water District
• Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
• Southern California Edison
• The Orange County Fire Authority
• Santiago County Water District
• The Regents of the University of California
• Chandis Securities Company
• Sherman Foundation
• M.H. Sherman Company
• Orange County Flood Control District
• City of Irvine
• City of Tustin

Natural Community Conservation Plan for the Central/Coastal Orange County Subregion of the Coastal Sage Scrub Natural Community Conservation Program Implementation Agreement

California Department of Fish and Wildlife: NCCP Plan Summary- County of Orange (Central/Coastal) NCCP/HCP

In 1995-96, a combination of the lengthy recession and a need by RMV to re-think its estate planning resulted in the program going into hiatus, a pause that lasted until the middle of 1997. During this pause in the process, RMV and the County re-considered the overall scope of the NCCP/HCP process and decided to expand the overall planning process to address aquatic resources concurrent with upland resources through preparation of a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) under the direction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) under the direction of CDFG as companion pieces to the NCCP/HCP. Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.¹ 

It should be noted that in late 2004, the participating landowners decided to transfer the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP while leaving the SAMP as a stand-alone Federal document. The decision to make the MSAA a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP document meant that the County of Orange became the Lead agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for both the NCCP and the MSAA. The USACE continued to be the Lead agency under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the SAMP document.

Lead Agency for CEQA for NCCP/MSAA is the County of Orange

Lead Agency for SAAMP is the US Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 5

Southern Subregion Reserve Design Principles prepared by Science Advisors 

In 1997, The Nature Conservancy convened a team of “Science Advisors” to assist in restarting the NCCP /HCP process. The purpose of the Science Advisors’ effort was to provide program participants with recommended guidance on matters relating to the design of a subregional Habitat Reserve, principles for preparing and implementing an adaptive management program, and recommendations concerning future regulatory decisions by the USFWS and CDFG regarding Take authorizations for threatened and endangered species and other species of interest. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-14

San Juan Partnership No. I sold two parcels of land to the Capistrano Unified School District to  build Chiquita Canyon High School, aka Tesoro High School. 

Instrument No: 19970143928 was a Grant Deed recorded on March 31, 1997

See also: Capistrano Unified School District Toll Road Facts 

Legal Description:

"That portion of Parcel 3 of Certificate of Compliance CC95-01 in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Orange, State of California recorded March 21, 1995 as Instrument No 95-0112516" 

Certificate of Compliance CC 95-01 originated from Certificate of Compliance CC-82-2.

The Capistrano Unified School District paid $4.85 million for a total of [75.1539 acres]

Parcel 125-096-69 Lot for Main Campus: [65.19 acres], plus

Parcel 125-096-82 Lot for Road and Utility Purpose: [4.8519 acres], plus

Parcel 125-096-82 Lot for Slope Drainage [5.112 acres]

Valuable Consideration:

On 5/13/1997 CUSD paid $2.6 million through Fund 13 which at that time was the State School Building Fund

On 5/21/1997 CUSD paid $2.25 million from CFD 90-1

Large portions of Parcel 125-096-69 and Parcel 125-096-82 are contained in the Habitat Reserve south of Oso Parkway and west of "Modified "F" Street". 

Parcel 125-096-69 Lot for the Main Campus is shown below:

Parcel 125-096-82 is two pieces:

Lot for Road and Utility Purpose: Parcel 125-096-82 [4.8519 acres]

Lot for Slope Drainage Parcel 125-096-82 [5.112 acres]

During this pause in the Southern Subregion process, RMV and the County re-considered the overall scope of the NCCP/HCP process and decided to expand the overall planning process to address aquatic resources concurrent with upland resources through preparation of a Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) under the direction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) under the direction of CDFG as companion pieces to the NCCP/HCP. Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.

Four Lead Agencies: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, The County of Orange, California Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures.

On May 14, 1998, a second public Scoping Meeting was held for the Southern Subregion NCCP planning process. After conducting the 1998 Scoping meeting the local participants (County and landowners) reviewed the submitted public comments and the recent regulatory experience of participating landowners in the Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP/HCP program to assess whether it was advisable to conduct the NCCP/HCP planning process without also initiating a watershed-level planning and permitting program capable of addressing impacts to aquatic resources subject to the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) (Section 404) and the state Fish and Game Code (Sections 1600-1603). It was determined that a future NCCP/HCP for the Southern Subregion should be prepared either concurrently or in close coordination with the preparation of a Special Area Management Plan and a Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAMP/MSAA) that would address the need to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate potential impacts to aquatic resources on a watershed level. 

After meeting with the state and federal agencies (CDFG, USFWS and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE]) that would be involved in preparing and coordinating the preparation and approval of the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA documents, the County and participating landowners began coordinating NCCP/HCP planning with preparation of a SAMP/MSAA that would cover those portions of both the San Juan Creek Watershed and San Mateo Creek Watershed located within the County of Orange. Coordinated planning was facilitated by the initiation of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change process for the 22,815-acre Rancho Mission Viejo property, the only large unplanned private ownership remaining within the Subregion.

 Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-14

Second scoping meeting held for Southern Subregion 

Accordingly, in 1998 when the four State/Federal agencies had agreed to a comprehensive planning approach, the planning process was re-initiated as a two-part program with the NCCP/HCP as one component addressing upland species/natural communities and the MSAA/SAMP as a concurrent component addressing aquatic species and communities.1

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures.

