4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan EIR Section 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.7 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY This section is based on information from the following documents: • Gateway South Office Building and Fire Station Draft Supplemental EIR, City of Scotts Valley, January 2004 • Gateway South Office Building and Fire Station Hydrology Technical Report, City of Scotts Valley , January 2004 • Polo Ranch Draft Recirculated EIR, City of Scotts Valley, December 2005 • 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. Scotts Valley Water District. • Groundwater Modeling Study of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin • 2007 Annual Report. Scotts Valley Water District. Groundwater Management Program. May 2008. 4.7.1 Setting a. Physical Setting. Drainage. The City of Scotts Valley occupies the valley of Carbonera Creek and its main tributary to the north, Bean Creek. The project site is located within both the watershed of Carbonera Creek and Bean Creek (see Figure 4.7-1). Carbonera Creek is a tributary of the San Lorenzo River system, which drains south from the Santa Cruz Mountains into the Monterey Bay at the City of Santa Cruz. The San Lorenzo River watershed drains approximately 137 square miles, and its principal tributaries include Boulder Creek, Kings Creek, Bear Creek, Newell Creek, Zayante Creek, Bean Creek, and Branciforte Creek. The Carbonera Creek watershed drains 3.6 square miles at United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauge near the Scotts Valley Water District (SVWD) southern boundary. Unlike Bean Creek, Carbonera Creek typically becomes dry or near dry during the summer months. The creek flows generally southwest from its headwaters in the Santa Cruz Mountains, and discharges to Branciforte Creek in the City of Santa Cruz. Branciforte Creek discharges into the San Lorenzo River near Soquel Avenue, approximately one mile downstream of the Carbonera Creek confluence. The Carbonera Creek watershed is primarily mountainous, being bounded on the north by the Santa Cruz Mountains, on the west by the Bean Creek Watershed, and on the east by the Branciforte Creek watershed, and encompasses elevations ranging from 30 to 3,200 feet above mean sea level. Bean Creek drains 8.8 square miles at its USGS gauge just beyond the western boundary of the SVWD. Lower Bean Creek has a high average flow of 3.0 cubic feet per second. Carbonera Creek flows at an average 0.8 to 1.0 cubic feet per second (Scotts Valley, 1989). However, the flow in these creeks greatly depends on the season. The average annual precipitation ranges from 35 to 50 inches per year and 90 percent of this falls between November and April. Flows in these creeks can drop dramatically during the dry summer season (Scotts Valley, 1989). Bean Creek is the natural drain for groundwater in the Scotts Valley area and is perennial in its lower reaches. Both streams recharge the local aquifer along certain reaches. City of Scotts Valley 4.7-1 Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan EIR Section 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality The existing on-site development contains a complete storm drain system that carries runoff south to Mt. Hermon Road in a network of pipes and catch basins. Storm water is detained to some degree while on-site before being released into a 36-inch reinforced concrete culvert that runs west in Mt. Hermon Road. The undeveloped portion of the site drains in a southeast direction to the project boundary where it is collected in a 15-inch reinforced concrete culvert running along the edge of Mt. Hermon Road. Runoff is carried across the street in a 30-inch reinforced concrete culvert before being introduced into the larger storm drain system which runs south-east. The majority of existing drainage is carried to detention basins on the south- west side of town, though smaller detention exists throughout developments within the City. Flooding. Flood Insurance Rate maps partition flood areas into three zones: Zone A for areas of 100-year flood, base flood elevations not determined; Zone B for areas of 500-year flood; and Zone C for areas of minimal flooding. The National Flood Insurance Program 100- year floodplain is considered the base flood condition. This is defined as a flood event of a magnitude that would be equaled or exceeded an average of once during a 100-year period. Floodways are defined as stream channels plus adjacent floodplains that must be kept free of encroachment as much as possible so that the 100-year floods can be carried without substantial increases (no more than one foot) in flood elevations. The Specific Plan area is not within a Federal Emergency Management Agency mapped Flood Insurance Rate Map as no major waterways are on site or immediately adjacent to the area that could result in flood hazards. Future development that would result in increased impervious surfaces may result in on-site and off-site drainage issues if not properly designed and engineered. Storm drainage improvements need to be incorporated into the Specific Plan. These features would