Section 1: Introduction
California's Ocean and Coastal Resources
California is blessed with spectacular ocean and coastal resources along its entire 1,100 mile coast. The ocean serves as a source of food, recreation, and energy resources, and provides a critical transportation link between California and other states and nations. As California meets the challenges of the 21st century, its rapid population growth, increasing cultural diversity, and growing economic base will continue to place demands on the state's ocean and coastal resources, making management of these resources increasingly complex. Addressing these management issues requires consideration of ocean and coastal resource stewardship, economic sustainability, research, education and technological capability, as well as rational and effective governance. California’s plan to implement the Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) is crafted to provide an improved and coordinated approach to addressing these subjects.
Resource Stewardship Habitats within California's ocean ecosystem contain some of the most biologically diverse natural communities in the world. California's ocean ecosystem includes habitats located within inland watersheds, enclosed coastal waters (bays, estuaries, lagoons, wetlands), nearshore ocean waters, and the waters located far offshore. Onshore, an extensive system of inland waterways provide seasonal habitat for various marine species, as well as freshwater and nutrient flows. Offshore, several major oceanic factors, such as the California and Davidson Currents and a hydrological phenomenon known as upwelling, contribute essential nutrients to nearshore and deep ocean waters.
There is growing recognition that the majority of impacts to California's enclosed waters and nearshore ocean zones derive from pollution generated on land and then transported through inland waterways to the ocean. A variety of ocean and coastal industries, including commercial and sport fishing, mariculture, biotechnology, tourism, and recreation, depend on the entire ecosystem upon which California’s ocean and coastal resources depend. Long-term maintenance and enhancement of the state's ocean and coastal resources can only be achieved with coordinated efforts to manage California's entire ocean ecosystem (i.e., resources located on both land and sea). For these reasons, California’s CIAP plan provides a comprehensive approach to addressing key stewardship concerns related to coastal access, ocean and coastal habitats, marine life and fisheries, shoreline erosion, and watershed issues.
California Coastal Economics – Global Implications California’s population increased from 18 million people in 1964 to almost 34 million people today – and that number continues to grow. Approximately 80% of California’s residents live within 30 miles of the coast. In 1992, California was estimated to have directly and indirectly generated $17.3 billion from seven “ocean dependent” industries. Coastal tourism accounted for nearly $10 billion of this total, and coastal ports about $6 billion. California’s economy is dependent upon coastal tourism and on commerce relating to the transportation
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 1 Draft Plan, October 2001 of goods through its ports, in addition to other sources of coastal revenue. Since California represents the sixth largest economy in the world, the global implications of the state's economic activity are significant. Unfortunately, data regarding California’s ocean and coastal resources and their contribution to local, state and national economies is lacking or in need of updating. California's CIAP plan proposes to gather and update elements of this important economic information.
Research, Education and Technology Development The goals of ocean and coastal resource protection and management cannot be achieved without adequate knowledge of the factors that contribute to (or detract from) the health of California’s ocean ecosystem. Monitoring and research projects in ocean, coastal, and inland watershed environments are vital to understanding the impacts of human and natural activities, and for determining if modifications are necessary to reduce or prevent such impacts.
Sound research (both basic and applied) and monitoring provide a necessary basis for decision-making. Science, however, does not often rapidly influence policy-making and decision-making. The California Ocean Resources Stewardship Act of 2000 authorizes the creation of an ocean trust to help fund ocean research projects, to seek additional funds for ocean research projects, and to encourage coordinated multi-agency approaches to marine sciences. California’s CIAP plan proposes to begin funding and implementing this important piece of legislation, in combination with other more specific proposals to conduct ocean and coastal research and monitoring.
Governance The waters off the California coast include a complex array of state, federal, and international jurisdictions, including state tidelands and submerged lands (State Tidelands), and the outer continental shelf, territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and high seas. These jurisdictions include areas of offshore ownership, sovereignty, various forms of mineral, fishery, and national security rights, or regulatory controls. A common theme in California’s CIAP plan is the need to bring together multiple government agencies, industry, academia, and the public to more effectively manage ocean and coastal resources. This approach seeks to integrate the needs and concerns of multiple stakeholders to ensure lasting and sustainable approaches to management.
In summary, California’s ocean and coastal resources, and the economic base they support, will benefit substantially from the proposals identified in this plan. These benefits will be gained not only in California, but also nationally and internationally.
Coastal Impact Assistance Program
The Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) was authorized by Congress under §903 of the Commerce, Justice, State (H.R. 5344) Fiscal Year 2001 Appropriations Act to assist states in mitigating the impacts associated with outer continental shelf (OCS) oil and gas production. Congress appropriated $150 million to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to be allocated to seven coastal states, including California. This
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 2 Draft Plan, October 2001 money is to be used to undertake a variety of projects for protecting and restoring coastal resources.
Under a one-time authorization, California will receive $15,477,740 that is to be apportioned between the state and eligible local coastal political jurisdictions (in the case of California, these are coastal counties). Distribution of these funds is based on a formula defined in H.R. 5344 that includes the length of coastline, coastal population, and proximity to existing offshore oil and gas development. In addition, the legislation requires that 65% of the funds are distributed to state governments and the remaining 35% are distributed to local coastal political jurisdictions. Under this allocation scheme, the state’s share is approximately $10 million; approximately $5.4 million is earmarked for eligible coastal counties to undertake projects. The twenty eligible coastal counties are Alameda, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Los Angeles, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, Orange, San Diego, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Ventura.
Authorized Uses of CIAP Funds
H.R. 5344 and a NOAA guidance document identify categories of authorized uses for expenditure of CIAP funds, including:
· Wetlands protection, conservation, and restoration; · Implementation of federally approved management plans; · Mitigating impacts of OCS activities; · Administrative costs of the CIAP; · Oil spill removal and contingency planning; and · Uses set forth in the new section 32(c)(4) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.) including resource conservation, research, assessment, water quality activities, watershed protection, erosion control, and others.
The authorized uses can be found in their entirety in the June 5, 2001 document titled, NOAA Revised Program Administration and Plan Development Guidance for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. Copies of the guidance document can be requested from NOAA via the Internet at www.ocrm.nos.noaa.gov/czm/.
After conducting a review of all state and county CIAP proposals, the State of California certifies that all proposals set forth in this draft plan are consistent with the identified authorized uses.
Designated State Agency
To facilitate a coordinated approach for the national CIAP, each eligible state designated a state official and agency as a lead contact for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Coastal Resource Management. On February 6, 2001 California Governor Gray Davis designated Secretary for Resources Mary D. Nichols as the lead state official and the California Resources Agency as the lead state agency in developing the state’s Coastal Impact Assistance Plan (see Appendix A for a copy of this letter).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 3 Draft Plan, October 2001 Governor Davis designated the Secretary for Resources as the lead state official for developing California’s Coastal Impact Assistance Plan because she is the cabinet level official in California delegated responsibility for marine and coastal matters. Specifically, 1991 amendments to the California Ocean Resources Management Act transferred responsibility for all non-statutory marine and coastal resource management programs to the Secretary for Resources and created the California Ocean Resources Management Program (Ocean Program) within the Resources Agency.
Duties and responsibilities transferred include all executive branch delegations regarding review and coordination of federal OCS oil and gas lease sales and development projects; policy coordination of resources management and uses in the exclusive economic zone; state representation to the Coastal States Organization and the Department of the Interior's OCS Policy Committee; and any other involvement in marine and coastal resource matters. While the authority for a majority of ocean resource management issues rests with the Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency oversees development of ocean water quality standards and regulation of waste discharges to the marine environment.
The Secretary for Resources oversees the activities of 27 departments, boards, commissions and conservancies, collectively referred to as "departments" (see Appendix B for a complete list). The Governor’s proposed fiscal year 2001-02 budget for these departments is $5.2 billion. The CIAP will have broad application to a variety of departments within the State of California government. The Secretary for Resources is well placed to coordinate the participation of these departments, as well as the eligible coastal counties in California.
Public Participation
On February 13, 2001 the Resources Agency convened two meetings in Sacramento for the purpose of disseminating information to coastal counties, state government agencies, and other organizations such as the Association of Bay Area Governments, Nature Conservancy, and Center for Marine Conservation. Subsequent to these meetings, Resources Agency staff continued public outreach with interested parties through one-on-one meetings, phone conversations, written correspondence, and electronic mail.
As required by the enabling legislation, the Resources Agency will commence a 30-day public review and comment period, ending on November 26, 2001. During this period the draft CIAP plan will be distributed to the state’s 20 eligible coastal counties, all departments within the Resources Agency, and other interested parties. Special review will be solicited from two of the state’s Coastal Zone Management agencies, the California Coastal Commission and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (this is in addition to the review under the requirements of federal consistency certification).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 4 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with California’s Coastal Zone Management Program
The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 requires that all proposed federal and federally authorized activities, development projects, permits and licenses, and support to state and local governments be reviewed by that state’s CZMA implementing agency for consistency with its approved coastal management program. For all of the California Coast, except San Francisco Bay, the state agency responsible for implementing the CZMA is the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission). In the San Francisco Bay Area, the CZMA administering agency is the San Francisco Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC).
The CIAP is a federal activity, and therefore the state’s CIAP plan will be subject to consistency review by the state’s two CZMA agencies. However, because the CIAP legislation requires the Governor to certify to NOAA that all the proposed state and local projects are consistent with the federal CIAP, federal consistency review is required for the plan only and not each expenditure proposed within the plan.
Coastal Commission and BCDC consistency review will take place concurrent to the NOAA review and approval process (i.e., shortly after completion of the state’s 30-day public comment period and after necessary revisions have been made to the draft plan).
Coordination with Federal Programs
The Resources Agency, its departments, and numerous counties have made a concerted effort to include federal entities such as the national marine sanctuaries and the national estuarine research reserves (NERRs) as project partners (e.g., Monterey Bay National Marine Sancturay and Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve). Similarly, these same entities have made a concerted effort to propose the implementation of federal or federally related programs through the CIAP (e.g., supporting the NERRs, protecting endangered species, and testing for nonpoint source pollution).