The AROE prepares a draft SAMP for the San Juan Creek and Western parts of San Mateo Creek Watersheds consists of a comprehensive wetland planning effort. The draft SAMP identified wetlands and Waters of the United States. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-10

VIOLATION OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT

Tesoro High School sits on four parcels of land: Parcel 125-096-59, Parcel 125-096-60, Parcel 125-096-69 and Parcel 125-096-82.

Parcel 125-096-82 and portions of Parcel 125-096-69 are in the Habitat Reserve.

All the waste water discharge for "F" Street, the Oso Bridge Project and the Oso Bridge Gap Closure Project is designed to flow onto Parcel 125-096-82 and underneath Tesoro High School creating a permant tresspass of water onto and underneath the School.

In May 1999; due to environmental restrictions (It appears that RMV sold CUSD land that was dedicated to the Habbitat Reserve), CUSD had to alter the design of Tesoro High School. The design of the school was flipped, and CUSD was forced to purchase two additional parcels of land in order to build sports fields.

On July 1, 1999 DMB San Juan Investment North, LLC a successor-in-interest to San Juan Partnership No. I, LLC  sold for valuable consideration Parcel A (aka 125-096-59) and Parcel B (aka 125-096-60) to the Capistrano Unified School District. 

Instrument No: 20000330046 was a Grant Deed recorded on June 23, 2000.

See also: Capistrano Unified School District Toll Road Facts 

Legal Description for the Additional Area Tesoro High School: "That portion of Parcel 3 of Certificate of Compliance CC95-01 in the Unincorporated Territory of the County of Orange, State of California recorded March 21, 1995 as Instrument No 95-0112516".

The Capistrano Unified School District paid $1.944 million to San Juan Partnership No I, LLC.

Sports Field Parcel A aka Parcel #125-096-59 [2.439 acres] 

Sports Field Parcel B aka Parcel #125-096-60 [7.576 acres] 

Valuable Consideration: 

On 7/31/1999 CUSD paid $1.94 million from CFD 98-2

Capistrano Unified School District owned four parcels of land which comprised the entire Tesoro High School Campus.

Parcel 125-096-59

Parcel 125-096-60

Parcel 125-096-69

Parcel 125-096-82

The school opened in September 2001.

Parcel 125-096-82 and portions of 125-096-69 have been used and continue to be used as Habitat Reserve.

Baseline data/studies prepared. 

In the early 2000s, the alignment for the southern portion of the FTC (a 16-mile segment from Oso Parkway to the Route 5 south of San Clemente). The six possible alignments, included three that went around the east side of the City of San Clemente and connected to Route 5 south of San Clemente as set forth in Streets and Highways Code section 541. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program (SOCTIIP) Volume I: Eecutive Summary page ES-3

Lead Agencies specified

The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) was to oversee compliance of the RMV development with the California Endangered Sepcies Act (CESA) through the NCCP and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) pursuant to Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) were engaged in a cooperative effort, in overseeing compliance with the Federal Endangered Speciaes Act (ESA) throught the preparation of the NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (50 C.F.R Section 13.0) and the CWA through Section 404 Permit Process (33 C.F.R. Section 230).

The Primary undeveloped area in south Orange County is RMV, which is why the NCCP and SAMP Plans are being concurrently processed with the RMV development proposal.

The County of Orange is the lead agency, in cooperation with CDFG, for preparation of the Southern Subregion NCCP.

Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program (SOCTIIP) Volume I: Eecutive Summary page ES-9

SCAG is the federally designated (MPO) Metropolitan Planning Organization for the six county region which includes Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties.As the MPO, SCAG is required to adopt and periodically update a RTP. The FTC-S is shown in the 2001 RTP as an extension of the existing FTC-N from the San Diego County line to Oso Parkway, with two mixed flow lanes in each direction by 2010 and two additional mixed flow lanes in each direction by 2015. AN alignment similar to the alignment of the FEC-M Alternative is mapped in the RTP as a programed part of the transportation network baseline and is assumed in the modeling for the RTP.

Any SOCTIIP alignment would also need to be consistent with The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) and SANDAG the State and Federally designated MPO responsible for regional transportation planning for San Diego County.

The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) develops and implements unified transportation programs and services for Orange County. The OCTA administers the County's MPAH. Projects must be on the MPAH to be implemented. Any SOCTIIP alinment would have to be consisten with the FTC-S as shown on the MPAH  Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-11

Scoping Meeting

The public participation process for the Southern Subregion involved three separate and independent elements:

1) public workshops conducted by the four lead agencies (Service, County, CDFG, USACE);

2) convening of an “Ad Hoc” group by The Nature Conservancy (TNC); and

3) creation of a citizen outreach program by the County Supervisor with responsibility over the District that includes the 22,815-acre (ac) (9,233-hectare (ha)) RMV property.

On July 23, 2001, the Capistrano Unified School District recorded a Grant Deed to Rancho Santa Margarita Water District for 0.287 acres of land for the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility. Current Land Records show that the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility currently sits on Parcels 125-096-04 and 125-096-68.

These parcels never belonged to the Capistrano Unified School District. 

Current Orange County Land Records show that the land that the Santa Margarita Water District Flow Control Facility sits on originated from:

CC 82-2 Instrument No. 198200313505

CC 95-01 Instrument No. 199500112516 

CC 2001-01 Instument Number 200100508635

CC 2004 Instrument Number 2004000978175  is also associated with these same parcels

CC 2011-01 Instrument Number 201100677171 is also associated with these same parcels

Why is the Capistrano Unified School District executing a Grant Deed for Parcel 125-096-68 (land it never owned) to Santa Margarita District on July 21, 2001? Three days before RMV transferred all of these Parcels into CC 2001-01 (The Right of Way for SR 241)

RMV, CUSD and the Santa Margarita Water District need to Quiet Title on all the Parcels south of Oso Parkway Bridge. They have been placed into the Habitat Reserve, sold to the Capistrano Unified School District and the Right of Way for SR 241.

