Could you provide more details regarding how Laguna …€¦ · I’ll gladly provide you with that...

From: Boon, RichardTo: "Roger Butow"; Ryan, Erica@Waterboards; Carr, Amanda; Crompton, Chris; Sharp, Grant; Arias,

Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards; Thoms, MarilynCc: Rick Wilson; Ray Hiemstra; [email protected]: RE: Draft WQIP Section B.3 Hydromod Channel Exemption Laguna Canyon CreekDate: Thursday, October 13, 2016 7:39:05 AMAttachments: image001.jpg

image002.jpg

RogerIamacknowledgingyoure-mail.Iwillhaveaninitialresponsetoyourcommentsnextweek.ThanksRichardRichard Boon, ChiefOrange County Stormwater ProgramOC Public Works2301 N. Glassell StreetOrange, CA 92865-2773Tel. 714-955-0670(877) 89SPILL 24 Hr. Water Pollution Hotline Gnorman

From: Roger Butow [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 6:14 PMTo: Boon, Richard; Erica@Waterboards Ryan; Carr, Amanda; Crompton, Chris; Sharp, Grant; ChristinaArias; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards; Thoms, MarilynCc: Rick Wilson; Ray Hiemstra; [email protected]: Draft WQIP Section B.3 Hydromod Channel Exemption Laguna Canyon Creek Richard: Could you provide more details regarding how Laguna Canyon Creek (Channel) wasidentified and then proposed as a candidate for said exemption? It is a blue line stream, and was determined as such by an OC Superior Court Judge. Ill gladly provide you with that transcript/Writ of Mandate.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.overwateringisout.org/

Ex.: Did you rely upon an MS4 Copermittee nomination/identification and supportingengineer reports, in this case submitted by the City of Laguna Beach? Were these candidates peer reviewed by OCPW/OCFC staff? I track the SWAMP program, and to declare, to typify LCC as a mechanicallyaltered channel is easily rebutted by SWRCB standards. Im inquiring because frankly, there are numerous monolithic projects that have beenproposed recently and/or have been within the CLB Planning Department, not to mentionseveral large parcels up for grabs in/near the vicinity of the JPEGS embedded in thePHOTOLOG (Marine Mammal Center to Stans Lane). Ex.: A 60 (?) bed permanent Homeless Shelter Complex near the Marine MammalCenter (shown in your PHOTOLOG). A rehabilitation project by the Laguna College of Art & Design at the Big Bend. A 30 unit, 47 person apartment building presently be litigated. In addition, I must say that if you sustain this exemption, to categorically declareexemptions for the entire stream within City Limits (from El Toro Rd. down to the Pacific), itwill be challenged by Clean Water Now. There are numerous HOAs & NGOs in the Canyon who I will engage to add theirvoice to this opposition. CWN contends that there are known/knowable potentially significant, adverse impact,watercourse degrading proposals, and if given categorical exemption then CEQA prohibitionre sequentional/piecemeal development is in play. This is a federal 303 d listed segment aswell, I think under TMDL prescriptions? Ex.: The City is considering MAJOR public works/capital improvement constructionactivities near the intersection of Forest & Laguna Canyon Road. A new Village Entrance,including dual level parking structures, storm drain channel alteration, etc. have been on thefront burner for the last 5 years. I respectfully request that you, as lead in the WQIP process, provide the logos, themechanisms, the instruments and proof that led to this particular proposed exemption. CWN would like the electronic or hard copy (via USPS) paperwork submissions by theCity of Laguna Beach initiating said candidacy. Thank you in advance for your consideration and timely response in this matter,

From the desk of:

Roger E. Btow Founder & Executive Director

Landline Office Phone: (949) 715.1912 (No Texting/VM after 6 rings)

Cell: (949) 280.2225 (VM & Texting)

Mailing Address: PO Box 4711 Laguna Beach CA 92652

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.clean-water-now.org

CLEAN WATER NOW (est. 1998) is an innovative, science-based organization committedto solution-oriented collaboration as a means of developing safe, sustainable watersupplies and preserving healthy ecosystems.

mailto:[email protected]://www.clean-water-now.org/

From: Roger ButowTo: Richard Boon; Amanda Carr; Sharp, Grant; Crompton, ChrisCc: Ryan, Erica@Waterboards; Arias, Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards; Gibson,

David@Waterboards; Smith, James@Waterboards; Penny Elia; Ray Hiemstra; Rick Wilson; Penelope Milne; [email protected]; John Albritton; Susan Hamil; Robert Zur Schmiede; [email protected]; [email protected]

Subject: WQIP: Section B.3 (Rescind Hydro-modification Management Exemption for Laguna Canyon Creek)Date: Monday, October 17, 2016 2:02:54 PMAttachments: 0% Future Buildout.jpg

Stationary Watermark .jpg

Richard Boone, Chief Orange County Stormwater ProgramOC Public Works

Richard: Thank you for the civil dialogue in this matter.