facilitate groundwater recharge and would minimize stormwater runoff and potential erosion. Water Supply and Quality. The SVWD currently obtains 100 percent of its potable water supply from the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (the Basin). As a result, the Basin has been designated as a Sole Source Aquifer by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The SVWD does not sell or export water to any other water purveyor or water supplier. The Tertiary Santa Margarita, Butano, and Lompico formations are the major water-bearing units in the area and their extent defines the Basin. The Basin includes portions of California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Basins 3-21, 3-27, and 3-50. The DWR has not classified these basins as overdrafted and these basins are not adjudicated as defined in DWR Bulletin 118. Since 1983, the SVWD has actively managed the Basin through the establishment of an integrated climatic, surface water, and groundwater monitoring program; regular reporting of water conditions; a safe yield study; implementation of a recycled water program assessment of artificial recharge and water transfer options; ongoing groundwater exploration studies; and development and revision of a regional groundwater numerical model. Concentrated pumping in the south Scotts Valley area in the last three decades has resulted in significant water level declines in municipal production wells, although more recent data City of Scotts Valley 4.7-2 Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan EIR Section 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality suggests that the rate of decline is tapering off with improved management practices, such as a recycled water program. The sustainable yield of the Basin is estimated to be approximately 4,200 AFY (Todd, 1995). The numerical model was recently used to produce a sustainable yield volume given the current pumping scheme in the Basin and the revised hydrogeologic interpretation. This volume was determined to be 3,300 AFY. This volume represents that amount of water that is available to the water producers under the current pumping configuration without causing any overall change in storage. The hydrogeologic characterization and numerical model development of the recent “Groundwater Modeling Study of the Santa Margarita Basin”, prepared by ETIC Engineering, Inc. in May 2006 estimated the average annual sustainable yield of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin. It calculated the estimated volume of groundwater that can be extracted from existing pumping wells, such that there is no loss of storage in the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin. Previous basin-wide safe yield estimates based on a water-balance approach have suggested an ultimate annual safe yield of approximately 4,200 acre-feet (Todd, 1998). These estimates are accurate within the limits of a water-balance approach, but do not account for such factors as localized effects on storage or the limits on groundwater extraction related to the actual locations and pumping capacities of extraction wells in the basin. Application of a newly developed numerical model of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin indicates an average annual sustainable yield of 3,320 acre-feet. A summary of the current understanding of observed declines in groundwater levels (drawdown) includes the following: • The Santa Margarita is “compartmentalized” with areas of significant groundwater level declines adjacent to areas where groundwater levels are sustained by active recharge • The Lompico groundwater producing unit has undergone significant and widespread groundwater level declines due in part to restricted recharge to the Lompico • The Butano formation is difficult to evaluate due to a lack of data • The Lompico and Butano show potential for providing long-term storage capacity that may be useful for future groundwater augmentation strategies such as in-lieu recharge. The groundwater produced in the SVWD is high in iron, manganese, and hydrogen sulfide and; therefore, requires treatment to meet the State water quality standards for aesthetics (i.e., Secondary MCLs). The SVWD monitors water quality at the groundwater production wells for constituents that meet requirements outlined in the Safe Drinking Water Act and under Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. Groundwater is sampled from SVWD Wells #3B, #7A, #9, #10, #10A, #11A, and #11B for major cations, anions, trace metals, total dissolved solids (TDS), pH, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Results are reported to the California Department of Public Health. The SVWD operatestreats groundwater at three pressure filterfour treatment plants for the removal of iron and manganese and uses chemical treatment for hydrogen sulfide removalprior to distribution. SVWD applies treatment technologies to raw water extracted from wells to compensate for groundwater with concentration levels above or approaching primary and City of Scotts Valley 4.7-3 Scotts Valley Town Center Specific Plan EIR Section 4.7 Hydrology and Water Quality secondary MCLs.