Current County of Orange Land Records do not show the existance of the July 23, 2001 Grant Deed from the Capistrano Unified School District to the Santa Margarita Water District.

See below: 

The July 23, 2001 Grant Deed 

In July 2001 all four of CUSDs' parcels were transferred into Certificate of Compliance CC 2001-01 by entities that did not own them.

The owner of record for Parcels 125-095-59, 125-096-60 and 125-096-69 is DMB San Juan Investment North, LLC

The owner of record for Parcel 125-096-82 is San Juan Partnership III.

CC-2001-01 is the Right-of-Way for the Tesoro Extension of the 241 Toll Road from the Oso Parkway continuing south towards the Orange County/ San Diego County line 

In 2001 San Juan Partnership No. 1 and DMB San Juan Investment North LLC entered into an agreement to transfer land owned by the Capistrano Unified School District to the TCA as part of the right-of-way for the 241 Extension of the Toll Road.

San Juan Partnership No. 1 and DMB San Juan Investment North LLC had no legal right to claim ownership and encumber all four parcels of land under Tesoro High School.

Working Group Meetings

These meetings were established to provide coordination at a both a technical and policy level between the County, RMV, SMWD and the Service and CDFG during plan preparation. These meetings were attended by the Service, CDFG, County, RMV, occasionally SMWD, lawyers retained by RMV, and the County’s NCCP consultants. The meetings consisted of all-day working sessions to discuss schedule and progress on the plan, technical elements of species accounts, conservation analyses, implementation approaches, and policy language for incorporation into the draft and final HCP and IA. Department of the Interior Solicitor’s Office staff and the CDFG legal staff occasionally attended these meetings. In total, the Working Group held 53 meetings. Five meetings were held in 2001 beginning in October and ending in December. Seventeen meetings were held in 2002 beginning in February and ending in December. Six meetings were held in 2003 beginning in April and ending in November. Five meetings were held in 2004 beginning in January and ending in July. Fourteen meetings were held in 2005 beginning in March and ending in December. In 2006, five meetings were held between March and August.

June 14, 2001 Scoping Meeting NCCP/MSAA/HCP

In preparation for the NOP and NOI, a June 14, 2001, Scoping Meeting was conducted jointly by the County of Orange, USFWS, CDFG, and USACE for the Southern NCCP/HCP and the San Juan Creek Watershed and San Mateo Creek Watershed SAMP/MSAA. During this joint Scoping Meeting, the agencies discussed the intent to implement a coordinated planning process that would include the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA planning components. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-15 and 1-17

Public Workshops

The four lead agencies initiated a series of joint “Public Workshops.” The Public Workshops preceded and contributed information important to the completion of the “Draft” NCCP/MSAA/HCP, EIS/EIR and IA. Beginning in December, 2001, a total of six public workshops were held. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-17

USFWS and ACOE held informational meetings on Resource planning for the South Subregion NCCP and SAMP. The NCCP and SAMP are separate projects that had separate environmmental documents. Draft EIS/SEIR and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure  Improvement Project (SOCTIIP) page ES-10

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Ad Hoc Group Meetings 

In support of the Public Workshops, TNC convened an “Ad Hoc” group designed to involve representatives of the involved agencies, environmental groups and local landowners in constructive dialogue within a smaller setting that could focus on NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA issues. In total, the TNC Ad Hoc Group met seven times in 2002 beginning in March and ending in October. Attendees at the Ad Hoc Group meetings included staff from the Service, CDFG, County, the participating landowners and members of the environmental community including Endangered Habitats League, Starr Ranch Audubon Society and Sierra Club. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18 U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 6

RMV filed GPA/ZC application

In addition to the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the SAMP, a further part of the coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion was the processing by RMV through the County of Orange of a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC) for its property. Processing of a GPA/ZC for the RMV property set land uses and allowed the plan participants to evaluate avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18

SCORE PROCESS South County Review and Evaluation (SCORE) program.

The overall goal of the SCORE program was to establish and maintain positive and constructive communications among all potentially interested parties including members of the RMV development team, Orange County staff and appointed officials, representatives of all the neighboring jurisdictions, representatives of specific community interest groups, and members of the public at large.

Supervisor Wilson convened two task forces to review RMV development issues, one to address land use and one to address urban runoff. Each task force was given a scope for review (the charge) and a set of ground rules for operation. The Land Use Task Force met a total of 14 times, and the Urban Runoff Task Force met 6 times. The task forces produced a joint report containing commentary based on their review of certain preliminary reserve design concepts and a list of potential solutions to address urban runoff issues. This report was presented to the Orange County Planning Commission on October 23, 2002. Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-18 U.S. FIsh and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-06-07-F-812.8 page 7

The following three major projects are planned in the SOCTIIP study area:

1) The Ranch Plan Development. 

2) the Southern Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and

3) (SAMP) Special Area Management Plan

the 3 plans are being developed cooperatively but are separate projects that will have separate enviornmental documents.