I have CC 5 NGO reps to keep them informed and expedite resolution of this matter: Mssrs. VP/Dr. John Hamil & President John Albritton (Laguna Canyon Property Owners Assn.)Ms. Penelope Milne XO & Board (CANDO)Ms. Penny Elia (Sierra Club)Mr. Ray Hiemstra (OCCK) Mr. Rick Wilson (SF) To avoid confusion, I feel it necessary to memorialize a summary of Clean Water Nows adamant request to resolve this discrepancy made today by phone with you @ 11:00 am:

The Appendix I.3 (requesting said exemption) below needs to be rescinded in toto, post haste, exemption disallowed and removed/excised from the Water Quality Improvement Plan Draft filed October 1, 2016. CWN has offered to not pursue enforcement or civil/criminal proceedings re this 3.5 mile long, acknowledged blue line stream dispute in exchange for that rescinding. The offer on the table is active until the close of business on Thursday, October 20, 2016.

If the MS4 Copermittee (City of Laguna Beach) and/or your agency acting as Principal Permittee remove the Laguna Canyon Creek element now, as an aforementioned undeserving candidate without merit, we wish a formal, written, legally binding response for our records. We would consider that acknowledgment as integral in a cure/remedy. If a re-circulation or amended Draft is transmitted, we will not contest it being typified as an error."

Anything less than a complete rescinding is unacceptable. The other 3 segments noted (North Creek in DP, Trafalgar & Poche Beach in SC) are not being disputed and CWN vows to not make them an issue in its WQIP B.3 Comments due by November 8, 2016.

Once again, thank you for your time this morning, plus your timely response and consideration in this matter,

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

From the desk of:



Cell: (949) 280.2225 (VM & Texting)




CLEAN WATER NOW (est. 1998) is an innovative, science-based organization committed to solution-oriented collaboration as a means of developing safe, sustainable water supplies and preserving healthy ecosystems.


From: Roger ButowTo: Vondrak, Mary WQCc: Shissler, David WQ; Ryan, Erica@Waterboards; Arias, Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards;

Gibson, David@Waterboards; Smith, James@Waterboards; Penny Elia; Ray Hiemstra; Rick Wilson; Penelope Milne; [email protected]; John Albritton; Susan Hamil; Richard Boon; Amanda Carr; Sharp, Grant; Crompton, Chris; Ed Almanza; Robert Zur Schmiede

Subject: Re: Clarification of Laguna Canyon Channel Exemption Request Related to ErosionDate: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 1:58:50 PMAttachments: Stationary Watermark .jpg

Ms. Vondrak: Pity that you didnt include the 2 emails by Clean Water Nows that were important regarding our inquiry, triggering the coughing up of critical information. Our goals and objectives have been accomplished: We wished assurance that none of the Citys submissions for exemptions rolled back, eroded, or encroached upon the high levels of justifiable stream and habitat protection as determined by Judge Kim Dunning in her scathing Writ of Mandate, her rebuke of the City and Coastal Commission staffs and overseer bodies. We also sought more information regarding the rationale, the justification, the sustaining data that supported Hydromod Exemptions in not only Laguna Canyon Creek but the others listed in SOC. Furthering our righteous alarm were two (2) other facts: Nowhere was Laguna Canyon Creek identified as a creek or by its true name, nor were the words blue line stream anywhere to be found. You/GeoSynTec described it as a channel throughout. So you diminished its value through intentional omission. Considering the fact that this City ignored many hydrology/water quality and accurate stream setback guidelines of the so-called Artists Work/Live, not to mention previous similar previous failures, why should a watchdog trust staff? Answer? We cant and shouldnt. Trust and respect must be earned, not granted ex officio My professional posture is that 0.0% means exactly that: ZERO. Not possibly 1.5% increase as is being offered in the amended WMAA offering. You wouldnt have re-submitted, have modified it if you hadnt falsely misrepresented build out. It could have read 1% and no complaint would have been forthcoming. As an analyst myself, 0.0% stuck out like a sore thumb, and only PARTIAL explanation WAS buried in an obscure Appendix (I.3).

These MS4 submissions are serious and should be taken with great weight, theyre signed under penalty of perjury, and if the County/City hadnt amended we would have sought charges of perjury against Mr. Shissler for knowingly deceiving the SDRWQCB. That the County believed the City is a problem for the Countyone must wonder how often such things fly under their radar screen due to their trust?

I have interlineated (interjected) comments to your response below in a different font, used BOLD RED, to notice those CC that this matter isnt over. These type of CYA responses by MS4 Permittees, these damage control emails dont really describe the process and especially ignore remedies/cures and appellate venues:

On Oct 26, 2016, at 9:13 AM, Vondrak, Mary WQ wrote:

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Greetings,ThefollowinginformationisbeingsenttoanswerquestionsreceivedaboutaHydromodificationexemptionrequestforLagunaCanyonChannel.Alsoattachedisatechnicalmemorandumdevelopedtoclarifytheanalysisandbasisoftherequest.Informationrelatedtotheprocessforsubmittingpubliccommentsaswellastheprocessforprovidinginputinthefutureareansweredinquestions8-11below.Pleasedonthesitatetocontactmeifyouhaveanyotherquestionsorconcerns.1. WhatdoesHydromodificationmean?