Recommended publications
  • D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology
    D.W. ALLEY & Associates Aquatic Biology -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2006 Juvenile Steelhead Densities in the San Lorenzo, Soquel, Aptos and Corralitos Watersheds, Santa Cruz County, California Coastrange Sculpin Photographed by Jessica Wheeler D.W. ALLEY & Associates, Aquatic Biology Don Alley, Chad Steiner and Jerry Smith, Fishery Biologists With Field Assistance from Kristen Kittleson, Dawn Reis and Jessica Wheeler Prepared For the Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Department Government Center, 701 Ocean Street, Room 312, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Funding From the San Lorenzo Valley Water District, Soquel Creek Water District, Lompico County Water District, Cities of Santa Cruz and Watsonville and the County of Santa Cruz May 2007 Project # 200-04 340 Old River Lane • P.O. Box 200 • Brookdale, California 95007 • (831) 338-7971 TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT SUMMARY...................................................................................10 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................31 I-1. Steelhead and Coho Salmon Ecology...................................................... 31 I-3. Project Purpose and General Study Approach ........................................ 34 METHODS ....................................................................................................35 M-1. Choice of Reaches and Vicinity of Sites to be Sampled- Methods........... 35 M-2. Classification of Habitat Types and Measurement of Habitat Characteristics.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • San Lorenzo Urban River Plan
    San Lorenzo Urban River Plan A Plan for the San Lorenzo River, Branciforte Creek and Jessie Street Marsh Prepared by: City of Santa Cruz San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force with assistance from Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program of the National Park Service Adopted June 24, 2003 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 Executive Summary 5 Chapter 19 Purpose, Context and Goals 1.1 Purpose of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan 9 1.2 Goals and Benefits of the Plan 10 1.3 The Planning Area and River Reach Descriptions 10 1.4 Relationship to Existing City Plans 13 1.5 Plan Organization 13 Chapter 2 15 Plan Setting and Background 2.1 Physical Setting 15 2.2 Social Setting: Development of the City of Santa Cruz 17 2.3 The History of Flooding in Santa Cruz 18 2.4 Current Planning and the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force 19 Chapter 3 21 Riverwide Concepts and Programs 3.1 The San Lorenzo Riverway 21 3.2 Defining the Riverway: System-wide Recommendations 22 Chapter 4 23 Reach Specific Recommendations 4.1 Design Improvements 25 4.2 Site Specific Recommendations in River Reaches 29 Estuarine Reach 29 Transitional Reach 39 Riverine Reach 49 Chapter 5 55 Branciforte Creek 5.1 Area Description and Current Conditions 55 5.2 Reach Specific Recommendations for Branciforte Creek 58 Chapter 6 61 Significant Riverfront Areas 6.1 Front Street Riverfront Area 61 6.2 Salz Tannery to 64 Sycamore Grove Riverfront Area 6.3 Beach Flats Riverfront Area 71 Chapter 7 73 Plan Implementation 7.1 San Lorenzo River Committee 73 Recommendations 74 7.2 Project Phasing and Projected Costs 75 7.3 Funding Opportunities 75 Chapter 8 79 References Appendix A Lower San Lorenzo River and Lagoon Enhancement Plan Appendix B Jessie Street Marsh Management Plan PB SAN LORENZO URBAN RIVER PLAN The San Lorenzo Urban River Plan could Acknowledgements not have been developed without the dedication of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force, City staff and the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast
    Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Consultation History......................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Action Area ..................................................................................................................... 32 2. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: BIOLOGICAL OPINION AND INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT ......................................................................................................... 34 2.1 Analytical Approach ....................................................................................................... 34 2.2 Life History and Range-wide Status of the Species and Critical Habitat ...................... 35 2.3 Environmental Baseline .................................................................................................. 48 2.4 Effects of the Action ........................................................................................................ 62 2.5 Cumulative Effects .......................................................................................................... 76 2.6 Integration and Synthesis ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Site Assessemnt (PDF)