The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will oversee the compliance of RMV with the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) through the NCCP and watercourse alteration through the Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) puursuant to Section 1600 of the CA Fish and Game Code. The USFWS and the ACOE are engaged, in a cooperative effort, in overseeing compliance with the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) through the preparation of the NCCP/Habitat Conservation Plan (50 C>F>R Section 13.0) and the CWA through Section 404 Permit Process (33 C.F.R section 230). The primary undeveloped area in south Orange County is RMV, which is why the NCCP and SAMP plans are being concurrently processed with RMV development proposal. Although there are a multitude of federal and state agencies involved in the planning process, the County of Orange is the lead agency, in cooperation with CDFG, for the preparation of the Southern Subregion NCCP. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Program Volue I: Eecutive Summary page ES-9

Rancho Mission Viejo Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan Project Number PW0087 June 7, 2004 

Pollutants page 46 - 51

• Pathogens (bacteria indicators)
• Sediment (Total Suspended Solids)
• Nutrients (Ammonia, Nitrate, and Total Phosphorus)
• Trace Metals (Aluminum, Cadmium, Copper, Lead and Zinc)
• Hydrocarbons (Oil and Grease, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
• Pesticides
• Trash and Debris

WQMP for Canada Chiquita Sub-basin page 91

Canada Chiquita is one of the few naturlly perennial streams in the watershed and contains riparian habitat, freshwater and alkaline marsh, and slope wetlands. The relatively high proportion of permeable soils and low percentage of developed area result in a relatively low runoff and sediment yields of the sub-basins in the wtershed. Many of the laterial tributaries are chennel-less swales.

Cumulative Impact Analysis San Juan Creek Watershed page 319

In late 2004, the titles of the draft Southern Subregion NCCP/HCP Planning Guidelines and the SAMP/MSAA Watershed and Sub-basin Planning Principles documents were modified to delete the references to the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA, respectively, in their titles. The revised document titles now are “Draft Southern Subregion Planning Guidelines” (hereafter called the Draft Southern Planning Guidelines) and the Draft Southern Subregion Watershed and Sub-basin Planning Principles” (hereafter called the Draft Watershed Planning Principles). These document title changes were implemented in conjunction with the decision by participating landowners to move the MSAA from the SAMP program to become part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP program in order to eliminate any potential confusion concerning the evolution, purpose and content of the “guidelines” and “principles” documents. From the outset of the overall coordinated planning process for the Southern Subregion, the draft “Southern Planning Guidelines” and “Draft Watershed Planning Principles” were designed to be prepared concurrently and be used to guide and evaluate Habitat Reserve alternatives and the planning, restoration and management policies contained in the NCCP/HCP and SAMP/MSAA. The transfer of the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP does not affect the application, purposes or content of either the draft Southern Planning Guidelines or Watershed Planning Principles documents and they continue to be used for their originally-intended purposes. DRAFT NCCP/MSAA/HCP Chapter 1 1-16 July 2006 The decision to make the MSAA a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP document means that the County of Orange becomes the Lead agency under CEQA for both the NCCP and the MSAA. The USACE would continue to be the Lead agency under NEPA for the SAMP document. Study area boundaries would be unaffected by this change in organization, except for the fact that the MSAA would now cover the San Clemente Hydrologic Unit (see Figure 7-M) as part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. Under the former SAMP/MSAA, the San Clemente hydrologic unit was not covered because it was not part of either the San Juan Creek or San Mateo Creek watersheds.

The decision to transfer the MSAA to become a part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP while leaving the SAMP as a stand-alone Federal document meant that the County of Orange in cooperation with (CDFG) California department of Fish and Game became the Lead agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for both the NCCP and the MSAA.

The USACE continued to be the Lead agency under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the SAMP document.

The Ranch Plan, the Southern NCCP and the SAMP were now three separate projects with separate environmental documents.

GPA/ZC approved by Board of Supervisors

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-1-YJC (Alternative Permitting Process)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-2-YJC (non- RMV Subarea)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-3-YJC (RMV Subarea)

SAMP DOCUMENT Draft SAMP released for public review:

Volume I Draft Environmental Impact Statement San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) November 2005

Volume I (2005): Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Volume II (2005): EIS Figures 

Volume III (2005): (Available Upon Request)

Participants in the SAMP:

Rancho Mission Viejo (RMV)

Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD)

(SOCTIPP) IS NOT PART OF THE SAMP Volume I page ES-IV

Permitting Process: Individual Permit/LOP

December 2005

Added April 3, 2021 (Links to actual document are broken)

Compliance With NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP

As in the case of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP, the SAMP is a voluntary process. However, after the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP are approved and permits are issued, compliance with the terms and conditions of the permits is mandatory for signatories and will be enforced by the appropriate local, state and federal agencies. The purpose of the SAMP being prepared by the USACE as lead agency is to provide for the protection and long-term management of federally regulated sensitive aquatic resources (biological and hydrological) on a landscape level. To the extent feasible, federal waters, including wetlands, will be avoided and unavoidable impacts will be minimized and fully mitigated under the SAMP. The SAMP also is designed to enable economic uses to be permitted within the study area portions of the San Juan Creek and San Mateo Creek watersheds consistent with the requirements of federal law (CWA Section 404). Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-19 1.3.2 The Need for a Coordinated Planning and Regulatory Process

Lead Agency Actions for NCCP/MSAA/HCP, SAMP and GPA/ZC

The County Board of Supervisors, acting as a lead agency, is responsible for reviewing and acting on the GPA/ZC, the NCCP and the MSAA. The County actions occur in two steps:

• • First, prior to completion of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP, the Board of Supervisors certified the EIR for the GPA/ZC component (EIR 589), and approved the DRAFT NCCP/MSAA/HCP related actions including the EIR, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Development Agreement and related entitlements; and
  • Second, after acting on the GPA/ZC and related EIR, the County Board of Supervisors would need to complete its review and decide whether to certify the EIR for the NCCP and MSAA and to approve the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and the related IA.