Answer: In this case, Hydromodification refers to erosion of streamchannels that can occur over a period of time downstreamfromdevelopedland.

2. WhatisaHydromodificationManagementrequirement?

Answer:ThetermcomesfromtheNPDESStormwaterPermitissuedtothe City by the San Diego Regional Water Board. CompliancewithHydromodificationrequiresdevelopmentprojectstolimitrain water runoff through detention and/or storage. Theserequirements are intended to prevent downstream erosionfrompropertiesinexcessofwhatwouldnaturallyoccur.

3. Whendidthisrequirementstart?

Answer: The requirement first appeared in the 2009 NPDES MunicipalStormwaterPermitfortheSouthOrangeCountyarea.

4. Arethereanyexemptionstothisrequirement?

Answer: Yes. The Permit exempts areas where runoff flows throughconcrete lined pipes or channels all the way to the ocean.These areas are exempt because there is no concern forerosion. ThePermitalsoallows forexemptions toareas thatare not susceptible to Hydromodification impacts asdetermined through a Watershed Management Area Analysis(WMAA)andapprovedbytheRegionalWaterBoard.

5. DoesaHydromodificationexemptionimpactthedesignationofaBlue

LineStream?Answer: No. The blue line stream designation is not related to

Hydromodification exemptions. An exemption ofHydromodificationmanagement requirementswouldhaveno

impactonthisdesignation.

Q.: Is Laguna Canyon Creek an acknowledged/designated blue line stream by the City or is it not? Why are you dodging or avoiding that issue?

6. DoesaHydromodificationexemptionmeanthatadevelopmentproject

willbeexemptfrompollutioncontrolsandaWaterQualityManagementPlan(WQMP)?Answer: No. Rain water pollution controls and a WQMP will still be

required.

FACT: WQMPs are NOT appealable according to the SDRWQCB. You give a false sense of remedy by intimating theres local protection/oversight where there is not.

7. WhyisthereaHydromodificationexemptionrequestforLagunaCanyon

Channel?Answer:Theareathatdrainsfromthedogparktotheoceanisalready

exemptbecause it isconcrete lined. Thearea inquestionforanexemptionrequestisfromthedogparktoPhillipsStreet.Ageomorphic evaluation of the channel was conducted thatdetermined there was no current or future concern for longterm channel erosion. A spatial evaluation was done todetermine the differences between the existing and zonedbuildout land use conditions. This determined that anypossible increase in the developed area or developmentdensity within the watershed was not significant enough tochange the conditions of the channel downstream. Whileminor increases in development could occur, the cumulativechange in runoff associated with the projects would be smallcompared to the overall watershed runoff which is primarilyfrom preserved open space and previously developed areasthathaveverylimitedadditionalpotentialfordevelopment.

8. IftheHydromodificationexemptionisapproved,willtherebeanywayto

removetheexemptioninthefuture?Answer: Yes.Theexemptionmaybere-evaluatedaspartoftheWater

Quality Improvement Plan Annual Report. The annual reportanalysis will require a public participation process to solicit

recommendationsforchanges.

FACT: NGOs, especially small grass roots ones, have a difficult time of it by simply staying engaged in this complex process. Challenging requires in-house expertise 90% of activist organizations lack. The SDRWQCB will listen to them, but by the time gaps and deficiencies are noted, technical input scrutinized at a professional level, the staff and Board have been swayed by the previous submissions/explanations and analyses by County (Principal MS4 Permittee) and Copermittees (Municipalities). Hence CWNs intervention herein.

This is a fiduciary relationship, the SDRWQCB TRUSTS the permittees to provide 100% accurate, 100% true information. Once certified or approved by the SDRWQCB (set for late spring/early summer 2017), it will be nearly IMPOSSIBLE without expensive legal assistance to re-open, re-evaluate later. You make whats complex seem simple. Meanwhile, this City is hell-bent on urbanizing Laguna Canyon. So youve provided disingenuous/exagerrated scenarios for redress, cures, remedies and a true stakeholder participation process. CWN considers this City a traitor to its ecologically-friendly image. MS4 holders wager that they can whistle through the jurisdictional/regulatory graveyards without serious opposition, while our streams and watersheds proceed their entropic slide.

9. WherecanIfindthedocumentsthatarecurrentlyavailableforpublic

reviewandcomment?Answer: The documents are posted online at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtml. Those related to Laguna Beachare under the section titled South Orange County (San JuanHydrologicUnit).

10. Whatisthecurrentdeadlineforpubliccomments?

Answer: Thecurrentpubliccommentperiodwillcloseat5:00p.m.onNovember8,2016.

11. HowdoIsubmitcomments?

Answer: Written comments may be submitted via email [email protected]. The email should beaddressed to the attention of Erica Ryan. The subject of theemail should be PIN 794813, Comments on South OrangeCounty (San Juan Hydrologic Unit) San Juan Creek WaterQualityImprovementPlanSectionB.3.

