Agua Hedionda Watershed

Management Plan

Watershed Planning Group Meeting

June 5, 2008
Carlsbad, CA
Agenda
Update on LID Research

Preliminary Recommendations for Watershed

Management Actions

Implementation

Next Steps
Update on LID Research
 Bioretention
 Bacteria removal significantly better
than swales
 Likely to need underdrain system, which
increases cost
 Without irrigation, need drought-tolerant
plants that can also withstand
inundation
 Recommend sedimentation forebay to
reduce risk of clogging
 More research needed for proper design
in arid environments
 Porous Pavement
 Many different technologies, rapidly
evolving field
 Potential for some infiltration, even on
poor soils
 With proper design, may not need
underdrains
 Frequent vacuum sweeping (e.g.,
annually) needed to maintain
effectiveness
 Could be used for sidewalks and patios
in addition to large non-commercial
parking areas.
 Cisterns
 Cisterns have been successfully tested
in 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 determine
cost-effectiveness
 New development – can amortize cost
with mortgage
 Bioretention

Porous Pavement

Cistern

City of Encinitas, Roadside GrassCrete parking

Courtesy of Arid Solutions, Inc

 Stream Buffers
 Multiple functions – stream channel
stability, pollutant trapping and uptake,
temperature moderation, habitat
 Recommended width varies depending
on goals
 30 – 100 feet for pollutant removal
 100 – 300 feet for habitat/ecosystem
function/wildlife corridors
 Channel protection width varies by stream
order – room for channel migration (e.g., 4X
bankfull width)
 Current CA local buffer ordinances
mostly from 50 – 100 feet
 Irrigation
 Estimates of 40-50 inches/yr in CA,
leads to nutrient-rich irrigation return
flow
 Technologies allow irrigation to be
demand-driven
 Can use drought-tolerant plants to
reduce demand
 Irrigation essentially required by CA fire
safety law
 Maintain a “defensible space” around buildings
 30 feet minimum “home defense zone”,
vegetation with high moisture content
Preliminary Recommendations for
Watershed Management Actions
 Actions: New Development
Site Management
 Basic LID Implementation
Reduce site impervious area
Swales
Extended dry detention
Stream buffers
 Extended Dry Detention

Swale

City of Encinitas, Volleyball Court/ Detention Area

Stream Buffer

Photograph Courtesy of EOA, Inc.

 Actions: New Development
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
 Bioretention
 Porous pavement
 Cisterns/water harvesting
 Actions: New Development
Site Management
 Incorporate use of “basic LID” techniques
into local codes and ordinances
 Track compliance with stormwater
management and LID
 As requirements increase (e.g. TMDL),
consider use of enhanced LID techniques
 Test feasibility of porous pavement,
cisterns, and bioretention without
irrigation
 Actions: Preservation

 25 properties
 386 acres to preserve
 $38 to $95 million in total acquisition
costs (fee simple acquisition)
 Average cost: $98,000 to $246,000
per acre
 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
 Actions: Riparian Buffer
Restoration
 27 properties
 129 acres to restore
 $9.8 to $19 million in total acquisition
and restoration costs
 Average cost: $76,000 to $147,000
per acre
 Buffer Restoration Priorities
Unincorp.

Legend
Actions: Riparian Buffer and
Area

Wetland Restoration
Targeted Buffer Area

Vista
Watershed
Subwatersheds
Municipal Boundaries
Oceanside
Freeways
Streams
Buffer Rest. Opportunities -7 8 k
SR ee
Cr
Composite Score

na
Low (3.0 - 5.9)
Medium (6.0 - 8.4)
e
High (8.5 - 9.4)
Bu

k
I-5

ee
Cr
as

n
in
nc

ma
le E
t
Lit

Ro
k
ree
C SR
nda ree
k
di o a C -7
e ad 8
u aH Mir
Ag La
San Marcos

Carlsbad

o
0 0.45 0.9 1.8
Parcel Prioritization for Buffer Restoration, Revised June 2008 Kilometers
NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_VI_FIPS_0406_Feet
Map produced 05-30-2008 - Heather Fisher 0 0.4 0.8 1.6
I-5

Miles
 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
Actions: Wetlands Restoration

 14 properties
 61 acres to restore
 $4.2 to $13 million in total acquisition
and restoration costs
 Average cost: $69,000 to $213,000
per acre
 Wetlands Restoration Priorities
Unincorp.
Area
Legend
Watershed
Subwatersheds
Municipal Boundaries Vista
Freeways
Water
Oceanside
Streams