After the County completes its review and actions on the GPA EIR and GPA/ZC application, and before it approves the draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP, the USFWS and CDFG would complete their reviews of the draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP and provide comments and suggested changes to the County. USACE also would complete the SAMP after the County approves the GPA/ZC application.

After the final drafts are prepared, and circulated for public review, the state and federal agencies reviews of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP and SAMP would proceed as follows:

The USFWS and CDFG would decide whether to approve the NCCP/MSAA/HCP. If approved,

• • • the USFWS would issue the Biological Opinion, Record of Decision (ROD) and FESA Section 10 permits for Incidental Take of federally-listed Covered Species under the HCP component of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP
    • CDFG would issue its permits for Incidental Take of state-listed Covered Species under the NCCP and its streambed alteration agreements under the MSAA for CDFG Jurisdictional Areas; and
    • Covered Species that are not currently “listed” at the state and federal levels also would be designated as part of the NCCP/MSAA/HCP.

The USACE would complete its review and decide whether to issue final approval for the SAMP.

• • • USACE would finalize the SAMP EIS and issue the ROD and approve relevant Section 404 permits and permitting procedures, related mitigation programs and a preferred Aquatic Resources Conservation Program for activities covered by the SAMP.  A Section 7 programmatic consultation would be completed with USFWS for the SAMP permitting procedures

Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP page 1-21 1.3.4 Sequence of Lead Agency Actions for the NCCP/MSAA/HCP, SAMP and GPA/ZC

On February 23, 2006, TCA certified a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) for the SOCTIIP project and filed a Notice of Determination.

In support of the FSEIR, TCA adopted findings and a statement of overriding considerations for the SOCTIIP project- a 16 mile segment of SR-241 from Oso Parkwkay to the Orange County/San Diego county line. TCA found that impacts to wild life, fisheries and vegetation could not be mitigated to a less than significant level.  

State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 dated September 23, 2014 page 2 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 dated March 16, 2015. page 2, 

On February 23, 2006, the Petitioner adopted CEQA findings for the preferred alternative and approved construction of the sixteen mile extension of State Route 241. California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022 Resolution Supporting Denial of Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-007, Waste Discharge Requirements for Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency, Tesoro Extension (SR241) Project, Orange County page 2

On February 23, 2006, and after a several year process involving numerous public hearings, the TCA Board adopted Resolution F2006-1 certifying Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report TCA SEIR 4 ("2006 SEIR") for the SR-241 Foothill South Extension. That same day, the TCA Board also adopted Resolution F2006- 2 selecting the locally preferred alignment (the A7C-FEC-M-Initial Alternative, commonly called the "Green Alignment") in the DEIS/SEIR for the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Project ("SOCTIIP") (the "2006 Approvals"). Consistent with legislative enactments and state and regional transportation plans concerning SR 241, the Green Alignment connected to Route 5 south of San Clemente near Basilone Road in San Diego County. SR 241 has been adopted as a state highway by Resolution of the California Transportation Commission on July 9, 1993 and August 19, 1998, and has been declared to be a freeway. The Reserve Maintenance Corporation V. Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency page 16

The 2006 SEIR and 2006 Approvals were challenged under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) by certain SSOC Members, and by the People and the CSPRC, in the 2006 CEQA Lawsuits. The NAHC also filed the NAHC Lawsuit, seeking to enjoin construction, development, and permitting of the alignment approved by the 2006 Approvals under Public Resources Code §§ 5097.94 and 5097.97.  The Reserve Maintenance Corporation V. Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency page 17

Because the sixteen mile extension of State Route 241 required a Clean Water Act section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, on June 13, 2006 the TCA submitted Water Quality Certification Application No. 06C-064 for SOCTIIP. The SOCTIIP toll road extension would have added approximately 16 miles of toll road to the current terminus of State Route 241 (SR 241) at Oso Parkway in Southern Orange County and extended the SR 241 south and parallel to lnterstate-5 (1-5) before merging with 1-5 near the Orange County-San Diego County Line. California Regional Water Quality Control Board Resolution No. R9-2015-0022  page 1 and State of Califoria State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2014-0154 page 2

PUBLIC SCOPING COMMENT PART 6 DOCUMENTATION

| PART 1 | PART 2 | PART 3 | PART 3 CONTINUED | PART 4 | PART 5 | PART 6 | PART 6(a) | PART 6 TIMELINE | PART 6 DOCUMENTATION |

Continued from Timeline 2014 to the Present

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

PURSUANT TO A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST I RECEIVED THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS ON DECEMBER 19, 2019:

FOIA 20-0027 (SPL-2015-00054 ("F" Street from "A" Street to Oso Parkway, Rancho Mission Viejo)) 

Permit Applications to: USACOE, SDRWQCB AND CDFG "F" Street, Trail/Sidewalk & Associated Utilities project dated November 21, 2014.  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YAAm_-r24ogxCpfPxShrh3pYP9zVl3gi/view?usp=sharing 

Permit Number:  SPL-2015-00054-G5 issued July 16, 2015. 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YeG6JF0xE4Ihk3guU35Vf64biXNuQjL-/view?usp=sharing 

FEDERAL LAW (NEPA)

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 42 U.S.C §4321 et seq.  (1969) https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-national-environmental-policy-act

Clean Water Act (CWA) 33 U.S.C §1251 et seq.  (1972) https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act

The Clean Water Act is the primary federal law governing water pollution.