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtmlhttp://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtmlmailto:[email protected]

Sincerely,MaryVondrakSeniorWaterQualityAnalystCityofLagunaBeach(949)497-0781

From the desk of:



Cell: (949) 280.2225 (VM & Texting)






From: Roger ButowTo: Ryan, Erica@WaterboardsCc: Vondrak, Mary WQ; Shissler, David WQ; Arias, Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards; Gibson,

David@Waterboards; Smith, James@Waterboards; Penny Elia; Ray Hiemstra; Rick Wilson; Penelope Milne; [email protected]; John Albritton; Susan Hamil; Richard Boon; Amanda Carr; Sharp, Grant; Crompton, Chris; Ed Almanza; Robert Zur Schmiede; [email protected]

Subject: Re: CREEK, not channel according to City grantDate: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:02:15 AM

Thanks EricaWhen the City wants maximum exemptions from CWA & Porter-Cologne regulatory oversight, its a channel.When they have their hands out for State grants it has high biological value, a creek deserving restoration & maximum protection.

On Oct 27, 2016, at 10:44 AM, Ryan, Erica@Waterboards wrote:

Received as public comment on B.3 Submittal Erica Ryan, CPSWQQSD/QSP/CISEC/ToR CGPQISP/ToR IGPWater Resource Control EngineerStorm Water ManagementSan Diego Water Board 2375 Northside Drive, Suite 100San Diego, CA 92108Direct Phone: (619) 521-8051Main Line: (619) 516-1990Fax No. (619) 516-1994Email: [email protected]

www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/

From: Roger Butow [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 6:05 AMTo: Vondrak, Mary WQCc: Shissler, David WQ; Ryan, Erica@Waterboards; Arias, Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards; Gibson, David@Waterboards; Smith, James@Waterboards; Penny Elia; Ray Hiemstra; Rick Wilson; Penelope Milne; [email protected]; John Albritton; Susan Hamil; Richard Boon; Amanda Carr; Sharp, Grant; Crompton, Chris; Ed Almanza; Robert Zur Schmiede; [email protected]: CREEK, not channel according to City grant Last year Borthwick told the City Council that "It's a thorn in my side when people refer to the creek as a ditch or channel.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/https://www.facebook.com/San-Diego-Regional-Water-Quality-Control-Board-141716669201479/https://twitter.com/SDWaterBoard?lang=enmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

It's not the creek's fault it looks the way it does. It's our fault for the way we've packaged it."http://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/news/tn-cpt-me-dewitt-restoration-20160804-story.html

On Oct 26, 2016, at 1:58 PM, Roger Butow wrote: Ms. Vondrak: Pity that you didnt include the 2 emails by Clean Water Now that were important regarding our inquiry, triggering the coughing up of critical information. Our goals and objectives have been accomplished: We wished assurance that none of the Citys submissions for exemptions rolled back, eroded, or encroached upon the high levels of justifiable stream and habitat protection as determined by Judge Kim Dunning in her scathing Writ of Mandate, her rebuke of the City and Coastal Commission staffs and overseer bodies. We also sought more information regarding the rationale, the justification, the sustaining data that supported Hydromod Exemptions in not only Laguna Canyon Creek but the others listed in SOC. Furthering our righteous alarm were two (2) other facts: Nowhere was Laguna Canyon Creek identified as a creek or by its true name, nor were the words blue line stream anywhere to be found. You/GeoSynTec described it as a channel throughout. So you diminished its value through intentional omission. Considering the fact that this City ignored many hydrology/water quality and accurate stream setback guidelines of the so-called Artists Work/Live, not to mention previous similar previous failures, why should a watchdog trust staff? Answer? We cant and shouldnt. Trust and respect must be earned, not granted ex officio My professional posture is that 0.0% means exactly that: ZERO. Not possibly 1.5% increase as is being offered in the amended WMAA offering. You wouldnt have re-submitted, have modified it if you hadnt falsely misrepresented build out. It could have read 1% and no complaint would have been forthcoming. As an analyst myself, 0.0% stuck out like a sore thumb, and only PARTIAL explanation WAS buried in an obscure Appendix (I.3). These MS4 submissions are serious and should be taken with great weight, theyre signed under penalty of perjury, and

mailto:[email protected]

if the County/City hadnt amended we would have sought charges of perjury against Mr. Shissler for knowingly deceiving the SDRWQCB. That the County believed the City is a problem for the Countyone must wonder how often such things fly under their radar screen due to their trust? I have interlineated (interjected) comments to your response below in a different font, used BOLD RED, to notice those CC that this matter isnt over. These type of CYA responses by MS4 Permittees, these damage control emails dont really describe the process and especially ignore remedies/cures and appellate venues:

On Oct 26, 2016, at 9:13 AM, Vondrak, Mary WQ wrote: Greetings, The following information is being sent to answer questions received about a Hydromodification exemption request for Laguna Canyon Channel. Also attached is a technical memorandum developed to clarify the analysis and basis of the request. Information related to the process for submitting public comments as well as the process for providing input in the future are answered in questions 8-11 below. Please dont hesitate to contact me if you have any other questions or concerns. 1. What does Hydromodification mean?