California Resources Agency Contact Information
Honorable Mary Nichols Secretary for Resources California Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814
Staff Contact Information Don Wallace Assistant Secretary for Finance and Administration (916) 653-9709
Brian Baird Chris Potter Ocean Program Manager Coastal Grants and Wetlands Coordinator (916) 657-0198 (916) 654-0536
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 5 Draft Plan, October 2001 Section 2: Implementation of the CIAP Plan
In March 1997 the State of California released its first-ever overview of California’s ocean ecosystem and its relationship to state and federal laws, economics, jurisdictional designations and complex system of reserves, refuges, sanctuaries and other marine managed areas that exist to protect and manage this critical resource. The strategy, California’s Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future, also explicitly established a set of mission and goals for the California Ocean Resources Management Program (Ocean Program) that could be achieved through a mix of government, private sector, and public/private partnership arrangements.
Mission and Goals
The complex mix of federal, state, and local ocean and coastal resource management statutes, and the agencies charged with implementing these laws, has led to processes that can be duplicative, difficult to understand, and challenging to coordinate. As a means of providing consistent guidance to coastal counties, federal and state government agencies, and other organizations responsible for developing CIAP project proposals, the state adopted the following mission and goals for its CIAP based on those of its Ocean Program.
Mission To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
Goals Four goals were established to achieve the stated mission.
Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Each project contained within this plan is crafted to address and help achieve the mission and goals provided above. As a result, this plan provides a cohesive body of projects that emphasize comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement approaches for California’s ocean and coastal resources. Coastal and ocean enhancement projects will be far less effective if all critical components of stewardship; economics;
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 6 Draft Plan, October 2001 research, education, and technology; and governance (jurisdiction and ownership) are not thoroughly considered and incorporated in the project design. This plan is designed to provide an integrated approach to achieving this mission and goals, and for addressing the categories of uses identified in the authorizing legislation and NOAA guidance documents.
CIAP Implementation
The Resources Agency, as the designated lead for the CIAP in California, will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of all projects proposed by state agencies. This oversight will include not only implementation of projects proposed by the Resources Agency, but also projects proposed by the California Coastal Commission, State Coastal Conservancy, Department of Boating and Waterways, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Parks and Recreation, and San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development and Commission. The Resources Agency will use mechanisms such as trust funds, grants, interagency agreements and competitive bidding to distribute CIAP funds for their intended purpose.
The 20 counties identified in NOAA's June 5, 2001 CIAP guidance document have submitted project proposals for inclusion in the state’s draft CIAP plan. Some counties have submitted multiple proposals for inclusion in the plan, though no county has exceeded its allocation as identified in the June 7, 2001 correspondence from the NOAA to the Secretary for Resources (see Appendix C). All proposals are provided in their entirety in Section 3 of this plan.
To expedite the implementation of county projects and lessen the CIAP's administrative burden on the Resources Agency, the state will request that NOAA directly award individual grants (or a functional equivalent) to all 20 counties. This request also represents the wishes of staff of the 20 counties who will be responsible for implementing the projects. If the NOAA chooses to award individual grants directly to the counties, the Resources Agency would fulfill all reporting requirements under the U.S. Department of Commerce and NOAA granting procedures and guidelines. Last, the NOAA has indicated that grants, if issued, would have a time period of three years. Extensions beyond the three year period would be issued by the NOAA on a case-by-case basis only.
Overview of Proposed State and County Projects
In response to the NOAA guidance document, the Resources Agency established the following project categories for both state and county CIAP proposals:
· Coastal Access · Coastal Habitat/Wetlands · Economics · Geographic Information Systems · Infrastructure · Marine Life/Fisheries · Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management · Offshore Oil and Gas · Research
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 7 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Shoreline Erosion · Watersheds/Water Quality · State CIAP Administration
A brief overview of these categories is provided below, along with a summary of the state and county project proposals within each category. The amount of funding requested for each project is identified in parentheses after the project title. The full text of these proposals can be found in Section 3 of this draft plan.
Coastal Access The California Constitution guarantees the rights of all citizens to access and use the shoreline. This right is recognized by NOAA’s Office of Coastal Resource Management in its certification of California’s Coastal Management Program. The California Coastal Commission, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the State Coastal Conservancy, the California State Lands Commission, local governments, and non-profit organizations all play a role in assuring this access and use. The following projects seek to improve public access facilities at specific locations, while some are designed to support the broader statewide objective of creating a trail along the entire coast of California.
State Proposals · Bay Trail Implementation Partnerships ($750,000): The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) proposes to advance its San Francisco Bay public access program by working in concert with local and regional partners to facilitate implementation of the Bay Trail. First, joint planning would occur with the California Department of Fish and Game, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and other agencies to identify, map and assess sensitive wildlife habitats and species around the Bay, and the potential impacts of access on these resources. Second, working in partnership with ABAG Bay Trail Projects and the California State Coastal Conservancy, the BCDC would implement and construct access improvement projects.
· Coastal Trail Implementation Plan ($300,000): The California State Coastal Conservancy, in conjunction with the California Coastal Commission, proposes to create extensive maps and accompanying text describing various segments of the Pacific Coastal Trail. The maps would detail the character and location of existing trail segments, identify where new trails could be located, and identify the conditions of existing and proposed trail locations, including topography, environmentally sensitive areas, potential hazards, and various amenities. An implementation plan prioritizing development of trail segments, including detailed capital needs projections, would also be developed.
· Implementation of Site-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program ($50,000): The California Coastal Commission, in conjunction with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS), proposes to develop bilingual educational materials and programs aimed at Spanish speaking students with the goal of increasing visitation
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 8 Draft Plan, October 2001 and appropriate uses at Elkhorn Slough and several state beaches and parks. Educational materials would address how families can help protect the ocean and why ocean protection is important. A variety of innovative, hands-on programs would encourage students and families to become actively involved. Outreach would include expanded web-based Spanish language materials for four coastal sites and the MBNMS.
· Public Access Projects ($400,000): The California State Coastal Conservancy proposes to undertake five public access projects along the coast and in San Francisco Bay: Pfeiffer State Beach ($80,000), Dana Pt. Ocean Institute ($80,000), Cambria East-West Ranch Management Plan ($60,000), Pacific Coastal Trail ($80,000), and Eureka Waterfront Boardwalk ($100,000).
County Proposals · Albany Waterfront Restoration Project ($35,000): Alameda County proposes to remove and control exotic plants and restore native plant species to the Albany portion of the San Francisco Bay Trail, along the City of Albany waterfront. Development of interpretive materials would be included in the scope of this project.
· Avila Beach Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage ($25,386): San Luis Obispo County proposes to construct a mid-block pedestrian passage between First and Front streets to align with the Avila Pier in the community of Avila Beach. The passage would provide a safe and inviting pedestrian-only connection from an inland parking lot to the beach.
· Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier ($105,920): The City and County of San Francisco proposes to construct a public pier on San Francisco Bay at the Downtown Ferry Terminal. The City and County indicates the project is already designed and has received all its needed environmental and regulatory approvals from the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
· Isla Vista Natural Resource Preservation and Enhancement ($40,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to make improvements to publicly owned coastal access in the community of Isla Vista, including landscaping, habitat restoration, beach access stair and ramp upgrades, pathways, etc. The county would also study additional sites for resource protection and recreation.
· Manhattan Beach Access Repairs Project ($435,261): Los Angeles County proposes to repair and/or replace (depending upon the extent of damage) an existing retaining wall and access stairs at Manhattan Beach. The stairs and the retaining wall have deteriorated from heavy public use and the elements. The current retaining wall provides support for the parking lot and separates the parking lot from the active beach area. The access stairs lead from the parking lot to the South Bay bicycle trail.
· Napa County Airport Area Bay Trail ($68,635): Napa County proposes to plan, design, and construct a pedestrian and bicycle trail through the Napa Airport area connecting
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 9 Draft Plan, October 2001 in the south to the Bay Trail in the City of American Canyon, and in the north to the proposed Napa River Trail in the City of Napa.
Coastal Habitat/Wetlands It is estimated that California has lost 90% of its coastal wetlands and much of its other coastal habitats have been substantially disrupted by development. In some regions of the state native habitats have been disrupted by invasive plant or animal species. Support is necessary for projects to inventory, acquire, and restore California's wetlands and special habitats. The projects in this category seek a variety of partnerships to increase stewardship of California’s important coastal habitats.
State Proposals · Development of Coordinated Elkhorn Slough Stewardship Plan ($300,000): The California Coastal Commission, in conjunction with the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, proposes to create a coordinated Elkhorn Slough Stewardship Plan for the conservation, management, and restoration of Elkhorn Slough.
· Form Central Coast Wetlands Joint Venture ($75,000): The Resources Agency proposes to contract with consultants over two years to create a Central Coast Wetlands Joint Venture. The Central Coast is currently the only region of the state that is not covered by some type of wetlands restoration, acquisition, and planning partnership.
· Oceano Dunes Foredune Restoration ($200,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to develop and implement a foredune habitat restoration plan and construct a planked pedestrian beach access path within an approximately 2,400 foot length of foredunes in Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area at Pismo State Beach. The project would involve the restoration of approximately 11 acres of foredune habitat.
· Pescadero Marsh Habitat Restoration ($150,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to remove approximately 150 feet of levee on Pescadero Creek in Pescadero Marsh State Beach, and begin to restore approximately 13 acres of fallow agricultural field back to tidal marsh.
· San Francisco Bay Wetlands Restoration Program ($125,000): The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) proposes to provide technical assistance to agencies, organizations and private interests that propose wetlands restoration projects in San Francisco Bay. Similar to the BCDC's successful Design Review Board and Engineering Criteria Review Board, a panel of wetlands restoration experts would be convened to review wetlands restoration proposals and offer technical assistance to project designers.
