WPGMeeting Presentation 06-03-08

8/8/2019 WPGMeeting Presentation 06-03-08

1/36

Agua Hedionda WatershedManagement Plan

Watershed Planning Group MeetingJune 5, 2008

Carlsbad, CA


2/36

AgendaUpdate on LID Research

Preliminary Recommendations for Watershed

Management Actions

Implementation

Next Steps


3/36

Update on LID Research


4/36

Bioretention

Bacteria removal significantly betterthan swales

Likely to need underdrain system, which

increases cost Without irrigation, need drought-tolerant

plants that can also withstandinundation

Recommend sedimentation forebay toreduce risk of clogging

More research needed for proper designin arid environments


5/36

Porous Pavement

Many different technologies, rapidlyevolving field

Potential for some infiltration, even onpoor soils

With proper design, may not needunderdrains

Frequent vacuum sweeping (e.g.,annually) needed to maintain

effectiveness Could be used for sidewalks and patios

in addition to large non-commercialparking areas.


6/36

Cisterns

Cisterns have been successfully testedin CA in demonstration projects

Store runoff from rainy season to use

for site irrigation during dry season

Applicable for both residential and non-residential uses

Needs further analysis to determinecost-effectiveness

New development can amortize costwith mortgage


7/36

City of Encinitas, Roadside GrassCrete parking

Courtesy of Arid Solutions, Inc

Porous Pavement

Cistern

Bioretention


8/36

Stream Buffers

Multiple functions stream channelstability, pollutant trapping and uptake,temperature moderation, habitat

Recommended width varies dependingon goals30 100 feet for pollutant removal

100 300 feet for habitat/ecosystemfunction/wildlife corridors

Channel protection width varies by streamorder room for channel migration (e.g., 4Xbankfull width)

Current CA local buffer ordinancesmostly from 50 100 feet


9/36

Irrigation

Estimates of 40-50 inches/yr in CA,leads to nutrient-rich irrigation returnflow

Technologies allow irrigation to bedemand-driven

Can use drought-tolerant plants toreduce demand

Irrigation essentially required by CA firesafety lawMaintain a defensible space around buildings

30 feet minimum home defense zone,

vegetation with high moisture content


10/36

Preliminary Recommendations for

Watershed Management Actions


11/36

Actions: New Development

Site Management

Basic LID Implementation

Reduce site impervious area

Swales

Extended dry detention

Stream buffers


12/36

Extended Dry Detention

Swale

City of Encinitas, Volleyball Court/ Detention Area

Photograph Courtesy of EOA, Inc.

Stream Buffer


13/36


Site Management Enhanced LID Implementation

High level of effort to reduce site impervious area

Disconnect impervious surfaces where possible,direct runoff to pervious areas to maximize

infiltration

Minimize disturbance of pervious surfaces

BioretentionPorous pavement

Cisterns/water harvesting


14/36


Site Management Incorporate use of basic LID techniques

into local codes and ordinances

Track compliance with stormwatermanagement and LID

As requirements increase (e.g. TMDL),consider use of enhanced LID techniques

Test feasibility of porous pavement,cisterns, and bioretention withoutirrigation


15/36

Actions: Preservation

25 properties

386 acres to preserve

$38 to $95 million in total acquisitioncosts (fee simple acquisition)

Average cost: $98,000 to $246,000per acre


16/36

Actions: Preservation

Field evaluation

Landowner outreach

Compare with cultural resource priorities

Identify/secure funding sources

Identify/secure stewardship organizations

Develop stewardship plan

Annual acquisition workshop

Update prioritization tool


17/36

Actions: Riparian Buffer

Restoration

27 properties

129 acres to restore

$9.8 to $19 million in total acquisitionand restoration costs



18/36

Actions: Riparian Bufferand

Wetland RestorationV

C r

S r

SR

SR

A H

Crk

B

Crk

rCr

k

ER

m

Cr

k

LegendTargeted B

er Area

Waters

ed

S

aters

edsM

ici

alB

daries

Freeways

Streams

Buffer Rest. Opportunities

Composite S

ore

L

w (3.0 - 5.9)

Medi

m (6.0 - 8.4)

High (8.5 - 9.4)

o0 0.9 1.80.45

Kilometers

0 0.8 1.60.4

Miles

ParcelPrioritization forB ffer Restoration, Revised June 2008

NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_VI_FIPS_0406_FeetMap produced 05-30-2008 - HeatherFisher

Buffer Restoration Priorities


19/36

Actions: Riparian Buffer

Restoration Field evaluation Landowner outreach Compare with cultural resource priorities

Preliminary design and cost estimate Secure needed permits Identify/secure funding sources Identify/secure stewardship organizations Restoration planning and design