Answer: In this case, Hydromodification refers to erosion of stream channels that can occur over a period of time downstream from developed land.

2. What is a Hydromodification Management

requirement?Answer: The term comes from the NPDES

Stormwater Permit issued to the City by the San Diego Regional Water Board. Compliance with Hydromodification requires development projects to limit rain


water runoff through detention and/or storage. These requirements are intended to prevent downstream erosion from properties in excess of what would naturally occur.

3. When did this requirement start?

Answer: The requirement first appeared in the 2009 NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit for the South Orange County area.

4. Are there any exemptions to this requirement?

Answer: Yes. The Permit exempts areas where runoff flows through concrete lined pipes or channels all the way to the ocean. These areas are exempt because there is no concern for erosion. The Permit also allows for exemptions to areas that are not susceptible to Hydromodification impacts as determined through a Watershed Management Area Analysis (WMAA) and approved by the Regional Water Board.

5. Does a Hydromodification exemption impact the

designation of a Blue Line Stream?Answer: No. The blue line stream designation is

not related to Hydromodification exemptions. An exemption of Hydromodification management requirements would have no impact on this designation.


6. Does a Hydromodification exemption mean that a development project will be exempt from pollution controls and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)?Answer: No. Rain water pollution controls and a WQMP will

still be required. FACT: WQMPs are NOT appealable according to the SDRWQCB. You give a false sense of remedy by intimating theres local protection/oversight where there is not.

7. Why is there a Hydromodification exemption request for

Laguna Canyon Channel?Answer: The area that drains from the dog park to the

ocean is already exempt because it is concrete lined. The area in question for an exemption request is from the dog park to Phillips Street. A geomorphic evaluation of the channel was conducted that determined there was no current or future concern for long term channel erosion. A spatial evaluation was done to determine the differences between the existing and zoned buildout land use conditions. This determined that any possible increase in the developed area or development density within the watershed was not significant enough to change the conditions of the channel downstream. While minor increases in development could occur, the cumulative change in runoff associated with the projects would be small compared to the overall watershed runoff which is primarily from preserved open space and previously developed areas that have very limited additional potential for development.

8. If the Hydromodification exemption is approved, will there

be any way to remove the exemption in the future?Answer: Yes. The exemption may be re-evaluated as part of

the Water Quality Improvement Plan Annual Report. The annual report analysis will require a public participation process to solicit

recommendations for changes. FACT: NGOs, especially small grass roots ones, have a difficult time of it by simply staying engaged in this complex process. Challenging requires in-house expertise 90% of activist organizations lack. The SDRWQCB will listen to them, but by the time gaps and deficiencies are noted, technical input scrutinized at a professional level, the staff and Board have been swayed by the previous submissions/explanations and analyses by County (Principal MS4 Permittee) and Copermittees (Municipalities). Hence CWNs intervention herein. This is a fiduciary relationship, the SDRWQCB TRUSTS the permittees to provide 100% accurate, 100% true information. Once certified or approved by the SDRWQCB (set for late spring/early summer 2017), it will be nearly IMPOSSIBLE without expensive legal assistance to re-open, re-evaluate later. You make whats complex seem simple. Meanwhile, this City is hell-bent on urbanizing Laguna Canyon. So youve provided disingenuous/exagerrated scenarios for redress, cures, remedies and a true stakeholder participation process. CWN considers this City a traitor to its ecologically-friendly image. MS4 holders wager that they can whistle through the jurisdictional/regulatory graveyards without serious opposition, while our streams and watersheds proceed their entropic slide.

9. Where can I find the documents that are currently available

for public review and comment?Answer: The documents are posted online at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtml. Those related to Laguna Beach are under the section titled South Orange County (San Juan Hydrologic Unit).

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtmlhttp://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtml

10. What is the current deadline for public comments?

Answer: The current public comment period will close at 5:00 p.m. on November 8, 2016.

11. How do I submit comments?

Answer: Written comments may be submitted via email to [email protected]. The email should be addressed to the attention of Erica Ryan. The subject of the email should be PIN 794813, Comments on South Orange County (San Juan Hydrologic Unit) San Juan Creek Water Quality Improvement Plan Section B.3.

Sincerely, Mary VondrakSenior Water Quality AnalystCity of Laguna Beach(949) 497-0781

From the desk of:Roger E. Btow Founder & Executive Director Landline Office Phone: (949) 715.1912 (No Texting/VM after 6 rings)Cell: (949) 280.2225 (VM & Texting)Mailing Address: PO Box 4711 Laguna Beach CA 92652 Email: [email protected]: www.clean-water-now.orgCLEAN WATER NOW (est. 1998) is an innovative, science-based organization committed to solution-oriented collaboration as a means of developing safe, sustainable water supplies and preserving healthy ecosystems.