    Site Assessment Report Scotts Valley Hotel SCOTTS VALLEY, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA December 29, 2014 Prepared by: On behalf of: Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC City Ventures, LLC Cameron Johnson Mr. Jason Bernstein 88 North Hill Drive, Suite C 444 Spear Street, Suite 200 Brisbane, California 94005 San Francisco, California 94105 1 Table Of Contents SECTION 1: Environmental Setting ................................................................................... 4 A. Project Location ........................................................................................................................... 4 B. Surrounding Land Use ................................................................................................................ 4 C. Study Area Topography and Hydrology ............................................................................... 4 D. Study Area Soil .............................................................................................................................. 5 E. Vegetation Types .......................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2: Methods ............................................................................................................... 7 A. Site Visit .......................................................................................................................................... 7 B. Study Limits ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Status of Coho Salmon in Streams of the Urbanized San Francisco Estuary, California
    CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME California Fish and Game 91(4):219-254 2005 HISTORICAL STATUS OF COHO SALMON IN STREAMS OF THE URBANIZED SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY, CALIFORNIA ROBERT A. LEIDY1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105 [email protected] and GORDON BECKER Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration 4179 Piedmont Avenue, Suite 325 Oakland, CA 94611 [email protected] and BRETT N. HARVEY Graduate Group in Ecology University of California Davis, CA 95616 1Corresponding author ABSTRACT The historical status of coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch, was assessed in 65 watersheds surrounding the San Francisco Estuary, California. We reviewed published literature, unpublished reports, field notes, and specimens housed at museum and university collections and public agency files. In watersheds for which we found historical information for the occurrence of coho salmon, we developed a matrix of five environmental indicators to assess the probability that a stream supported habitat suitable for coho salmon. We found evidence that at least 4 of 65 Estuary watersheds (6%) historically supported coho salmon. A minimum of an additional 11 watersheds (17%) may also have supported coho salmon, but evidence is inconclusive. Coho salmon were last documented from an Estuary stream in the early-to-mid 1980s. Although broadly distributed, the environmental characteristics of streams known historically to contain coho salmon shared several characteristics. In the Estuary, coho salmon typically were members of three-to-six species assemblages of native fishes, including Pacific lamprey, Lampetra tridentata, steelhead, Oncorhynchus mykiss, California roach, Lavinia symmetricus, juvenile Sacramento sucker, Catostomus occidentalis, threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus, riffle sculpin, Cottus gulosus, prickly sculpin, Cottus asper, and/or tidewater goby, Eucyclogobius newberryi.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
    Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan EIR Section 4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 4.9.1 Setting a. Regional Hydrology. Watersheds. The MBSST Network would traverse through nearly every watershed in Santa Cruz County, and be located where the watersheds drain, due to its coastal location. A list of the watersheds within the MBSST Network is provided below. Because several watersheds fall within more than one reach of the MBSST Network, the watersheds are listed in order from north to south, rather than by reach. Waddell Baldwin Wilder Swanton Bluffs San Lorenzo River Scott Creek Arana Gulch – Rodeo Davenport Soquel Creek San Vicente Creek Aptos Creek Liddell Creek Pajaro River Laguna Creek Watsonville Slough Majors San Andreas The watersheds cover almost all of Santa Cruz County, except for the less than 20 acres that are within the Año Nuevo Creek Watershed and the Pescadero Watershed. Each watershed consists of numerous tributaries, with over 50 tributaries combined. All of these watersheds are within the jurisdiction of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB establishes requirements prescribing the quality of point and nonpoint sources of discharge and establishes water quality objectives through the Water Quality Control Plan for the local basin. A point source is defined as waste emanating from a single, identifiable point such as a wastewater treatment plant. A nonpoint source of discharge results from drainage and percolation of activities such as agriculture and stormwater runoff. Groundwater. Groundwater supplies account for approximately 80 percent of the countywide water supply.
