Executive Summary
Ifthe monitoring effort is unable to determine to the satisfaction of the resource agencies, the project impact
R
at a specific lagoon, then potential, worst-case sedimentation quantities as derived in Appendix C may be
R
utilized. If the lagoons experience sand input above typical conditions, which are related to the RBSP,
R
funding would be provided to allow for sediment removal or additional mouth opening in concert with other
R
on-going maintenance efforts at each lagoon. This determination would be made in consultation with
R
SANDAG/Resource agencies based on review of the monitoring reports (twice yearly and at project
R
completion). Funding will be identified for potential mitigation, and a not-to-exceed cap negotiated, as part
R
of the permit process.
R
ES-6 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
This EIR/EA provides a description of the existing environmental conditions in the project areas. This
document describes existing conditions for the following resource categories: geology and soils; coastal
wetlands; water resources; biological resources; cultural resources; land and water use; aesthetics;
socioeconomics; public health and safety; structures and utilities; traffic; air quality; and noise.
ES-7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
No long-term significant impacts are expected to occur from implementation of the project given the
monitoring and mitigation program as defined in subsection ES-5. As noted in that section, monitoring
would occur during constructionto satisfy permit conditions and ensure avoidance ofsite-specific resources
(e.g., grunion). Monitoring would also occur for four years subsequent to the action to verify no significant
impacts to coastal lagoons and marine biological resources. If significant long-term impacts do occur, then
SANDAG would implement action to mitigate those impacts, generally lagoondredging/mouthopenings(s)
and/or reef restoration/creation. Table ES-7 summarizes the potential effects under all three alternatives
and both construction variations.
ES-8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
California guidelines implementing CEQA require a discussion of significant environmental impacts that
would result when the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in combination with
the effects of "past, present, and probable future projects " or in relation to "a summary of projections
contained in an adopted generalplanor related planning document" (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, 15065(c)
and 15130(b)(1)(A)(B)). Federal guidelines implementing NEPA define a cumulative impact as one that
would result from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable actions (40 C.F.R. 1508.7).
Page ES-20
Regional Beach Sand Project EIR/EA
99-69\SANDAG EIREA es.wpd 7/17/00
Previous Page