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.clean-water-now.org/

From: Roger ButowTo: Vondrak, Mary WQCc: Shissler, David WQ; Ryan, Erica@Waterboards; Arias, Christina@Waterboards; Walsh, Laurie@Waterboards;

Gibson, David@Waterboards; Smith, James@Waterboards; Penny Elia; Ray Hiemstra; Rick Wilson; Penelope Milne; [email protected]; John Albritton; Susan Hamil; Richard Boon; Amanda Carr; Sharp, Grant; Crompton, Chris; Ed Almanza; Robert Zur Schmiede; [email protected]

Subject: CREEK, not channel according to City grantDate: Thursday, October 27, 2016 6:05:21 AM

Last year Borthwick told the City Council that "It's a thorn in my side when people refer to the creek as a ditch or channel. It's not the creek's fault it looks the way it does. It's our fault for the way we've packaged it."http://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/news/tn-cpt-me-dewitt-restoration-20160804-story.html

On Oct 26, 2016, at 1:58 PM, Roger Butow wrote:

Ms. Vondrak: Pity that you didnt include the 2 emails by Clean Water Now that were important regarding our inquiry, triggering the coughing up of critical information. Our goals and objectives have been accomplished: We wished assurance that none of the Citys submissions for exemptions rolled back, eroded, or encroached upon the high levels of justifiable stream and habitat protection as determined by Judge Kim Dunning in her scathing Writ of Mandate, her rebuke of the City and Coastal Commission staffs and overseer bodies. We also sought more information regarding the rationale, the justification, the sustaining data that supported Hydromod Exemptions in not only Laguna Canyon Creek but the others listed in SOC. Furthering our righteous alarm were two (2) other facts: Nowhere was Laguna Canyon Creek identified as a creek or by its true name, nor were the words blue line stream anywhere to be found. You/GeoSynTec described it as a channel throughout. So you diminished its value through intentional omission. Considering the fact that this City ignored many hydrology/water quality and accurate stream setback guidelines of the so-called Artists Work/Live, not to mention previous similar previous failures, why should a watchdog trust staff? Answer? We cant and shouldnt. Trust and respect must be earned, not granted ex officio My professional posture is that 0.0% means exactly that: ZERO. Not possibly 1.5% increase as is being offered in the amended WMAA offering. You wouldnt have re-submitted, have modified it if you hadnt falsely misrepresented build out. It could have read 1% and no complaint would have been forthcoming. As an analyst myself, 0.0% stuck out like a sore thumb, and only

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

PARTIAL explanation WAS buried in an obscure Appendix (I.3).

These MS4 submissions are serious and should be taken with great weight, theyre signed under penalty of perjury, and if the County/City hadnt amended we would have sought charges of perjury against Mr. Shissler for knowingly deceiving the SDRWQCB. That the County believed the City is a problem for the Countyone must wonder how often such things fly under their radar screen due to their trust?

I have interlineated (interjected) comments to your response below in a different font, used BOLD RED, to notice those CC that this matter isnt over. These type of CYA responses by MS4 Permittees, these damage control emails dont really describe the process and especially ignore remedies/cures and appellate venues:

On Oct 26, 2016, at 9:13 AM, Vondrak, Mary WQ wrote:

Greetings,ThefollowinginformationisbeingsenttoanswerquestionsreceivedaboutaHydromodificationexemptionrequestforLagunaCanyonChannel.Alsoattachedisatechnicalmemorandumdevelopedtoclarifytheanalysisandbasisoftherequest.Informationrelatedtotheprocessforsubmittingpubliccommentsaswellastheprocessforprovidinginputinthefutureareansweredinquestions8-11below.Pleasedonthesitatetocontactmeifyouhaveanyotherquestionsorconcerns.1. WhatdoesHydromodificationmean?

Answer:Inthiscase,Hydromodificationreferstoerosionofstream channels that can occur over a period oftimedownstreamfromdevelopedland.

2. WhatisaHydromodificationManagementrequirement?

Answer: The term comes from the NPDES StormwaterPermitissuedtotheCitybytheSanDiegoRegionalWaterBoard.CompliancewithHydromodificationrequiresdevelopmentprojects to limit rainwaterrunoff through detention and/or storage. Theserequirements are intended to preventdownstream erosion from properties in excess ofwhatwouldnaturallyoccur.


3. Whendidthisrequirementstart?

Answer:Therequirementfirstappearedinthe2009NPDESMunicipal Stormwater Permit for the SouthOrangeCountyarea.

4. Arethereanyexemptionstothisrequirement?

Answer:Yes.ThePermitexemptsareaswhererunoffflowsthrough concrete lined pipes or channels all theway to the ocean. These areas are exemptbecause there is no concern for erosion. ThePermitalsoallowsforexemptionstoareasthatarenot susceptible to Hydromodification impacts asdetermined through a Watershed ManagementArea Analysis (WMAA) and approved by theRegionalWaterBoard.

5. DoesaHydromodificationexemptionimpactthedesignation

ofaBlueLineStream?Answer:No.Thebluelinestreamdesignationisnotrelated

to Hydromodification exemptions. An exemptionof Hydromodification management requirementswouldhavenoimpactonthisdesignation.