    [Show full text]
  • NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS OCTOBER 2005 HISTORICAL OCCURRENCE OF COHO SALMON IN STREAMS OF THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA COAST COHO SALMON EVOLUTIONARILY SIGNIFICANT UNIT Brian C. Spence Scott L. Harris Weldon E. Jones Matthew N. Goslin Aditya Agrawal Ethan Mora NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-383 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Fisheries Science Center NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), organized in 1970, has evolved into an agency which establishes national policies and manages and conserves our oceanic, coastal, and atmospheric resources. An organizational element within NOAA, the Office of Fisheries is responsible for fisheries policy and the direction of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). In addition to its formal publications, the NMFS uses the NOAA Technical Memorandum series to issue informal scientific and technical publications when complete formal review and editorial processing are not appropriate or feasible. Documents within this series, however, reflect sound professional work and may be referenced in the formal scientific and technical literature. Disclaimer of endorsement: Reference to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government. The views and opinions of authors expressed in this document do not necessarily state or reflect those of NOAA or the United States Government, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS This TM series is used for documentation and timely communication of preliminary results, interim reports, or special purpose information.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the San Lorenzo River Watershed by Lee Summers
    Understanding the San Lorenzo River Watershed By Lee Summers Water is the drink of life that pours through our veins, cradles us as babes in the womb, carves valleys and mountains, cleans our air and keeps our planet green and growing. About 71 percent of the earth’s surface is covered with water. Of that, about 2½ percent is fresh water and only about 1.2 percent of fresh water can we easily access, treat, and drink.1 What’s more, about 60 percent of the human body is water. It comes in quite handy as cellular building material; to regulate our temperature; transport food; flush waste; absorb shock to the brain, spine, and fetus; and lubricate joints.2 We can find water as a liquid, gas and solid. Its solid form is less dense than liquid, which allows lakes to freeze from the top down. It dissolves substances better than any other liquid, which means it easily transports nutrients through a body. It absorbs a lot of heat before it gets hot, so it keeps the air temperature more constant, especially near the coast. It sticks to itself, which allows it to ball into drops as well as get pulled up the tallest redwood trees. In fact, if we weren’t surrounded by it our entire lives, it would amaze us. Water is essential for life on this planet, yet most people have no idea where their water comes from when they turn on the faucet. If they really understood, they would likely never take water for granted again.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of Water Quality Monitoring for Bacteria Indicators in the Lower San Lorenzo River Watershed, 2014 and 2016
    Report of Water Quality Monitoring for Bacteria Indicators in the Lower San Lorenzo River Watershed, 2014 and 2016 Prepared for the San Lorenzo River Alliance, Water Quality Working Group, with participants from: City of Santa Cruz Public Works Department City of Santa Cruz Water Department County of Santa Cruz Department of Public Works County of Santa Cruz Department of Environmental Health Services Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board Coastal Watershed Council Surfrider Foundation Prepared by: Armand Ruby, Technical Director, Coastal Watershed Council Alev Bilginsoy, River Scientist, Coastal Watershed Council December 29, 2017 INTRODUCTION The Water Quality Working Group of the San Lorenzo River Alliance (SLRA) was first assembled in 2013 to help address water quality issues in the San Lorenzo River and its tributaries. Working Group participants include personnel with water quality expertise from: City of Santa Cruz Public Works and Water Departments, County of Santa Cruz Environmental Health Services and Public Works, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Nonprofit organizations Surfrider Foundation and Coastal Watershed Council. The Working Group has taken a collaborative approach to improving water quality in the San Lorenzo River watershed. The initial focus of the Working Group’s activity has been to address impairment of river water quality by fecal indicator bacteria. The reasons for this focus are: 1. The SLRA wishes to improve the general quality and beneficial uses in the San Lorenzo River, and 2. The SLRA seeks to participate with other stakeholders and help municipalities in response to the impairment of beneficial uses of the river, as described in the San Lorenzo River Watershed Pathogen Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) regulation (Central Coast Water Board Resolution R3-2009-0023).