· Santa Cruz Island Ecosystem Restoration ($500,000): The California Department of Fish and Game proposes to partner with The Nature Conservancy in an ongoing effort to restore 14 state-protected, endemic plants and animals now in dramatic decline on
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 10 Draft Plan, October 2001 Santa Cruz Island. Key among these is the Island fox Urocyon littoralis, which is listed by the state as "threatened."
· Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project (SCWRP) Science Advisory Panel ($200,000): The State Coastal Conservancy, in conjunction with the Science Advisory Panel of the SCWRP, proposes to: 1) address critical issues that could constrain or enhance wetlands restoration efforts; 2) develop a more sophisticated planning context for setting SCWRP project priorities; 3) improve wetlands restoration techniques; and 4) determine the most telling and cost-effective evaluation methods for wetlands projects.
County Proposals · Albion River Watershed - Replace Two Fish Barriers ($72,287): Mendocino County proposes to provide fish passage for coho and steelhead salmon at two culverts on a county road in the Albion River coastal watershed.
· Alviso Marina County Park, South San Francisco Bay Wetlands Habitat Improvements/Mitigation ($163,610): Santa Clara County proposes to make improvements to wetlands and coastal habitat by removing a former marina site at Alviso Marina County Park in San Jose and restoring habitats.
· Carquinez Straits Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Project ($253,256): Contra Costa County proposes to fund this project that includes several components: 1) a study of land acquisition, enhancement, and stewardship needs in the area; 2) strategic seed money for three important acquisition and restoration projects; 3) support for the effort to form a Carquinez Strait National Heritage Area; and 4) reserve implementation funds to address or begin addressing the most pressing recommendation(s) of the project plan. The county would partner with Muir Heritage Land Trust and the East Bay Regional Park District.
· Gaviota Coast Acquisition ($212,203): Santa Barbara County proposes to acquire outright or through conservation easements property along the Gaviota Coast (Pt. Conception to Goleta). The Gaviota Coast is known widely for its panoramic coastal views, from the slopes of the Santa Ynez Mountains to the north to the coastal bluffs, beaches, ocean, and Channel Islands to the south. This area also represents 50% of the remaining rural coastline in Southern California.
· Natural Habitat Conservation Planning for the Los Osos Area ($60,000): San Luis Obispo County proposes to develop a regional multi-species habitat conservation plan (HCP) that would balance planned development of the Los Osos area with the need to conserve unique and sensitive havitats found in the community. The project would be a cooperative effort among the County of San Luis Obispo, Los Osos Community Services District, California Coastal Commission, California Department Fish and Game, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
· Oceano Lagoon Wetlands System Biological and Hydrological Assessment $23,600): San Luis Obispo County proposes to complete a biological and hydrological survey of
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 11 Draft Plan, October 2001 the Oceano Lagoon wetlands system, one of the components of the Nipomo Dunes and Wetlands. This project would be the first step in restoring the wetlands system.
· Solano County Wetlands Restoration Projects ($294,667): Solano County proposes to implement up to three wetlands restoration projects (depending on final cost for each): 1) River Park Marsh Restoration Project (in conjunction with the Greater Vallejo Recreation District), 2) Benicia Waterfront Marsh Restoration Project (in conjunction with the City of Benicia), and/or 3) Suisun Marsh Wetland Restoration and Enhancement Program (in conjunction with the Suisun Resource Conservation District).
· South Talbert Wetlands Habitat Enhancement ($297,359): Orange County proposes to remove invasive exotic plants in the Talbert Marsh Nature Preserve to allow native habitat to naturally re-establish, augmented by some new planting for overall enhancement to wetlands. South Talbert Marsh is an approximately 88.5 acre portion of the nature preserve located near the mouth of the Santa Ana River. The nature preserve is approximately 1.5 miles from the coast.
· Watsonville Sloughs System Restoration Project ($86,933): Santa Cruz County proposes to acquire an 8.7 acre parcel of land in Upper Harkins Slough. The slough channel, riparian corridor, and flood plain occur along the center of the parcel. The county has identified the parcel as being located in an area that is under intense development pressure. As proposed this project would in effect implement recommendations in the Watsonville Sloughs Watershed Conservation Plan, which calls for the acquisition of strategically located wetland and riparian habitats for multi- benefit restoration activities.
· Willow Creek Road Culverts ($68,415): Sonoma County proposes to upsize road culverts along Willow Creek to enhance fish passage and reduce sediment loads caused by erosion. The location of the culverts would be determined in the field through consultation with fishery groups and regulatory agencies. Willow Creek drains into the Russian River estuary.
· Wetlands Task Force ($282,229): Ventura County proposes to form a Wetlands Task Force as a local component of the regional Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project, a partnership of public agencies working cooperatively to acquire, restore, and enhance coastal wetlands and watersheds between Point Conception and the international border with Mexico. The Wetlands Task Force would carry out the following tasks: 1) interagency coordination; 2) data management and organization; 3) research existing mechanisms for wetlands assessment, and assist in adapting them local circumstances; and 4) encourage coordination among agencies involved in watershed issues.
Economics Economics is a major consideration in the protection and management of California’s ocean and coastal resources, which is in part why economic sustainability is one of the primary goals of this draft plan. In 1997 the Resources Agency released the first ever
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 12 Draft Plan, October 2001 comprehensive assessment of the economic contribution of seven ocean dependent industries to the California economy. This data has been utilized and cited by two California governors, California State Legislature, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Western Governors Association, Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, and many others. Unfortunately, this information is based on 1992 data and has not be updated since. The project proposed in this category would provide an updated understanding of the contribution the ocean and coast make to California's economy.
State Proposals · Update Study of Ocean and Coastal Contribution to California Economy ($100,000): The Resources Agency would contract with the University of Southern California's Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies to evaluate the contribution of the California ocean and coastal sectors to the state and U.S economies. Sufficient data would be gathered to describe the contributions from the perspective of traditionally measured economic activity, as well as values not measured in market transactions.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) California benefits from the use of geographic information systems (GIS) to display, analyze, and communicate information about ocean and coastal resources. These systems have been extremely helpful to planners for the immediate retrieval of complex mult-layered information about land use, biological resources, topography, or just about any type of information that can be geographically identified. GIS is a critical tool for emergency response by providing instant access to the best available information about natural resources that may be vulnerable to oil spills, fires, flooding, or other emergency situations. Projects in this category seek to develop new or improved GIS systems to assist with the protection and management of California’s ocean and coastal resources.
State Proposals · Revised Oil Wildlife Sensitivity Maps for Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary ($75,000): The California Coastal Commission, in conjunction with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, proposes to update ten year old Department of Fish Game, Office of Spill Prevention and Response maps that show marine resources that are sensitive to spilled oil.
County Proposals · GIS Coastal Zone Enhancements ($106,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to enhance its GIS and databases by: 1) digitizing county coastal plan overlays that delineate environmentally sensitive habitat, flood zones, and view corridors, 2) linking to the county's Shoreline Inventory System, 3) digitizing and rectifying Coastal Commission appeals and permit jurisdiction boundary areas, and 4) incorporating land use and permit information for urban runoff and ocean water quality analyses.
· GIS Support for Stormwater Permit Compliance ($296,107): San Diego county proposes to develop several databases using GIS and remote sensing to support the implementation of its newly adopted Municipal Stormwater Permit. The GIS products developed through this project would address the following water pollution data needs: 1) source identification (construction sites, municipal, industrial and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 13 Draft Plan, October 2001 commercial), 2) threats to water quality prioritization (residential), and 3) watershed urban runoff management program.
Infrastructure The 2000 Census reported California’s population to be nearly 34 million - the most populated state in the nation. As California continues to lead the nation in population size and growth, federal, state, and local governments will need to make increasing investments in infrastructure to foster sustainable commerce and economic development. Per the federal CIAP guidance, projects in this category may include design, engineering, or construction of public services and facilities. The project proposal in this category seeks to provide a renewable means of generating electricity for county fire stations.
County Proposals · Energy Conservation - Installation of Photovoltaic "Net Metering" Systems at 23 Fire Stations ($73,562): Ventura County proposes to install photovoltaic systems at 23 county fire district stations throughout the county. When the photovoltaics are unable to meet the electricity demands of a given fire station, such as at night, the local utility will provide the difference. Based on local solar data, each system will typically generate 12.2 kilowatt-hours (KWH) per day, or 4,453 KWH per year.
Marine Life/Fisheries Substantial attention is being paid to managing and protecting marine life and fishery resources off the California coast. In recent years several actions have been taken to improve our approach to marine protection, both along the coast and within California’s extensive watershed systems. In the past five years alone, the Marine Life Management Act, Marine Life Protection Act, Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act, and Marine Life Stewardship Act have all been signed into law and are currently being implemented. The projects proposed in this category seek to support fishery management goals, marine protected area processes, and resource assessments related to marine life management.
State Proposals · Constituent Involvement for Marine Management ($75,000): The California Department of Fish and Game would contract with specialists to: 1) train department staff in public participation processes; 2) develop and implement procedures for public involvement; and 3) construct basic stakeholder databases for contacts.
· Crystal Cove Underwater Preserve Monitoring for Impacts ($35,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR) proposes to measure the impacts from human activities, such as skin and SCUBA diving and commercial fishing, at Crystal Cove State Park. The data would be collected during different seasons over at least two years to reduce natural variability factors. Based upon these data, the CDPR would make recommendations for changes in managing activities within the park.
· Fisheries Monitoring Infrastructure ($300,000): The California Department of Fish and Game proposes to contract with specialists to evaluate the current method of collecting commercial fisheries landing data in the state; review systems used by other state, federal, and Canadian fisheries agencies; develop a new system for the
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 14 Draft Plan, October 2001 California commercial fisheries; and evaluate and develop a system of monitoring for recreational fishing catches in a comprehensive, timely, and accurate manner.