6. Does a Hydromodification exemption mean that a

development project will be exempt from pollution controlsandaWaterQualityManagementPlan(WQMP)?Answer:No.RainwaterpollutioncontrolsandaWQMPwill

stillberequired.

FACT: WQMPs are NOT appealable according to the SDRWQCB. You give a false sense of remedy by intimating theres local protection/oversight where there is not.

7. WhyisthereaHydromodificationexemptionrequestforLagunaCanyonChannel?Answer: The area that drains from the dog park to the

ocean is already exempt because it is concretelined. The area in question for an exemptionrequest is fromthedogpark toPhillipsStreet. Ageomorphic evaluation of the channel wasconducted thatdetermined there was no currentorfutureconcernforlongtermchannelerosion.Aspatial evaluation was done to determine thedifferences between the existing and zonedbuildoutlanduseconditions.Thisdeterminedthatany possible increase in the developed area ordevelopment density within the watershed wasnotsignificantenoughtochangetheconditionsofthe channel downstream. While minor increasesin development could occur, the cumulativechange in runoff associated with the projectswouldbesmallcomparedtotheoverallwatershedrunoff which is primarily from preserved openspace and previously developed areas that haveverylimitedadditionalpotentialfordevelopment.

8. IftheHydromodificationexemptionisapproved,willthere

beanywaytoremovetheexemptioninthefuture?Answer:Yes.Theexemptionmaybere-evaluatedaspartof

the Water Quality Improvement Plan AnnualReport. The annual report analysis will require apublic participation process to solicitrecommendationsforchanges.

FACT: NGOs, especially small grass roots ones, have a difficult time of it by simply staying engaged in this complex process. Challenging requires in-house expertise 90% of activist organizations lack. The SDRWQCB will listen to them, but by the time gaps and deficiencies are noted, technical input scrutinized at a professional level, the staff and Board have been swayed by the previous submissions/explanations and analyses by County (Principal MS4 Permittee) and Copermittees (Municipalities). Hence CWNs intervention herein.

This is a fiduciary relationship, the SDRWQCB TRUSTS the permittees to provide 100% accurate, 100% true information. Once certified or approved by the SDRWQCB (set for late spring/early summer 2017), it will be nearly IMPOSSIBLE without expensive legal assistance to re-open, re-evaluate later. You make whats complex seem simple. Meanwhile, this City is hell-bent on urbanizing Laguna Canyon. So youve provided disingenuous/exagerrated scenarios for redress, cures, remedies and a true stakeholder participation process. CWN considers this City a traitor to its ecologically-friendly image. MS4 holders wager that they can whistle through the jurisdictional/regulatory graveyards without serious opposition, while our streams and watersheds proceed their entropic slide.

9. WherecanIfindthedocumentsthatarecurrentlyavailable

forpublicreviewandcomment?Answer: The documents are posted online at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtml. Thoserelated to Laguna Beach are under the sectiontitledSouthOrangeCounty(SanJuanHydrologicUnit).

10. Whatisthecurrentdeadlineforpubliccomments?

Answer: The current public comment period will close at5:00p.m.onNovember8,2016.

11. HowdoIsubmitcomments?

Answer:Writtencommentsmaybesubmittedviaemailtosandiego@waterboards.ca.gov. The email shouldbeaddressedtotheattentionofEricaRyan. Thesubject of the email should be PIN 794813,Comments on South Orange County (San JuanHydrologic Unit) San Juan Creek Water QualityImprovementPlanSectionB.3.

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtmlhttp://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/stormwater/wqip.shtmlmailto:[email protected]

Sincerely,MaryVondrakSeniorWaterQualityAnalystCityofLagunaBeach(949)497-0781

From the desk of:



Cell: (949) 280.2225 (VM & Texting)






Grant will help city clean Laguna Canyon Creek - Laguna Beach Coastline Pilot

http://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/news/tn-cpt-me-dewitt-restoration-20160804-story.html[11/15/2016 12:33:00 PM]

Times Community News / Coastline Pilot / News

f t m

Grant will help city clean LagunaCanyon Creek

MOST POPULAR LOCAL SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT POLITICS ORANGE COUNTY OPINION PLACE AN AD f 77

SUBSCRIBE

http://www.latimes.com/socal/#nt=breadcrumbhttp://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/#nt=breadcrumbhttp://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/news/#nt=breadcrumbhttp://www.latimes.com/socal/coastline-pilot/http://www.latimes.com/popular/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/local/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/sports/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/entertainment/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/politics/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/local/orangecounty/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/opinion/#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://placeanad.latimes.com/http://www.latimes.com/local/weather/?regionalZipCode=90012#nt=tertiarynavbarhttp://www.latimes.com/#nt=mastheadnavbar



L

By Bryce Alderton Contact Reporter

AUGUST 4, 2016, 1:23 PM

aguna Beach is cleaning up in more ways than one.