    [Show full text]
  • The Occurrence and Distribution of Umbellularia Californica
    THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Hayward In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Geography By Steven D. Guiney October 1990 THE OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA IN THE BIG BASIN AREA, SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, CA By Steven D. Guiney Approved: Date: s ~ /?f't1 ~7f~~/W /2 /Vt1Y6H~~ /9?a ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ·· · · · ·· · · 1 II. AN OVERVIEW ·· · · · ·· · ·· · ·· · · 6 III. BIG BASIN PHYTO-PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY ···· 9 IV. HISTORICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · 44 V. ECOLOGICAL PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · 47 VI. PHYSIOGRAPHIC PLANT GEOGRAPHY · · · · · · 52 VII. DISTURBANCE FACTORS · · · 54 VIII. CONCLUSIONS · · · · · ··· · · · · · 58 BIBLIOGRAPHY · · · ·· · ·· · ·· 61 iii '""-<-- LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure Page 1 Study Area .. · ·· · ··· . 4 2 Elevations . .. · ···· · 11 3 Climatograph Explanation · · · · · · 17 4 Santa Cruz Climatograph · · · 18 5 Henry Cowell Climatograph ·· · 19 6 Ben Lomond Climatograph ·· ·· · · 20 7 Big Basin Climatograph · · ·· · 21 8 Henry Cowell Transects · 24 9 Portola Transects · ·· 25 10 Big Basin Soils ···· . 26 11 Big Basin Vegetation · · ·· 28 Table 1 Individuals/Species. 34 2 Density 35 3 Coverage . 36 iv LIST OF PHOTOS Photo Page SITE 1 37 SITE 2 38 SITE 3 41 SITE 4 42 SITE 5 43 v INTRODUCTION The coastal redwood forest of Central California is composed principally of four kinds of trees: coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflora) and California bay (Umbellularia californica). All of these are found in Big Basin Redwoods State Park and adjacent areas in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
    [Show full text]
  • B118 Basin Boundary Description 2003
    Central Coast Hydrologic Region California’s Groundwater Scotts Valley Groundwater Basin Bulletin 118 Scotts Valley Groundwater Basin • Groundwater Basin Number: 3-27 • County: Santa Cruz • Surface Area: 774 acres (1.2 square miles) Basin Boundaries and Hydrology The Scotts Valley Groundwater Basin is located in the Santa Cruz Mountains in central Santa Cruz County. The basin is a “J” shaped alluviated valley located along State Highway 17. The basin boundary is the contact edge of the Quaternary alluvial fill with the surrounding Tertiary sedimentary units. In addition to the alluvial basin, a groundwater resource area of about 20 square miles comprised of Tertiary sedimentary units exists in the Scotts Valley area. Carbonera Creek drains the upper northern basin and an unnamed tributary drains the southern portion. Average annual precipitation varies from 39 to 41 inches, increasing westerly. Hydrogeologic Information Water Bearing Formations The Tertiary Lompico Sandstone sits atop the valley’s granitic basement. The Monterey Shale is above the Lompico Sandstone and varies in thickness up to 600 feet (DKTCE 1994). The thickness varies because of the earlier erosion of vertically displaced blocks due to faulting and structural folding The principal water bearing formation is the Santa Margarita Sandstone that lies above the Monterey Shale. The Lompico Sandstone also yields water to wells. However, Todd Engineers (1996) assigned a specific yield of six percent to the Lompico Sandstone and 12 percent to the Santa Margarita Sandstone. Unconfined water conditions exist in the Santa Margarita Sandstone (up to 350 feet thick) and semi-confined or confined conditions occur in the lower Lompico Sandstone formation (DKTCE 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • San Lorenzo River Riparian Conservation Program
    San Lorenzo River Riparian Conservation Program May 2018 Developed by: City of Santa Cruz Water Department Coastal Watershed Council County of Santa Cruz Water Resources Division Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County San Lorenzo Valley Water District With assistance from: Conservation Collaborative [email protected] Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 Existing Policy Framework for Riparian Conservation and Protection ........................... 4 Existing Conditions of the Riparian Habitat in San Lorenzo River .................................. 5 Model Programs Reviewed for Program Development ................................................ 8 Recommended Activities of a Riparian Conservation Program ..................................... 9 I. Establish Existing Conditions and Assessment Data and Mapping ............................................... 10 II. Protect Remaining Habitat by Implementing Existing Policies ..................................................... 10 III. Riparian Habitat Protection and Restoration ...................................................................................... 11 IV. Education and Outreach ................................................................................................................................ 11 Roles for San Lorenzo River 2025 Partners and Community Organizations ................. 14 Current and Potential Riparian Projects ....................................................................
    [Show full text]