· Infrastructure for a Marine Life Management Act Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program ($700,000): The California Department of Fish and Game's Marine Region proposes to implement an initial Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program and contract for the collection of baseline information. Elements of the program are: 1) survey of nearshore habitat and stock density assessments of ecologically and economically important fish and invertebrate in rocky reef and kelp habitats; 2) life history studies for key species of nearshore rocky reef and kelp habitat species; 3 ) purchase of SCUBA gear; 4) increase of ROV surveys; 5) pay for enforcement overtime in marine protected areas, and 6) purchase of two boats for enforcement purposes.
· Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Implementation ($372,000): The California Department of Fish and Game's Marine Region proposes to meet the requirements of the MLPA by: developing recommendations for a preferred alternative network of marine protected areas (MPAs); providing support for the team developing the preferred alternative; facilitating public involvement in the development of a preferred alternative; and writing, producing, and distributing a draft Master Plan.
· Marine Resource Surveys Related to Caltrans/Highway 1 ($150,000): The California Coastal Commission, in conjunction with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), proposes to survey the intertidal, nearshore subtidal, sea bird, and marine mammal haulout areas along the Big Sur Coast. The entire coastline would not be surveyed, but rather just those areas known to be affected by repeated road washouts and repair activities.
· Market Squid Research ($75,000): The California Department of Fish and Game proposes to contract with UC San Diego and the National Marine Fisheries Service to research California’s market squid fishery. Additional research would be undertaken to develop and evaluate an escapement model for squid fishery management.
County Proposals · Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Resource Assessment Project ($145,934): The San Mateo County Parks Department in conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Game, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, proposes to develop and implement a resource assessment project for the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. The assessment project would: 1) determine the amount (if any) of resource degradation from visitation, fishing, and gathering; 2) recommend actions that can best protect the reserve's natural resources, and 3) evaluate how (if at all) these actions will affect those who visit, fish, and gather at the reserve.
· Tri-County FISH Team ($21,000): Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo County each propose to support the activities of the Tri-County FISH Team. The purpose of the team is to work with federal, state, and local agencies and non-
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 15 Draft Plan, October 2001 governmental groups to: 1) secure funding to support salmonid recovery and habitat enhancement, 2) improve information about restoration and recovery activities, and 3) enhance public understanding and support for such activities in the tri-county area.
Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management Managing California’s ocean and coastal resources is a complex undertaking involving traditional planning techniques and a suite of new and innovative approaches. Local Coastal Programs (LCPs) are the primary mechanism established in the California Coastal Act for coastal cities and counties to carry out coastal protection and management policies. California's coastal management program is based on a partnership between the California Coastal Commission and the 73 cities and 15 counties located in the coastal zone. Unfortunately, a number of cities and counties have not completed their LCPs and others have certified plans that either require amendments or are out of date. The projects in this category seek to improve planning, management and technical expertise for protecting and managing California’s ocean and coastal resources.
State Proposals · Regulatory Assistance and Bay Management Partnerships ($200,000): The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission proposes to contract with consultants in the fields of biology, hydrology, coastal engineering, wetland science, and marsh restoration to acquire expertise to assist permitting and enforcement staff.
· Santa Barbara County LCP Update ($400,000): The California Coastal Commission proposes to work with Santa Barbara County in analyzing and reviewing the county’s land use plan and zoning ordinances, paying particular attention to oil and gas development issues. The Coastal Commission indicates that the county’s LCP was completed over 20 years ago and now needs to be reviewed and brought up-to-date.
· California and the World Ocean 2002 (CWO '02) Conference ($100,000). The Resources Agency proposes to organize and hold a follow-up conference to its California and the World Ocean conference held in 1997. Similar to the 1997 conference, CWO '02 would be based on the Agency's published strategy for managing ocean and coastal resources. The follow-up conference would be an opportunity to bring together a broad spectrum of interests, from resource managers and technical experts to not-for-profit organizations and the general public, to learn about the successes of the previous five years and additional opportunities for improving ocean and coastal resource management in California.
County Proposals · Amortization Ordinance or Consolidation Local Coastal Plan Amendment ($90,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to undertake one of the two following options relative to consolidating onshore processing of offshore oil and gas production: 1) draft an amortization ordinance, including environmental review; or 2) amend the county's LCP consolidation policies to require that all new or expanded oil and gas production processing in the county's South Coast region occurs at one consolidated site.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 16 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Carpinteria Valley Greehouse Program ($20,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to complete the final phase of the Carpinteria Valley Greenhouse Program. Once completed, the program will provide regulatory methods for minimizing impacts to coastal resources by creating two new agricultural zone districts and new development standards. This phase would also include adoption of the program by the California Coastal Commission.
· California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Thresholds Update ($20,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to update its CEQA Guidelines and Thresholds Manual in order to improve its clarity and usefulness to decision-makers. Topics that would be addressed include impacts to groundwater, agriculture, and traffic due to development in the coastal zone.
· Coastal Area Compliance and Enforcement ($30,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to augment efforts in responding to reported instances of non-compliance with the county's Coastal Zoning Ordinance and coastal development permits with a particular emphasis on threats to water quality. Past examples of non-compliance include unapproved grading and/or vegetation removal within or in close proximity to riparian corridors, watercourses or wetlands, unapproved drainage systems, improper drainage termination, etc.
· Comprehensive Update to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the County General Plan ($28,984): Mendocino County proposes to prepare a comprehensive update to Open Space and Conservation Element of the county's General Plan. The comprehensive update would address preservation of natural resources, managed production of resources, outdoor recreation, and public health and safety. The current element was adopted by the County Board of Supervisors in 1974 with minor revisions in 1981.
· Ellwood Beach - Santa Barbara Shore Specific Plan Amendments ($200,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to plan for and manage potential development impacts on the Ellwood Mesa by drafting amendments to its Specific Plan for the area. The Ellwood Mesa is one of only two remaining undeveloped coastal terraces within the community of Goleta.
· Energy Conservation and Distributed Generation ($106,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to enhance analysis, policy-making, flow of information, and public outreach on the nature and role of coastal energy resources offshore the county, relative to California's utility problems. In doing so, the county's Energy Division would serve as a public information clearinghouse and coordinator of co-generation, fossil-fuel alternatives, conservation measures, and renewable energy sources. The Energy Division would also serve a coordinating, public-outreach role regarding residential and light commercial energy conservation, distributed electrical generation, transmission, and market issues.
· Gaviota Coast Resource Study ($50,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to conduct a study of the 35-mile Gaviota Coast (Pt. Conception to Goleta). The study would
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 17 Draft Plan, October 2001 assess inventories and map the many resources and habitats located on the Coast to assist in both the long-term planning effort for the area and decisions on pending developments. The study would also describe important resources found along the coast, existing land use regulations, and plans and policies applicable to the area.
· Humboldt Coastal Management ($151,157): Humboldt County proposes to implement a program to conserve, restore, and protect county coastal resources. The program would consist of five elements: 1) beach management, 2) coastal planning, 3) coastal monitoring and mapping, 4) Humboldt Bay Harbor facilities feasibility study, and 5) watershed management and restoration matching funding.
· Local Coastal Program Implementation ($154,510): San Luis Obispo County proposes to undertake a number of tasks and projects to implement its LCP, including: 1) LCP review tasks - develop and adopt new policies and standards, 2) update four coastal area plans of the county's LCP, and 3) LCP implementation projects (e.g., Cambria Open Space District feasibility study, Coastal Trail, and County Coastal Access Implementation Plan).
· Increased Regional Planning Coordination ($50,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to enhance regional planning efforts along the county's coast. Specifically, the county would coordinate with agencies on policy development affecting coastal resources and communities and to conduct interagency review of high-profile projects. Among the projects to be addressed is the long-range development plan revisions for the University of California, Santa Barbara.
· Summerland Community Plan Implementation ($20,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to implement certain elements of the Summerland Community Plan. The plan was developed to address concerns regarding adequate parking and access to coastal recreational opportunities. Specifically, the county would begin designing the coastal access and recreation elements of the plan, and coordinate with community leaders and the California Department of Transportation.
· Toro Canyon Plan Adoption and Implementation ($20,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to complete, adopt, and implement the Toro Canyon Plan. Specifically, the county would use CIAP funds for the coastal portions of the plan adoption, including preparing and disseminating plan documents and related information to the public and affected public agencies. The funds would also be used to cover county costs associated with the California Coastal Commission's certification review, final publication, and preparing implementation and training materials and activities for both county staff and the public.
Offshore Oil and Gas The State of California and federal government are currently addressing the impacts of the potential re-issuance (suspension) of 36 oil and gas leases off the California coast. The U.S. Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service will be providing California with additional information regarding the future of these 36 offshore tracts, which may be followed by a series of proposals and environmental impact statements regarding future
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 18 Draft Plan, October 2001 developments. California also anticipates the submittal of other large, complex coastal energy and ocean resource-related projects. Five types of expected submittals are: 1) power plant projects; 2) proposals to develop state tideland oil and gas reserves from existing federal platforms; 3) review of energy elements for amended LCPs; 4) fiber optic cable proposals; and 5) proposals for desalination facilities. The proposals in this category are intended to help California and local governments address the impacts of these types of developments.
State Proposal · Review of Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease Suspensions, Exploration, and Development Plans and Other Energy and Ocean Resource Projects ($300,000): The California Coastal Commission proposes to hire temporary staff to review energy and ocean resource-related projects and to backfill for experienced staff needed to review outer continental shelf lease suspensions and exploration and development plans.
County Proposals · Change of Owner, Operator, Guarantor Ordinance ($20,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to develop codified procedures similar to those of the U.S. Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service to oversee changes in owner, operator, and other third-party guarantors for the onshore facilities that support offshore oil and gas development.
· Offshore Oil and Gas Public Information and Website ($15,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to construct a website for disseminating information about offshore oil and gas development to the affected public. Among other things, the site would be used to inform the public about upcoming events and provide fact sheets and information papers about offshore and oil and gas development in the region.
