2.0 Alternatives Considered
a first priority. Consideration would be given to the construction of artificial reefs as mitigation to offset
project impacts at a 1:1 ratio if like habitat restoration efforts were not feasible as determined by the
USACOE, in consultation with the resource agencies. Like the Navy, SANDAG would negotiate a "not-
to-exceed" cap on mitigation costs as a key part of the permit conditions related to mitigation. The
R
potential worst-case acreage for 1:1 enhancement/replacement is similar in size to the prior Navy project
R
and a similar mitigation fund (
||content||
.1 million) would likely be negotiated.
R
Potential Impacts to Lagoons
If the lagoons experience sand input above typical conditions, which are related to the Regional Beach
Sand Project, funding would be provided to allow for sediment removal or an additional mouth opening
in concert with other on-going maintenance efforts at each lagoon. This determination would be made in
R
consultation with SANDAG/resource agencies based on review ofthe monitoring reports (twice yearly and
R
project completion). Funding will be identified for potential mitigation and a not-to-exceed cap will be
R
negotiated as a key part of permit conditions.
R
R
2.5.4
Summary of Project Elements to Avoid Significant Impacts/
R
Possible Mitigation Measures
R
R
R
Section 2.4.1 identifies numerous project design features and conditions that will be placed on the
contractor to avoid significant impacts. Section 2.5 contains a monitoring framework, based on the Navy's
R
approved monitoring program for a larger beach replenishment project, for monitoring and mitigation, if
R
necessary. The design features, monitoring component and fully funded mitigation commitments are
R
considered in the determination of impact significance in Chapter 4. Table 2-8 provides a summary table
R
of these features and commitments, identifying the purpose, timing, and entity responsible for
R
implementation.
R
2.6
ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON
The intent of NEPA and CEQA is to ensure that the information about the scope of a project and the
potential action environmental effects are made available to public officials and citizens before decisions are
made and actions undertaken. Accordingly, this EIR/EA evaluates two potential alternatives for
implementation of the Regional Beach Sand Project and the No Action Alternative. CEQA requires an
EIR to include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis and
comparison.
Regional Beach Sand Project EIR/EA
Page 2-61
99-69\SANDAG EIREA 3.4.wpd 7/17/00
Previous Page