Lead Agency: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Section 404 of the CWA regulates the placement of dredged or fill material into wetlands, lakes, streams rivers, estuaries and certain other types of waters. The goal of Section 404 is to avoid and minimize losses to wetlands and other waters and to compensate for unavoidable loss through mitigation and restoration.  Section 404 is jointly implemented by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).  The Corps issues Section 404 permits and monitors compliance with the issued permits. 

Both the Corps and EPA are responsible for on-site investigations and enforcement of unpermitted discharges under CWA Section 404.  The joint implementation of the Section 404 enforcement program is outlined in a 1989 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the agencies.

The Section 404 Permitting web page contains more detailed information. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq. (1973) https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-endangered-species-act

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides a program for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals and the habitats in which they are found. 

Lead Federal Agencies: United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service

U.S. Fish and WIldlife prepares a Biological Opinion when an action is likely to adversely affect a listed species. The conclusion of the biological opinion will state whether the Federal agency has insured that its action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species and/or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. 

Often, an action is reasonably certain to result in the incidental take of a species, but is not likely to jeopardize its continued existence. When this happens, the Service provides the Federal agency with an incidental take statement with the biological opinion. The anticipated incidental take is not subject to the take prohibitions of the ESA as long as the Federal agency or applicant implements the terms and conditions provided in the incidental take statement.

Incidental take permits (ESA Section 10 page 28)

Incidental take permits are required when non-Federal activities will result in take of threatened or endangered species. A habitat conservation plan or “HCP” must accompany an application for an incidental take permit. The habitat conservation plan associated with the permit ensures that the effects of the authorized incidental take are adequately minimized and mitigated.

NEPA 

Air Quality Implementation Plans Status of California Designated Areas

San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board 

San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watersheds SAMP Draft EIR Chapter 2.0 Project Coordination Efforts and Overview of Potential Projects

September 23, 2014 ORDER WQ 2014-15 In the Matter of the Petition of FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCY For Review of the Denial of Waste Discharge Requirements, Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007 for the Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project, Orange County by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region SWRCB/OCC FILE A-2259 

September 23, 2014 CORRECTED CERTIFICATION: SWRCB/OCC File A-2259 In the Matter of the Petition of FOOTHILL/EASTERN TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AGENCY For Review of the Denial of Waste Discharge Requirements, Revised Tentative Order No. R9-2013-0007 for the Tesoro Extension (SR 241) Project, Orange County by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region SWRCB/OCC FILE A-2259 

San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan SAMP (Orange County)

SAMP

Planning Level Delineation for the SJC/WSMC Watershed SAMP (September 19, 2000)

Assessment of Riparian Ecosystem Integrity for SJC/WSMC Watershed SAMP (2004)

Riparian Ecosystem Restoration Plan for San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watersheds: General Design Criteria and Site Selection (2004)

Volume I (2005): Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Volume II (2005): EIS Figures 

Volume III (2005): (Available Upon Request)

Volume IV (2005): Responses to Comments

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-1-YJC (Alternative Permitting Process)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-2-YJC (non- RMV Subarea)

Army Corps Of Engineers Special Public Notice 199916236-3-YJC (RMV Subarea)

Biological Opinion for Southern Subregion Habitat Conservation Plan (2007)

¹ US Army Corps of Engineers Documentation for San Juan Creek/Western San Mateo Creek Watershed SAMP (Orange County):  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/SAMP-Permitting-and-Research/SAMP-Documents/

² September 19, 2000: Planning Level Wetland Delineation and Geospatial Characterization of San Juan and Portions of San Mateo Watersheds, Orange County, California  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/Planning_Level_Delineation_for_SJCWSMC_Watershed.pdf?ver=2017-07-31-114300-797

³ October 2000: Assessment of Riparian Ecosystem Integrity In the San Juan/San Mateo Watersheds, Orange County, California  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/Assessment_of_Riparian_Ecosystem_Integrity_for_SJCWSMC_Watershed.pdf?ver=2017-07-31-114230-013 Page 1 "The Los Angeles District is conducting the SAMP in coordination with the existing and the proposed amendment to the Central - Coastal Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)."

⁴ August 2004 Riparian Ecosystem Restoration Plan for San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watersheds: General Design Criteria and Site Selection  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/Riparian_Ecosystem_Restoration_Plan_for_SJCWSMC_Watershed.pdf?ver=2017-07-31-114300-937

⁵ November 21, 2005 Special Public Notice: Letter of Permission procedures for areas within RMV Planning Area in the San Juan Creek/Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan.   https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/Public_Notice_for_SJCWSMC_Watershed_SAMP_RMVSubarea.pdf?ver=2018-01-01-101113-913 Page 5 "The SAMP cooperative process will result in two products: an alternate permitting system to authorize the discharge of dredged and/or fill materials into WoUS while protecting higher value aquatic resources and a comprehensive aquatic resources conservation program. The alternate permitting system involves the establishment of abbreviated permit procedures in the form of an RGP and LOPs in combination with the use of certain NWPs."