· Oil and Gas Legislation, Rulemaking, and Intergovernmental Coordination ($50,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to track and comment on legislation and rulemaking that affect offshore oil and gas development and its onshore supporting infrastructure. The county also proposes to improve coordination with various federal and state agencies relative to oil and gas development in the region.
· Oil Transportation Policies ($50,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to update the policies of its General Plan and LCP regarding transportation of offshore oil and gas.
· Oil Spill Environmental Thresholds ($15,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to draft new oil spill thresholds. The county has determined that these thresholds are essential tools for determining the significance of impacts to marine and terrestrial water quality and biology, recreation, and tourism as a result of an offshore or onshore oil spill. These thresholds would be applied during environmental review of offshore oil and gas development, including onshore infrastructure that supports such development.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 19 Draft Plan, October 2001 Research Research should be the foundation of good public policy, though often it is not due to a variety of factors. Factors reducing the utilization of research findings in public policymaking include funding deficiencies, the need for more directed research, and the lack of coordination between researchers and policy makers. However, the state of California must support marine research to remain in the forefront of progressive resource management. The projects proposed in this category address the need for new initiatives to support and coordinate statewide marine research initiatives, site specific research initiatives, or infrastructure for existing research facilities.
State Proposals · Ocean Resources Stewardship Act Trust Fund ($850,000): The Resources Agency proposes to establish the California Ocean Trust authorized by the California Ocean Resources Stewardship Act of 2000 (AB 2387; Keeley). Among other things, the goals of the trust are to fund ocean research science projects, seek additional funds for ocean research science projects, and encourage coordinated multi-agency approaches to ocean resource science.
· San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) Headquarters - Baywater Delivery, HVAC and Fire Supression System ($100,000): The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, in conjunction with the San Francisco Bay NERR, proposes to construct an energy-efficient baywater delivery system. This system would provide the NERR teaching laboratory and the Romberg Tiburon Center laboratories with a constant and controllable source of salinated water for a variety of animal care, aquaculture, and research purposes. In addition, this state-of-the-art system will allow the collected water to circulate throughout the entire building, thus providing an energy efficient heating and cooling system (HVAC) for the facility that will further serve as a component of the building's new fire-suppression system.
Shoreline Erosion California’s spectacular coastline includes sandy beaches, sheer bluffs, rocky headlands, intertidal zones, and other diverse shoreline types. This variety of landforms, combined with complex oceanographic and geologic conditions as well as human activities that affect site conditions and the delivery and movement of sand to and along the coast, results in erosion rates that vary from one segment of the coast to another. It has been estimated that approximately 85 percent of the California coast is actively eroding, while the coastal population in California continues to rise. The projects in this category address the need for a statewide approach for evaluating the sediment (including sand) management needs of our watersheds, wetlands, and beaches, all of which are interrelated.
State Proposals · California Master Plan for Comprehensive Coastal Sediment Management ($800,000): The California Department of Boating and Waterways proposes to develop a comprehensive statewide master plan that evaluates and prioritizes sediment management needs. The purpose of the plan is to maximize the ecological functioning of the state’s coastal watersheds, wetlands and beaches. This would be
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 20 Draft Plan, October 2001 the first time that the state has developed such a plan for statewide coastal sediment management.
· Coastal Sediment Compatibility and Impact Study ($400,000): The California Department of Boating and Waterways proposes to develop a coastal sediment compatibility and impact study that determines and compares the historical and present day terrestrial sediment loads and grain-size distribution from major streams, rivers and coastal bluffs. The study would also determine the general fate of terrestrial sediments reaching the ocean and the effects of waves, currents, dilution, and mixing on the ultimate fate of these sediments.
Watersheds/Water Quality California’s ocean ecosystem extends from the inland watersheds of the Sierra Nevada that lead to the coast to the deep ocean waters located far off the coastline. The ecological relationships between land and sea cannot be overstated; healthy ocean and coastal resources are dependent on healthy watersheds. Coastal watersheds provide nurseries for anadromous fish, as well as nutrients and other resources that flow into enclosed bays, estuaries, coastal lagoons, or directly into the ocean. The watersheds/water quality category consists of proposals to improve our stewardship and protection of California’s precious watershed resources.
State Proposals · Adobe Creek Watershed Management Plan ($25,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to prepare a comprehensive watershed management plan for the Adobe Creek sub-watershed of the Petaluma River (which flows to San Pablo Bay) within Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park. The plan will develop strategies and actions to control surface runoff and sedimentation into the stream and prevent water quality contamination from possible bacterial sources.
· Espa Lagoon and Watershed Analysis ($75,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR) proposes to analyze the impacts of past logging in the upper Espa Lagoon watershed within Prairie Creek State Park. The CDPR would inventory and prioritize sediment sources for rehabilitation with heavy equipment, examine methods to diminish eutrophication in the lagoon, evaluate water quality and tidal effects within the lagoon, and assess the advisability of reducing flow restrictions.
· For the Sake of the Salmon Regional Watershed Coordinators ($180,000): In conjunction with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the Resources Agency proposes to extend for a second year contracts with three regional watershed coordinators. The top priority for each coordinator is to help watershed groups develop technically sound, well-written proposals to fund watershed assessment, planning, and restoration projects. First year funds were provided by For the Sake of the Salmon.
· Gaviota Creek Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource Management Plan ($100,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to implement a Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource Management Plan
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 21 Draft Plan, October 2001 (WMP) on Gaviota Creek. The WMP would provide a forum for all property owners to work cooperatively in addressing surface water and habitat degradation. The WMP would also provide an action plan to address surface water degradation.
· North Coast Watershed Assessment - Phase II ($450,000): In Fiscal Year 2000-2001, the Resources Agency launched a new program to assess all North Coast watersheds. The Resources Agency now proposes to support additional monitoring work and watershed plan development in the coastal watersheds where the assessment will be completed in the coming year. Specifically, these watersheds are the Gualala, Mattole, Redwood, Albion, Big Creek, and North Fork Eel.
· Sonoma and Santa Rosa Creeks Watershed Management Plans ($100,000): The California Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to prepare comprehensive watershed management plans for certain sub-watersheds within Sugar Loaf Ridge State Park, Jack London State Historic Park, and Annadel State Park. The plans would propose strategies and actions to control surface water runoff and sedimentation into stream courses.
· Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring ($50,000): The California Coastal Commission, in conjunction with the Gulf of the Farrallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS), proposes to make available funds, training, manuals, equipment, and computation of a monitoring program for Tomales Bay. Under the supervision of the GFNMS, Tomales Bay High school students would be enlisted and trained to conduct the monitoring.
· Tools for Watershed Management ($700,000): The Resources Agency proposes to provide funding towards the development of a statewide watershed program based on the Oregon model of providing technical assistance and other tools to community- based watershed management efforts. Allocations would be based on the already developed priorities of the California Biodiversity Council's Watershed Workgroup. This project would be developed in conjunction with the CalFed Program.
County Proposals · Lower Smith River Stream Channel Assessment ($61,696): Del Norte County proposes to prepare an assessment of river conditions within the coastal zone of the Smith River. The Smith River is recognized nationally as a federal Wild and Scenic River and world renowned for its anadromous fishery and high water quality.
· Phase I Integration of Coastal Surface Water Quality Programs ($187,028): Monterey County proposes to integrate up to ten federal and state coastal water quality programs. The integration would focus on those components of federal and state programs that fall within the purview and responsibility of county government. Highlights would include programs such as the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary's WQPP Action Plan, Part IV, the California Farm Bureau Federation's Non Point Source Initiative and California's Plan for Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The county would also assess water quality at two coastal lagoons and develop a Comprehensive Surface Water Quality Integration Plan.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 22 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Preparation and Implementation of a Marin County Watershed Management Plan ($160,281): Marin County proposes to prepare a comprehensive watershed management plan. The purposes of the plan would be to identify best management practices for inclusion in the Marin Countywide Plan, prioritze restoration projects for funding, and provide a framework for subsequently preparing watershed management plans for each of the county's watersheds. Plan implementation would consist of presenting best management practices to the County Board of Supervisors for priortization and funding key watershed restoration projects.
· Project Clean Water ($100,000): Santa Barbara County proposes to continue a program to protect public health and enhance environmental quality in watersheds and at beaches throughout the county. Program elements would include: 1) media, information and outreach materials, 2) land use policy review - new development guidelines, 3) pollutant load estimates - storm drain inspections, and 4) demonstration projects.
· San Lorenzo Creek Bayland Restoration and Sedimentation Study ($145,894): Alameda County proposes to design and implement projects that will enable the county to improve the rapidly declining health of the San Lorenzo Creek Watershed and improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. The county has determined that projects such as dams, drop structures, retention basins, culverts, concrete channels, and the diking of tidal wetlands have led to habitat destruction and fragmentation of the watershed.
· Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment ($185,000): Los Angeles County proposes to conduct additional analysis and collect additional data necessary to complete the Topanga Creek Watershed Management Plan. The goal of the plan is to develop an integrated management approach for the entire Topanga Creek Watershed that will protect existing habitat and infrastructure, help identify sources of pollution in the watershed, and provide guidelines, including voluntary citizen involvement, to improve the quality of the watershed.
· Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition ($220,000): Los Angeles County proposes to partner with public agencies and nonprofit organizations to protect the headwaters of three major coastal watersheds: Zuniga Creek and Pond of Old Topanga Creek of Topanga Creek, Dry Canyon Creek of Arroyo Calabasas of the Los Angeles River, and Cold Creek of Malibu Creek.
· Various Stockpile Sites within Sonoma County ($49,295): Sonoma County proposes to develop permanent spoil sites along roads adjacent to the Russian River, Gualala River, and other rivers. The goal of these spoil sites would be to help reduce erosive debris from being deposited on hillside slopes above rivers and streams that support salmonid species.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 23 Draft Plan, October 2001 State CIAP Administration As discussed in the introduction of this plan, H.R. 5344 appropriates CIAP funding to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce who will then distribute these funds to eligible states and coastal political subdivisions (counties). The legislation also requires eligible states, including California, to submit Coastal Impact Assistance Plans detailing how the funds will be expended. NOAA's June 5, 2001 CIAP guidance document provides additional administrative CIAP requirements on the states such as disbursing funds and overseeing project implementation. The State CIAP Administration category consists of the Resources Agency’s proposal to secure sufficient resources to meet the requirements discussed above and to ensure successful implementation of the plan.