Two years after the cleanup of a nearby hazardous waste site, the city hasreceived notice of a $500,000 grant for removing invasive plant species in and

along Laguna Canyon Creek, planting trees along the creek and constructing a public trailthat will be a safer walkway than busy Laguna Canyon Road.

Laguna Canyon Foundation executive director Hallie Jones walks along Laguna Canyon Creek on the DeWitt property onWednesday. The city received a grant to restore the area and is partnering with the foundation and Laguna Greenbelt, Inc. onthe project. (Don Leach / Coastline Pilot)

ADVERTISING

http://www.latimes.com/tn-dpt-me-bryce-alderton-staff.html#nt=bylinemailto:[email protected]?subject=Regarding: "Grant will help city clean Laguna Canyon Creek"



The project will provide a destination for hikers, students and other visitors, offeringinterpretive trail signs to educate about the riparian habitat along the creek, according toplans.

The California Natural Resources Agency, whose mission is to restore, protect andmanage the state's natural, historical and cultural resources, awarded the grant forrestoration of an area within the 186-acre, city-owned DeWitt property in LagunaCanyon.

The restoration area is adjacent to a 6-acre parcel within the DeWitt property that wasthe site of a hazardous waste cleanup effort in late 2014, four years after floods in thearea caused erosion, exposing debris.

The city removed 15,500 cubic yards ofwaste in an area referred to as the burnsite, so named for the household trash



incinerated on the land between 1958and the early 1970s, consultant BobBurnham wrote in an email, citing anenvironmental impact report. Debrisincluded broken and melted glass, fused

metal, ceramics and porcelain.

The city purchased the DeWitt property for $2 million in 1991 after two years ofwrangling over the price with then-owners John DeWitt, a San Gabriel Valley oil dealer,and Alice Platz, an Arizona resident, the Los Angeles Times reported.

"We're so happy about being able to to work together on a project of this magnitude,"Hallie Jones, executive director of the Laguna Canyon Foundation, said of thefoundation's partnership with Laguna Greenbelt Inc. to give the city expert council on theproject. "Laguna Canyon Creek's restoration is a high priority."

The Laguna Canyon Foundation is a nonprofit organization created to preserve andprotect the Laguna Coast Wilderness Park and surrounding parklands. Laguna Greenbeltis a grassroots organization that works to protect wildlife habitat.

The nearly 5-acre restoration area, adjacent to the creek, stretches from the Sun Valleyneighborhood north to Anneliese School. It harbors areas of invasive arundo and pampasgrass, scattered dirt piles and a former asphalt parking lot, according to a city staffreport.

Jones expects to begin removing invasive plants and debris this fall or winter. Vegetationexperts still need to decide which types of plants to include in the meadow and along thecreek, she said.

Inspiration for the project came from landscape architect and Laguna Greenbelt boardmember Bob Borthwick, who developed a comprehensive plan for improving areas alongthe 51/2-mile creek, which begins north of Laguna Lakes.

"Bob did the yeoman's job on Laguna Canyon Creek as a whole, really highlighting themost critical improvements that could take place," Jones said.

Last year Borthwick told the City Council that "It's a thorn in my side" when people referto the creek as a ditch or channel. "It's not the creek's fault it looks the way it does. It's



our fault for the way we've packaged it."

The Laguna project was one of 23 statewide awarded a share of $10.3 million in grantfunding in conjunction with the California River Parkways Act of 2004.

Grant applicants needed to satisfy two of five conditions. The DeWitt project qualifiedunder the habitat category, for improving or restoring riparian environment, and forinterpretive enhancements, said Bryan Cash, the resource agency's deputy assistantsecretary.

"It's great there is an elementary school next door so students can see a restorationproject" in progress, Cash said. Interpretive signs along the trail will help teachersinstruct students on the natural elements of the area, he added.

The grant, combined with $125,000 from the city and $5,000 in private donations, willmake for a comprehensive restoration effort of the DeWitt property, those associatedwith the project said.

As part of the grant application, the city agreed to conduct a biological study and securenecessary permits from regulatory agencies before beginning work to comply with theCalifornia Environmental Quality Act.

Agency staff typically visit a project site while work is in progress and at the end toensure consistency with planned restoration, Cash said, adding that the city will receivefunding in stages as it submits invoices to the agency.

--

Bryce Alderton, [email protected]

Twitter: @AldertonBryce

Copyright 2016, Laguna Beach Coastline Pilot

f t m

mailto:[email protected]://twitter.com/AldertonBrycehttp://www.latimes.com/



BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT



CWN-10_13_16.B.3HMPCWN-10_17_16.B.3HMPCWN-10_26_16.B3HMPCWN10_27_16 B.3HMPCWN 2_10_27_1610_27_16 CWN Attlatimes.comGrant will help city clean Laguna Canyon Creek - Laguna Beach Coastline Pilot

Could you provide more details regarding how Laguna …€¦ · I’ll gladly provide you with that...

Documents

Transcript of Could you provide more details regarding how Laguna …€¦ · I’ll gladly provide you with that...