⁶ November 21, 2005 Special Public Notice: Letter of Permission procedures for areas outside RMV Planning Area in the San Juan Creek/Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan.  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/Public_Notice_for_SJCWSMC_Watershed_SAMP_Non-RMVSubarea.pdf?ver=2018-01-01-101111-197

⁷ November 2005 Environmental Impact Statement for the SJC/WSMC Watershed SAMP

▪ ⁸ Volume I: Draft Environmental Impact Statement San Juan Creek and western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/EIS%20for%20SJCWSMC%20SAMP%20(Vol%201).pdf?ver=2018-03-26-191927-697
▪ ⁹ Volume 2
▪ Volume 3 (available upon request)
▪ ¹⁰ Volume 4: Enviornmental Impact Statement San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) Volume IV: Responses to Comments   https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/EIS%20for%20SJCWSMC%20SAMP%20(Vol%204).pdf?ver=2018-03-26-191826-010

July 2006 Appendix S Rancho Mission Viejo Covered Activities   https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/HCPs/SOOCSRHCP/Orange%20County%20Southern%20Subregion%20HCP%20Appendices/Appendix%20S%20-%20RMV%20Covered%20Activities/Appendix%20S%20-%20RMV%20Covered%20Activities.pdf

¹¹January 10, 2007 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Opinion 1-6-07-F-812.8 Intra-Service Formal Section 7 Consultation/Conference for Issuance of an Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(B) Permit (TE144113-0, TE144140-0, and TE144105-0) for The Southern Orange Natural Community Conservation Plan/ Master Streambed Alteration Agreement/ Habitat Conservation Plan, Orange County, California  https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/Projects/SAMP/BO_for_Southern_Subregion_HCP.pdf?ver=2018-01-01-101138-023

August 2002 San Juan Creek Watershed Management Study, Orange County, California Feasibility Phase F-5 Report  https://web.archive.org/web/20060313181627/http://www.ocwatersheds.com/watersheds/pdfs/San_Juan_Creek_F5_Report_August_2002.pdf 

US Army Corps of Engineers: SAMP Background https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/SAMP-Permitting-and-Research/SAMP-Background/ 

February 12, 2007 Letter from United States Environmental Protection Agency re: Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the San Juan Creek and Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) (CEQ # 60543)  https://archive.epa.gov/region9/nepa/web/pdf/san-juan-creek-feis.pdf

July 16, 2015 Letter from Salas Gerard, Senior Project Manager USACOE Letter RE: (File No. SPL-2015-00054-GS) for a Department of Army permit for your proposed project, "F" Street from "A" Street to Oso Parkway, in Rancho Mission Viejo, previously evaluated as part of the Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for San Juan Creek/Western San Mateo Creek watersheds and for the associated long-term Department of the Army (DA) permit (SPL-1999-16236), issued March 23, 2007. Specifically, and as shown on the attached drawings, you are authorized to conduct the
following regulated activities:

1. Permanently discharge fill material onto 0.019 acre of non wetland waters of the United
   States (Road Gap 1) to construct a new County of Orange arterial road called F Street,
   from Cow Camp Road to Oso Parkway (see attached Figure 4); and
2. Permanently discharge fill material onto 0.07 acre of non wetland waters of the United
   States (Road Gap 9) to construct a new County of Orange arterial road called F Street,
   from Cow Camp Road to Oso Parkway (see attached Figure 5).

San Juan/San Mateo Watershed SAMP/MSAA

A special Management Plan (SAMP) and Master Streambed Alteration Agreement (MSAA) is being prepared jointly by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the (CDFG) California Department of Fish and Game and covers generally those portions of San Juan Creek and San Mateo Creek watersheds located within the Southern NCCP/HCP Subregion. As in the case of the NCCP/HCP, the SAMP/MSAA is a voluntary process. The purpose of the SAMP/MSAA is to provide for the protection and long-term management of sensitive aquatic resources (biological and hydrological) on a landscape level. The SAMP/MSAA is also designed to enable economic uses within the SAMP study area portions of the San Juan Creek watershed consistent with the requirements of federal and state laws (particularly the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), including Sections 401 and 404) and California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.

¹² (NCCP) Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991 (AB 2172) adopted by California Legislature: California Fish and Game Code Section 2800   http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FGC&sectionNum=2800 

¹³Draft NCCP/MSAA/HCP   https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/HCPs/SOOCSRHCP/Orange%20County%20Southern%20Subregion%20HCP/So_OR%20HCP%20CHAPTER%201%20-%20Intro.pdf

CEQA SCH Number 2006061140 https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/Project/2006061140 (29 documents in project) Title:South Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan / Master Streambed Alteration Agreement / Habitat Conservation PlanDescriptionCDFW is intending to execute a Sub-Notification Approval for Master Streambed Alteration Agreement NO. 1600-2006-0438-0013-R5 pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code #1600-2006-0438-0013-R5 to the project applicant . Rancho Mission Viejo, LLC. The Planning Areas 3 and 4, Cow Camp Road Bridge over San Juan Creek and Grandeza Bridge over Gobernadora Creek Project will permanently impact 39.77 acres of stream habitat, and temporarily impact 2.42 acres of steam habitat. Temporary impacts will be re-contoured and restored withy native vegetation. Compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts will consists of arundo removal, phased land dedication as described in the Master Streamed Alteration Agreement, as well as 20.40 acres of stream restoration.

Draft Southern NCCP/MSAA/HCP June 2006 The Southern Natural Community Conservation Plan/Master Streambed Alteration Agreement/Habitat Conservation Plan 

NCCP/HCP 

NCCP/HCP COUNTY OF ORANGE SUBREGION: CENTRAL AND COASTAL 

Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion:

Notice of Determination California Department of Fish and Game July 17, 1996 .https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=34758&inline 

NCCP/HCP Plan Parts I & II July 17, 1996  https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-Parts-I-II-Plan.pdf

NCCP/HCP Plan Part III: Joint Programmatic EIR/EIS May 1996 https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-Part-III-EIR.pdf

NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement July 17, 1996 https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Implementation-Agreement.pdf

NCCP/HCP Map Section (Figures 1 through 75) https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-EIR-Map-Section.pdf

2003 Revised NCCP/HCP Plan https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NROC-HREP-HabRestPlan.pdf 

Reserve Map https://occonservation.org/land-areas/reserve-map/

NCCP/HCP COUNTY OF ORANGE SUBREGION: SOUTH  

The Southern Natural   Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (Southern NCCP/HCP) is being prepared by the County of Orange in cooperation with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) in accordance with the provisions of the state natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991 (NCCP Act), and the California Endagered Species Act (CSEA), and the Federal Endangered Species Act (FSEA). The Southern Orange County Subregion is part of the five -county NCCP study Area established by the State as the Pilot Study Area under the NCCP Program.