State Proposal · Coastal Impact Assistance Program Administration ($298,531): The Resources Agency proposes to contract with sufficient staff for implementing the state's Coastal Impact Assistance Plan. Tasks would include developing contracts and reimbursement and payment procedures, project oversight (state and local), site visits, and writing and submitting periodic reports to NOAA. The expected duration of the CIAP is in the range of three to five years.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 24 Draft Plan, October 2001 Table A: Summary of Proposed State and County Funding by Project Category Expenditure Level
Project Category Proposed
State Proposals Marine Life/Fisheries $1,707,000 Watersheds/Water Quality $1,680,000 Coastal Habitats/Wetlands $1,550,000 Coastal Access $1,500,000 Shoreline Erosion $1,200,000 Research $950,000 Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management $700,000 Offshore Oil and Gas $300,000 State CIAP Administration $298,531 Economics $100,000 Geographic Information Systems $75,000 State Total $10,060,531
County Proposals Coastal Habitat/Wetlands $1,814,559 Watersheds/Water Quality $1,109,194 Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management $940,651 Coastal Access $710,202 Geographic Information Systems $402,107 Marine Life/Fisheries $216,934 Offshore Oil and Gas $150,000 Infrastructure $73,562 County Total $5,417,209
Combined State and County Proposals Coastal Habitat/Wetlands $3,364,559 Watersheds/Water Quality $2,789,194 Coastal Acccess $2,210,202 Marine Life/Fisheries $1,923,934 Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management $1,640,651 Shoreline Erosion $1,200,000 Research $950,000 Geographic Information Systems $477,107 Offshore Oil and Gas $450,000 State CIAP Administration $298,531 Economics $100,000 Infrastructure $73,562 Combined State and County Total $15,477,740
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 25 Draft Plan, October 2001 Table B: Proposed State Projects by Category
Department Project Category and Title Proposed Funding Marine Life/Fisheries DFG Infrastructure for a Marine Life Management Act Nearshore $700,000 Ecosystem Assessment Program DFG Marine Life Protection Act Implementation $372,000 DFG Fisheries Monitoring Infrastructure $300,000 Coastal Cmsn Marine Resource Surveys Related to Caltrans/Highway 1 $150,000 DFG Constituent Involvement for Marine Management $75,000 DFG Market Squid Research $75,000 DPR Crystal Cove Underwater Preserve Monitoring for Impacts $35,000 Subtotal $1,707,000
Watershed/Water Quality RA Tools for Watershed Management $700,000 RA North Coast Watershed Assessment - Phase II $450,000 RA For the Sake of the Salmon Regional Watershed Coordinators $180,000 DPR Sonoma and Santa Rosa Creek Watershed Management Plans $100,000 DPR Gaviota Creek Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource $100,000 Management Plan DPR Espa Lagoon and Watershed Analysis $75,000 Coastal Cmsn Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring $50,000 DPR Adobe Creek Watershed Management Plan $25,000 Subtotal $1,680,000
Coastal Habitat/Wetlands DFG Santa Cruz Islands Ecosystem Restoration $500,000 Coastal Cmsn Development of Coordinated Elkhorn Slough Stewardship Plan $300,000 DPR Oceano Dunes Foredune Restoration $200,000 Coastal Cnsrv Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project Science Advisory $200,000 Panel DPR Pescadero Marsh Habitat Restoration $150,000 BCDC San Francisco Bay Wetlands Restoration Program $125,000 RA Form Central Coast Wetlands Joint Venture $75,000 Subtotal $1,550,000
Coastal Access BCDC Bay Trail Implementation Partnerships $750,000 Coastal Cnsrv Public Access Projects $400,000 Coastal Cnsrv Pacific Coastal Trail Implementation Plan $300,000 Coastal Cmsn Implementation of a Site-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program $50,000 Subtotal $1,500,000
Shoreline Erosion DBW California Master Plan for Comprehensive Coastal Sediment $800,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 26 Draft Plan, October 2001 Management DBW Coastal Sediment Compatibility and Impact Study $400,000 Subtotal $1,200,000
Research RA Ocean Resources Stewardship Act Trust Fund $850,000 BCDC San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve $100,000 Headquarters: Baywater Delivery, HVAC, and Fire Supression System Improvements Subtotal $950,000
Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management Coastal Cmsn Santa Barbara County Regional Cumulative Assessment Project and $400,000 Periodic Review of The Santa Barbara County LCP BCDC Regulatory Assistance and Bay Management Partnerships $200,000 RA California and the World Ocean 2002 $100,000 Subtotal $700,000
Offshore Oil and Gas Coastal Cmsn Outer Continental Shelf Impact Analysis $300,000 Subtotal $300,000
State CIAP Administration RA CIAP Administration $298,531 Subtotal $298,531
Economics RA Ocean and Coastal Contribution To California's Economy $100,000 Subtotal $100,000
Geographic Information Systems Coastal Cmsn Revised Oil Wildlife Sensitivity Maps for the Monterey Bay National $75,000 Marine Sanctuary Subtotal $75,000
Total of State Proposals $10,060,531 State Portion of CIAP Allocation $10,060,531
* BCDC = San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Coastal Cmsn = Coastal Commission Coastal Cnsrv = Coastal Conservancy DBW = Department of Boating and Waterways DFG = Department of Fish and Game DPR = Department of Parks and Recreation RA = Resources Agency
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 27 Draft Plan, October 2001 Table C: Proposed County Projects by County
Category County or Project Title Proposed Funding Alameda County W/WQ San Lorenzo Creek Bayland Restoration and Sedimentation Study $145,894 Coastal Access Albany Waterfront Restoration Project $35,000 Subtotal $180,894 CIAP Allocation $180,894
Contra Costa County CH/W Carquinez Straits Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, $253,256 and Stewardship Project Subtotal $253,256 CIAP Allocation $253,256
Del Norte County W/WQ Lower Smith River Stream Channel Assessment $61,696 Subtotal $61,696 CIAP Allocation $61,696
Humboldt County O&CP/Mgmt Humboldt Coastal Management $151,157 Subtotal $151,157 CIAP Allocation $151,157
Los Angeles County Coastal Access Manhattan Beach Access Repairs Project $435,261 W/WQ Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project $220,000 W/WQ Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality $185,000 Assessment Subtotal $840,261 CIAP Allocation $840,261
Marin County W/WQ Preparation and Implementation of a Marin County Watershed $160,281 Management Plan Subtotal $160,281 CIAP Allocation $160,281
Mendocino County CH/W Albion River Watershed - Replace Two Fish Barriers $72,287 O&CP/Mgmt Comprehensive Update to the Open Space and Conservation Element $28,984 of the County General Plan Subtotal $101,271 CIAP Allocation $101,271
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 28 Draft Plan, October 2001 Monterey County W/WQ Phase I Integration of Coastal Surface Water Quality Programs $187,028 Subtotal $187,028 CIAP Allocation $187,028
Napa County Coastal Access Napa County Airport Area Bay Trail $68,635 Subtotal $68,635 CIAP Allocation $68,635
Orange County CH/W South Talbert Wetlands Habitat Enhancement $297,359 Subtotal $297,359 CIAP Allocation $297,359
San Diego County GIS GIS Support for Stormwater Permit Compliance $297,570 Subtotal $297,570 CIAP Allocation $297,570
San Francisco County Coastal Access Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier $106,686 Subtotal $106,686 CIAP Allocation $106,686
San Luis Obispo County O&CP/Mgmt Local Coastal Plan Implementation Programs $154,510 CH/W Natural Habitat Conservation Planning for the Los Osos Area $60,000 Coastal Access Avila Beach Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage Project $25,386 ML/F Regional Restoration Project Plan For Steelhead/Tri-county Fish Team $25,000 CH/W Oceano Lagoon Wetlands System Biological and Hydrological $23,600 Assessment Subtotal $288,496 CIAP Allocation $288,496
San Mateo County ML/F Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Resource Assessment Project $145,934 Subtotal $145,934 CIAP Allocation $145,934
Santa Barbara County CH/W Gaviota Coast Acquisition Fund $212,203 O&CP/Mgmt Ellwood Specific Plan $200,000 O&CP/Mgmt Energy Conservation and Distributed Generation $106,000 GIS GIS Coastal Zone Enhancements $106,000 CH/W Project Clean Water $100,000 O&CP/Mgmt Amortization or Consolidation LCP Amendment $90,000 Research Gaviota Coast Resource Study $50,000 Offshore O&G Oil/Gas Legislation, Rulemaking, Other Intergovernmental Activities $50,000 Offshore O&G Oil Transportation Policies $50,000 O&CP/Mgmt Improved Regional Planning Coordination $50,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 29 Draft Plan, October 2001 O&CP/Mgmt Isla Vista Natural Resources Preservation and Enhancement $40,000 O&CP/Mgmt Coastal Area Compliance and Enforcement $30,000 ML/F Tri-County Fish Team $25,000 O&CP/Mgmt Carpinteria Valley Greenhouse Program $20,000 O&CP/Mgmt CEQA Guidelines and Thresholds Update $20,000 Offshore O&G Change of Owner, Operator, Guarantor Ordinance $20,000 O&CP/Mgmt Summerland Community Plan Implementation $20,000 O&CP/Mgmt Toro Canyon Plan Adoption and Implementation $20,000 Offshore O&G Offshore Oil and Gas Public Information and Website $15,000 Offshore O&G Oil Spill Environmental Thresholds $15,000 Subtotal $1,239,203 CIAP Allocation $1,239,203
Santa Clara County CH/W Alviso Marina County Park, South San Francisco Bay Wetlands $163,610 Habitat Improvements/Mitigation Subtotal $163,610 CIAP Allocation $163,610
Santa Cruz County CH/W Watsonville Sloughs System Restoration Project $86,933 Subtotal $86,933 CIAP Allocation $86,933
Solano County CH/W Solano County Wetlands Restoration Projects $294,667 Subtotal $294,667 CIAP Allocation $294,667
Sonoma County CH/W Willow Creek Road Culverts $68,415 W/WQ Various Stockpile Sites within Sonoma County $49,295 Subtotal $117,710 CIAP Allocation $117,710
Ventura County CH/W Wetlands Task Force $282,229 Infrastructure Energy Conservation - Installation of Photovoltaic "Net Metering" $73,562 Systems at 23 Fire Stations ML/F Tri-County Fish Team, Regional Restoration Coalition $21,000 Subtotal $376,791 CIAP Allocation $376,791
Total of County Requests $5,417,209 Total County Portion of CIAP Allocation $5,417,209
* CH/W = Coastal Habitat/Wetlands ML/F = Marine Life/Fisheries O&CP/Mgmt = Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management Offshore O&G = Offshore Oil and Gas W/WQ = Watershed/Water Quality
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 30 Draft Plan, October 2001 Section 3: Catalog of CIAP Project Proposals
Project Proposal Format and Development
California’s draft CIAP Plan consists of 37 state agency sponsored project proposals and 50 county sponsored project proposals. All state and county proposals submitted to the Resources Agency were required to include the following elements:
1. Summary of the project's purpose and scope. 2. Description of each project's consistency with the state CIAP mission and one or more of the goals (see Section 2). 3. Budget. 4. Total project cost estimate. 5. Timeline for project implementation and completion.