Develop stewardship plan Annual acquisition workshop Update prioritization tool


20/36

Actions: Wetlands Restoration

14 properties

61 acres to restore

$4.2 to $13 million in total acquisitionand restoration costs



21/36

Carsbad

Oceanside Vista

San Marcos

I-5

I-5

SR-78

SR-78

A H

Crk

B

Crk

r

Crk

ER

m

Cr

k

LegendWatershed

Subwatersheds

MunicipalBoundaries

Freeways

Water

Streams

Wetland Rest. Opportunities

Composite ScoreLow (2.7 - 5.9)

Medium (6.0 - 7.4)

High (7.5 - 8.7)

o0 1 20.5

Kilometers

0 0.8 1.60.4

Miles

ParcelPrioritization for Wetlands Restoration, Revised June 2008


Wetlands Restoration Priorities


22/36

Actions: Wetlands Restoration Field evaluation Landowner outreach Compare with cultural resource priorities Preliminary design and cost estimate

Secure needed permits Identify/secure funding sources Identify/secure stewardship organizations Restoration planning and design

Develop stewardship plan Annual acquisition workshop Update prioritization tool


23/36

Actions: Stream Restoration

12 reaches to restore

31,500 feet, or 6 miles to restore

$9 to $11 million in restoration costs


24/36

Actions: Stream RestorationVista

Carlsbad

Oceanside

San Marcos

I-5

I-5

SR-78

SR-7

8A

H

Crk

B

Crk

rCr

k

ER

m

Cr

k

Legend

Watershed

Subwatersheds

MunicipalBoundariesFreeways

Water

Stream Restoration Opportunities

Streams

o0 0.9 1.80.45

Kilometers

0 0.8 1.60.4

Miles

Stream Restoration Opportunities, Revised June 2008


Stream Restoration Opportunities


25/36


26/36

Actions: BMPRetrofit

2,870 acres of high priority parcels

Located in high priority subbasins based

on existing runoff and loading Five retrofit demonstration sites

(coincident with stream restoration sites)

Demonstration BMPs include dry

detention, bioswale, rainwater harvesting,permeable pavement, media filters, trashtraps


27/36

Actions: Riparian Bufferand

Wetland Restoration

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

Vista

Carlsbad

Oceanside

San Marcos

I-

I-

SR-78

SR-7

8AguaHed o

nda C

ee

Bue

naC

ee

La M

adaC e

e

Le E

ncnas

Ro

anCee

LegendPrioritySubwaterseds

Priority UntreatedParce s

^ Demonstrations BMPsSubwatersheds

Municipa Boundaries

Water

Freeways

Streams

o0 0. 1.0.45

Kilometers

0 0. 1. 0.4

Miles

PriorityBMP Retrofit pportunities

NAD 1983 StatePlane California VI FIPS 0406 FeetMapproduced05-30-

008

BMPRetrofit Opportunities


28/36

Actions: BMPRetrofit for 5

Demonstration Sites Landowner outreach

Preliminary design and cost estimate

Secure needed permits

Identify/secure funding sources

Final planning and design


29/36

Actions: BMPRetrofit for

UntreatedParcels

Site selection and BMP feasibility

Landowner outreach

Design and costing

Secure needed permits

Secure funding


30/36

Actions: Monitoringand

Enforcement

Long-term stream and lagoon monitoring

Long-term wetlands monitoring

Inspections/maintenance of sanitarysewer

Inspections/maintenance of stormdrainage system

Construction site inspection StormwaterBMP Inspection

Tracking Watershed Indicators


31/36

Actions: Citizen

Stewardship/PublicOutreach Collaborative Watershed Council

Education of local boards to gain

support for watershed management Development of citizen education

materials

LID workshops and training

Annual awards program

Management partnerships


32/36

Actions: Sustained Fundingand

Support Secure grants

SWRCB (Prop 84); DWR (Prop 84 and 1e); County RWM(Prop 84); EPA 319(h)

Coordinate with partner agencies Wetland Recovery Project; WildlifeAgencies; MSCP/MHCP

programs; Channel Maintenance Programs

Mitigation programs Mitigation Banks; ndividual Project Mitigation Needs

Watershed Council Support Wetland Recovery Project; Department of Conservation;

ocal Jurisdictions; ocal Businesses


33/36

Implementation


34/36

Youradvice needed

Potential funding sources

Responsible group(s)

General timelines

See handout


35/36

Next Steps


36/36

NextSteps

June 9-16 - Review of DraftImplementation Table

June 12-16 Review of Focus AreaRecommendations

July 10 Draft Watershed

Management Plan July 17- Final WPG Meeting tocomment on Draft Plan

WPGMeeting Presentation 06-03-08

Documents

Transcript of WPGMeeting Presentation 06-03-08