¹⁴ County of Orange The Natural Communities Coalition (NCC) (Implementing Entity) https://occonservation.org/about-ncc/

¹⁵July 17, 1995 Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts 1 & 11: NCCP/HCP https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-Parts-I-II-Plan.pdf

¹⁶ May 1996  Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts III: Joint Programmatic EIR/EIS https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-Part-III-EIR.pdf

¹⁷July 17, 1996 Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Parts 1 & 11: NCCP/HCP Implementation Agreement https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Implementation-Agreement.pdf

¹⁸ May 1996 Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion Map Section (Figures 1 through 76) https://occonservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/NCCP-EIR-Map-Section.pdf

¹⁹ Monitoring Reports https://occonservation.org/

²⁰ California Department of Fish and Game July 17, 1996 Notice of Determination Orange County Central Coastal Subregion Natural Communities Conservation/Habitat Conservation Plan. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=34758&inline

County of Orange/Rancho Mission Viejo GPA/ZC

²¹ Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP/Plans/OCTA

²² OCTA Planning Agreement C-9-0279 https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=16025&inline 

²³Amended 2016 (with an effective date of January 21, 2010? extending agreement to January 12, 2018) Planning Agreement 2810-2008-003-05 https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=135915&inline

²⁴ July 2011 Independent Science Advisors Report Orange County Transportation Authority M2 NCCP/HCP https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=69410&inline

²⁵ Nov 2016 Plan Documents [ERROR Broken Link] http://www.octa.net/Projects-and-Programs/Measure-M/Measure-M2-%282011-2041%29/Freeway-Mitigation/Conservation-Plan/

²⁶ Nov 2016 Environmental Review Documents (EIR, EIS) [ERROR Broken Link] http://www.octa.net/Projects-and-Programs/Measure-M/Measure-M2-%282011-2041%29/Freeway-Mitigation/Conservation-Plan/

²⁷ 2016 Implementing Agreement https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=146327&inline

²⁸ June 2017 California Department of Fish and Wildlife findings of fact under the California Environmental Quality Act and the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act and Natural Community Conservation Plan Permit # 2835-2017-001-05 https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=146326&inline

Rancho Mission Viejo Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan

²⁹ Rancho Mission Viejo Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)    https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/HCPs/SOOCSRHCP/Orange%20County%20Southern%20Subregion%20HCP%20Appendices/Appendix%20K%20-%20Water%20Quality%20Management%20Plan/Appendix%20K/WQMP/WQMP.pdf

Integrated Regional Water Management Plan for South Orange County updated 2018 https://www.mnwd.com/app/uploads/2018/08/2018-SOC-IRWMP.pdf

Chiquita Canyon

April 18, 2004 (USACE) US Army Corps of Engineers Deliniation of Areas Subject to the Jurisdiction of the US Army Corpos of Engineers Jurisdiction Planning Area 2 -  Chiquita Canyon USACE 14.08 Acres page 5  Road Gaps page 22 Map page 24   https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/HCPs/SOOCSRHCP/Orange%20County%20Southern%20Subregion%20HCP%20Appendices/Appendix%20R%20-%20Jurisdictional%20Delineation/Project%20Level%20Delineation%20Report.pdf 

US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg?query=Rancho+Mission+Viejo

November 16, 2005 Notice of availability for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the San Juan Creek Watershed/Western San Mateo Creek Watershed Special Area Management Plan (SAMP), Orange County, CA Document Number: 05-22718 Document Type: Notice, Agency: Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2005/11/16/05-22718.html Document Number: 05-22718 Type: Notice Agency: US Department of the Interior Army Corps of Engineers

November 13, 2006 Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Orange County Southern Subregion Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan, Orange County CA Document Number: E6-18971 Type: Notice  Agency: US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/agencies/department-of-the-interior/fish-and-wildlife-service?page=110

October 7, 2010 Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the San Juan Creek and Tributaries Flood Risk Management Study, Orange County, CA Document Number: 2010-25351 Type: Notice Date: 2010-10-07 Agency: Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Engineers Corps, Army Department https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2010/10/07/2010-25351.html

November 7, 2014 Orange County Transportation Authority, Orange County, California; M2 Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement, and Incidental Take Permit Application Document Number: 2014-26361 Type: Notice Date: 2014-11-07 Agency: Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2014/11/07/2014-26361.html

Southern California Association of Governments

Southern California Association of Governments Final Federal Transportation Improvement Program Orange County Project listing 

http://ftip.scag.ca.gov/Documents/F2017-FTIP-ProjectListingA.pdf Project ID ORA051

TCA

August 1990 San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Report Impact Statement and Section 4(F) Evaluation TCA EIR/EIS 1  

December 1992 Eastern Transportation Corridor Suplemental Environmental Impact Statement TCA EIS 2-1

February 2013 The Tesoro Extension Project: Addendum to the South Orange County Transportation Infrastructure Improvement Project (SOCTIIP) Final subsequent Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2001061046