Project summaries and the mission and goals description were limited to four pages while the budget, project cost estimate, and timeline were included as attachments (see Appendix D for proposal form).
State and county project proposals were reviewed by Resources Agency staff to ensure that the requirements listed above were met, as well as to ensure consistency with the authorized uses for CIAP funds as set forth in the enabling legislation and NOAA guidance document. In addition, all state proposals were considered preliminary until they were evaluated and ranked. Based on these evaluations, preliminary funding recommendations were made by Resources Agency staff and presented to the Secretary for Resources. Under the Secretary’s direction, state agencies were requested to submit final proposals for inclusion in the state’s draft plan.
State and County Project Proposals Catalog
In the following pages, state and county project proposals are included in their entirety under the following categories: Coastal Access, Coastal Habitat/Wetlands, Economics, Geographic Information Systems, Infrastructure, Marine Life/Fisheries, Ocean and Coastal Planning/Management, Offshore Oil and Gas, Research, Shoreline Erosion, Watersheds/Water Quality and State CIAP Administration.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 31 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Alameda County Department: Community Development Agency Planning Department Prepared by: James Sorensen, Planning Director Phone number: (510) 670-5400 Address: 399 Elmhurst Avenue, Room 136 Hayward, CA 94544 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Albany Waterfront Restoration Project Project location: Albany Waterfront (Buchanan extension of SF Bay Trail) Total cost: $35,000 Funding request: $35,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 59 Draft Plan, October 2001 ALBANY BAY TRAIL RESTORATION PROJECT
Project Summary: The Albany Bay Trail Restoration Project proposes to remove and control exotic plant species and restore natives to the Albany portion of the San Francisco Bay Trail, along the Albany waterfront. Development of educational materials is included within the scope of this project. Restoration activities in this area can serve as a model for future Eastshore State Park improvements, adjacent to the Bay Trail area, and will help to create a rich habitat for birds, plants, and pollinators. Directly benefited will be uncommon native plants such as the Gumweed (Grindelia stricta var angustifolia) and Western Goldenrod (Euthania occidentalis). Many varieties of migratory birds as well as reptiles and amphibians would also benefit. The plan to accomplish these goals already exists in draft form and this project could begin immediately upon receiving funds.
Project Background: The Albany portion of the Bay Trail is located west of Interstate 80, on a spit of land jutting into San Francisco Bay. The trail provides access to the Albany beach, the Albany “bulb” (City owned) and to the area owned by the East Bay Regional Park District, which is part of the proposed Eastshore State Park. To the south of the trail is Golden Gate Fields Race Track, including the site of the Buchanan Street Salt Marsh restoration project, (currently in the feasibility stage). The area is heavily frequented by a wide variety of recreational users, including an artist community working at the Albany bulb. Educational signage and viewing platforms are currently in place, and additional educational signage is in the planning stages.
The Albany waterfront is an important transition area. Bounded by the salt marsh and the natural area in the proposed Eastshore State Park, this stretch straddles two environmental extremes. On the natural side (north, and west to the beach), and is a rapidly disappearing habitat for native flora and fauna. On the other side is a huge parking lot for Golden Gate Fields, and directly east of the parking area is the salt marsh. To the southwest of the trail is one of the last remaining stretches of natural beach in the area. A proposed segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail runs south from this area to the Berkeley marina. The extreme western area, known as “the bulb” is the site of an old commercial landfill, closed in 1979, and now used by artists, and for recreational hiking, biking and dog-walking.
Along the trail are various planting and unimproved areas which have degenerated into weeds and undesirable exotic plant species . The aggressive nature of some of the non-native species and the lack of control means that many areas are overrun by the exotic plants and weeds. The City has been working to foster a sense of stewardship in the area and has implemented a community group “adopt-a-trail” program for litter control. The City has also worked with contractors to provide selective mowing to control invasive weeds while providing some chance for native species to re-establish. However, these efforts are quite limited, and cannot address the overall area in a comprehensive manner.
Project Description: This project proposes to implement repeated, timed and selective mowing, hand weeding, hoeing, and chopping of pernicious perennial and annual weeds for a two year period. Removal and control activities for the first year will occur primarily in the spring and summer, although some control activities will take place on a monthly basis. In the fall and winter, sowing and planting will begin. This will include, but is not limited to sowing
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 60 Draft Plan, October 2001 and planting of native species including toyon, lupine, Channel Islands buckwheat, dune grasses, and various native grasses and wildflowers. Existing non-native landscaping which was planted in prior years may be maintained depending upon the determination of the City, and the advice of specialists in the field. . The second year of the project will include continued removal and control of non-native species, and may include additional plantings. A brochure will be developed which describes the City’s waterfront area, the goals of the restoration, and promotes stewardship opportunities. The brochure will be distributed at public facilities, local events and to local community and environmental groups.
The proposed budget for the project is as follows: $10,000 Year 1 Control of non-natives (early spring to summer) $15,000 Year 1& 2 Purchase and planting of native species (planting occurring in fall/winter) $ 8,000 Year 2 Control of non-natives (monthly throughout the year) $ 2,000 Year 1 Educational materials $35,000
This project could begin as early as September 2001. The City would propose to work with Shelterbelt Builders, Inc., and with the Urban Tree Foundation, a local non-profit organization. Both of these entities have experience in our community, and specifically at the waterfront area. These organizations bring established expertise in the control of invasives, species selection, planting of native species, tree planting and maintenance, and public participation.
Consistency with Mission and Goals: The project is consistent with the mission statement and fulfills three of the four goals of the program, as follows:
Goal 1: Stewardship: One of the main goals of the City of Albany is to continue to develop and maintain stewardship over this unique area of our City. This project will work in conjunction with existing stewardship activities of volunteer groups and the Albany Waterfront Committee. Specialists will assist the community to restore, replant and develop a maintenance plan for the waterfront, developing an increased awareness of community responsibility toward our environmental resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability: This project will encourage and complement beneficial uses at the waterfront area. This includes local community recreational uses, regional uses such as development of the Eastshore State Park and the San Francisco Bay Trail, and co-existence with Golden Gate Fields Race Track. Restoration of the area will encourage those using facilities in the area to treat the waterfront and surrounding area in an environmentally sound manner.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology: Public education is an important complement to the restoration project. Currently, the City’s Waterfront Commission has directed the implementation of educational signage along the trail. Throughout the City, we educate, promote, and enforce federal Clean Water and Water Quality standards regarding urban run- off, emphasizing our connections to the Bay and our responsibility to our waterfront area. As
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 61 Draft Plan, October 2001 part of this project a brochure will be developed and distributed throughout the community. In addition, this project will go hand-in-hand with a grant proposal recently submitted by a local non-profit organization (the Urban Tree Foundation) to the Coastal Conservancy to develop a public and school educational program at the waterfront.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 62 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: San Luis Obispo County Department: Department of Planning and Building Prepared by: Nancy E. Rollman, AICP, Environmental Specialist Phone number: (805) 781-5008 Address: County Government Center, Rm. 310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408-2040 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Avila Beach Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage/County of San Luis Obispo Project location: Avila Beach Total cost: $750,000 Funding request: $25,386
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 63 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The approved Avila Beach Specific Plan proposes construction of a mid-block pedestrian passage between First and Front Streets to align with the Avila Pier. This would provide a pedestrian-only connection from the Earl’s Alley parking lot, located several blocks from the beach. The connection would create visitor serving opportunities along the passage in the form of shops and other retail uses because of exposure to direct pedestrian traffic flows to and from the parking lot. The pedestrian passage would link the parking lot to the nearby coastal resources by providing a safe and inviting public accessway to the beach area. The First Street entrance would also provide an ideal location for visitors being transported from remote parking lots or other offsite locations.
The passage would include the following design components:
• Passage orientation and paving – the buildings along the passage would be oriented to the existing street grid, but would have paving running through it that would articulate the diagonal orientation of the pier. Paving materials would be simple, such as board- imprinted concrete, wood planks, or simple concrete unit pavers aligned to the angle of the wood planks on the Avila Pier. • Passage entries – the entries would be demarcated with palm trees at either end of the passage to frame the views of the pier and ocean, and to help people identify it from a distance.