-78
Wetland Rest. Opportunities
R k
ee
Composite Score
S
Cr
Low (2.7 - 5.9)
Medium (6.0 - 7.4)
High (7.5 - 8.7)
ena
Bu

k
I-5

e
Cre
as

n
in
nc

ma
le E
t
Lit

Ro
k
C ree
d a
eek SR
dio n aC
r -7
e d 8
aH Mira
u La
Ag
San Marcos

Carlsbad

o
0 0.5 1 2
Parcel Prioritization for Wetlands Restoration, Revised June 2008 Kilometers
NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_VI_FIPS_0406_Feet
Map produced 05-30-2008 - Heather Fisher 0 0.4 0.8 1.6
I-5

Miles
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
Actions: Stream Restoration

 12 reaches to restore
 31,500 feet, or 6 miles to restore
 $9 to $11 million in restoration costs
 Stream Restoration Opportunities
Unincorp.
Area
Legend
Actions: StreamVista
Watershed
Subwatersheds
Municipal Boundaries
Restoration Oceanside
Freeways
Water
Stream Restoration Opportunities
-7 8 k
SR ee
Streams

Cr
e na
Bu

k
I-5

ee
Cr
as

n
in
nc

ma
le E
t
Lit

Ro
k
ree
C SR
nda ree
k
di o a C -7
e ad 8
u aH Mir
Ag La
San Marcos

Carlsbad

o
0 0.45 0.9 1.8
Stream Restoration Opportunities, Revised June 2008 Kilometers
NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_VI_FIPS_0406_Feet
Map produced 05-30-2008 - Heather Fisher 0 0.4 0.8 1.6
I-5

Miles
Actions: Stream Restoration
 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; coordinate with sewer
and storm drain infrastructure programs
 Actions: BMP Retrofit
 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, trash
traps
 BMP Retrofit Opportunities Unincorp.

Legend
Actions: Riparian Buffer and Area

Wetland Restoration
Priority Subwaterseds

^
Priority Untreated Parcels
Demonstrations BMPs
Vista
Oceanside
Subwatersheds
Municipal Boundaries
Water
- 78 k
Freeways
SR ree
Streams C
a
uen
B

k
I-5

ree
nC
s
c ina^

ma
n
t tl eE

Ro
Li
k
ree ^^^
aC k SR
io n
d re e
e d ^ rad
a C -7
8
u aH ^^ M i
Ag La
^^
San Marcos

Carlsbad

o
0 0.45 0.9 1.8
Priority BMP Retrofit Opportunities Kilometers
NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_VI_FIPS_0406_Feet
Map produced 05-30-2008 0 0.4 0.8 1.6
I-5

Miles
 Actions: BMP Retrofit for 5
Demonstration Sites
 Landowner outreach
 Preliminary design and cost estimate
 Secure needed permits
 Identify/secure funding sources
 Final planning and design
 Actions: BMP Retrofit for
Untreated Parcels

 Site selection and BMP feasibility

 Landowner outreach
 Design and costing
 Secure needed permits
 Secure funding
 Actions: Monitoring and
Enforcement
 Long-term stream and lagoon monitoring
 Long-term wetlands monitoring
 Inspections/maintenance of sanitary
sewer
 Inspections/maintenance of storm
drainage system
 Construction site inspection
 Stormwater BMP Inspection
 Tracking Watershed Indicators
 Actions: Citizen
Stewardship/Public Outreach
 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
Actions: Sustained Funding and
Support
 Secure grants
 SWRCB (Prop 84); DWR (Prop 84 and 1e); County IRWM
(Prop 84); EPA 319(h)
 Coordinate with partner agencies
 Wetland Recovery Project; Wildlife Agencies; MSCP/MHCP
programs; Channel Maintenance Programs
 Mitigation programs
 Mitigation Banks; Individual Project Mitigation Needs
 Watershed Council Support
 Wetland Recovery Project; Department of Conservation;
Local Jurisdictions; Local Businesses
Implementation
 Your advice needed

 Potential funding sources

 Responsible group(s)
 General timelines

 See handout
Next Steps
 Next Steps

 June 9-16 - Review of Draft

Implementation Table
 June 12-16 – Review of Focus Area
Recommendations
 July 10 – Draft Watershed
Management Plan
 July 17- Final WPG Meeting to
comment on Draft Plan