• Street Furniture and Lighting – street lights and benches would be installed along the passage at appropriate locations.
• Murals – hand-painted murals by local artists would be encouraged in the passage.
• Topography – design considerations will be made to accommodate the grade change of ten feet between First Street and Front Street. This could be done by sloping the walkway at a gradual grade of less than five percent, which complies with accessibility requirements for disabled persons, or by constructing a series of ramps that connect to terraces, where outdoor seating could be located.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
The Avila Beach Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage is consistent with the mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. The project as proposed in the Avila Beach Specific Plan, and approved by the California Coastal Commission in November, 2000, is a culmination of a comprehensive and coordinated process to manage the rebuilding of Avila Beach, after much of its commercial district was demolished as part of a clean-up project by Unocal. The Mid- Block Pedestrian Passage will enhance the beauty and charm of this popular beach town,
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 64 Draft Plan, October 2001 which is an important coastal resource in San Luis Obispo County. As described below in discussions about consistency with each of the goals, the proposed project would make coastal resources more accessible to visitors and residents, enhancing the enjoyment of coastal resources for the benefit of current and future generations.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
The County of San Luis Obispo, the residents of Avila Beach and the California Coastal Commission worked together diligently to create and approve the Avila Beach Specific Plan, a vision for rebuilding Avila Beach after demolition of most of its commercial district due to a Unocal oil spill clean-up project. Set on the scenic Central Coast of California, Avila Beach offers an attractive beach, a pleasant year-round climate (when other areas are fogged in, it is usually sunny in Avila Beach), and the charming atmosphere of an old-time beach town. These features make Avila Beach a popular tourist destination; estimates range from 800,000 to over one million visitors per year.
The Avila Beach Specific Plan contains a number of major physical design elements, including a new Town Center, a park, development along Front Street, and the Mid-Block Pedestrian Connection. As stewards for the implementation of the Avila Beach Specific Plan, the county and the community consider the public improvement of the Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage a high priority. This would make coastal resources more accessible to visitors and residents, helping to facilitate the recovery of the town, and enhancing the enjoyment of coastal resources for the benefit of current and future generations.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
The proposed project would improve coastal access and community aesthetics, increase local property values and better serve the area’s tourist population.
The pedestrian passage in intended to enhance pedestrian circulation because it will provide a pleasant, safe linkage from the parking lot to the beach. Because of the various design elements and public improvements along the pedestrian passage, it will be a visually appealing experience for the beach goer and visitor to Avila Beach. The project will also provide both indoor and outdoor retail and dining opportunities for tourists and business owners. Providing this public improvement in Avila would also increase local property values. A financial cost/benefit analysis of this passage showed that land values of the property along the passage would be approximately 27 percent higher than their value without the passage.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Successful implementation of the Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage will be documented and submitted for various planning and landscape architecture awards, with the goal of helping other coastal communities realize their visions and make good use of their coastal and ocean resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 65 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California’s interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Implementation of the Mid-Block Pedestrian Passage is a key component in rebuilding the town of Avila Beach after the excavation of the town from the oil contamination cleanup. To recover from the stigma of contamination and to encourage investment in the recreational resources that are possible in Avila Beach, the pedestrian passage would help Avila Beach recover from the devastating effects of the excavation project. The project would attract additional statewide interest in coastal resources in Avila Beach and would provide valuable coastal access to one of the state’s most charming beaches.
Cost Estimate:
The grant request of $25,386 will allow for final design plans and preparation of grading plans/ preliminary improvement plans. Other grant sources are being pursued for actual physical construction and streetscape improvements, which is estimated to cost approximately $750,000.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 66 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Napa County Department: Conservation, Development and Planning and Public Works Prepared by: Natasha Merkuloff Phone number: (707) 259-8188 Address: 1195 Third Street, Room 201 Napa, CA 94559 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Napa County Airport Area Bay Trail Project location: Vicinity of Napa County Airport near the Napa River Total cost: $470,000 Funding request: $68,635
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 67 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Napa County Airport Area segment of the Bay Trail is a project to plan, design and construct a pedestrian and bicycling trail through the Napa Airport Area connecting in the south to the Bay Trail in the City of American Canyon, and in the north, to the proposed Napa River Trail in the City of Napa.
Phase I – estimated $70,000
Plan, design and complete any required environmental determination for the Napa County Airport Area segment
a. Engage the services of a consultant to develop options for placement of the Bay Trail b. Review of options and perform environmental determination on recommended option(s) 1. May be costs associated with environmental, depending on location of trail c. Board of Supervisors approve option(s) d. Design all segments of trail; prepare plans, specifications 1. Estimated $60,000 consultant services e. Begin right of way acquisition if required (as funds allow). 1. Estimated $85,000 for acquisition Timeline: 12 months of project start – however location of trail is contingent on County priorities and realities of access.
Phase II – estimated $400,000
a. Finalize right of way acquisition as required. b. Construct Napa County Airport Area Bay Trail. Actual location of the Trail will depend on planning and design performed in Phase I. 1. Class I bike path estimated cost of $80,000/mile for 3 miles 2. 5% striping and signage allowance 3. 30% engineering, administration, escalation and contingencies Timeline: Completion of Phase II is dependant on a number of factors: a. Other funding mechanisms for Bay Trail construction b. Anticipated development of roads (Devlin Road in particular) in the area c. Board action on a proposed major development in the area
Funding:
Grant funding will be sought for all phases of this project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 68 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposed project is consistent with the State’s established mission and one or more of the established goals, to wit:
· The proposed project is consistent with the mission in that the Bay Trail project ensures comprehensive and coordinated management and enhancement of California’s coastal resources for their intrinsic value and the benefit of current and future generations. · The proposed project offers a setting for wildlife observation and broader environmental education. (Goal 3) · The proposed project increases the public’s ability to get near the water, enhancing appreciation of the many natural habitats and resources along the shoreline. It also provides easily accessible opportunities for recreation and exercise, removed from the hazards and pollution of motor vehicles. This increases people’s respect and admiration for the Bay and other bodies of water, which in turn, creates an incentive to protect its many resources and preserve waterfront open space (Goal 1).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 69 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: City and County of San Francisco Department: Port of San Francisco Prepared by: Dan Hoddap Phone number: (415) 274-0625 Address: Port of San Francisco Pier 1 San Francisco, CA 94111 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier Project location: San Francisco Bay Total cost: $1,200,000 Funding request: $105,920
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 70 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary: The Port of San Francisco is currently constructing the Downtown Ferry Terminal – a project that provides updated and expanded commuter ferry terminal facilities by relocating and adding new ferry berths. New berths at the Downtown Ferry Terminal will be protected from winter storm surge by a new freestanding breakwater. The proposed Downtown Ferry Terminal “Public Pier” project would finish the top of the breakwater with public access improvements, making it a part of the Bay Trail and connecting it to the existing Embarcadero Promenade Bay Trail.
The proposed Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier would take advantage of this unique condition, taking a needed breakwater and making it a landmark open space to provide a place for the public to appreciate the Bay along the San Francisco waterfront. An approximatley 100-foot pier extension would be constructed to connect the freestanding breakwater to the Embarcadero Promenade, and a circular terminus would be added at the other end of the pier, 600-feet out into the Bay. Visitors would be able to walk out into the Bay and view interpretive information about Bay currents, Bay habitat and ferry activities, and enjoy views back to the City and Bay Bridge.
The breakwater is designed and built to support interpretive information and public access. The concrete topping slab installed on the breakwater is the final finished pavement for the public pier, conduit is located within the slab for pedestrian lighting, and railing brackets were placed within the topping slab.
The Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier will be a major attraction along the Bay Trail. It will be a new destination for local residents, regional visitors, and tourists that will provide a unique way of enjoying the Bay - by being able to walk 600-feet out over the water and learn about the Bay environment, and enjoy spectacular views.
Environmental Review. A federal environmental review was completed for the project with a “Finding of No Significant Impact”. The project is not a required mitigation measure for any other project or portion of a project, and the project has enjoyed broad public support.
Regulatory Approvals. The Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier has received all its needed environmental and regulatory approvals from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the Army Corp of Engineers, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Project is designed and is ready to be constructed. It is cost effective in how it provides a substantial Bay public access opportunity by using the needed breakwater construction. It is an implementation project of the Port's six-year, citizen based Waterfront Land Use Plan, and is supported by the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the California State Coastal Conservancy, the Association of Bay Area Governments, Save San Francisco Bay Association, and other agency and citizen groups.
Summary. The Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier is ready to go, is efficient and cost effective in its design, and will be an exciting place for residents and visitors to San Francisco to appreciate and learn about the Bay environment. The Port of San Francisco invites the California Resources Agency to become a partner in this landmark project on San Francisco Bay.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 71 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals: Mission: The Downtown Ferry Terminal Public Pier furthers the Mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program through its use and enhancement of one of the most heavily used shoreline areas in California. The Public Pier project is located at the foot of Market Street in Downtown San Francisco at the Ferry Building. It adjoins the recently improved Embarcadero Roadway and Embarcadero Promenade. Daily thousands of residents, Downtown workers and visitors will have the opportunity to walk out 600-feet into the Bay on the Public Pier. The Public Pier will be a new facility provided as a permanent and easily maintainable public amenity.
The project also implements the Port's recently adopted Waterfront Land Use Plan and accompanying Waterfront Design & Access Element, and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission Special Area Plan for the San Francisco Waterfront. The Port’s Land Use documents were developed working through a diverse citizen participation process that included over 130 public meetings during a six-year period.
Goal 1: Stewardship. As described in the Mission statement above, the decision to place a breakwater and public access pier in this prominent waterfront location is the result of an extensive and broad-reaching public planning process. From these plans, policies were set to develop the Downtown Ferry Terminal and to improve the surrounding portions of the project for public recreation. Other areas of the nearby waterfront were set aside for restoration of natural habitat, Port maritime uses, and appropriate urban waterfront uses. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the entire waterfront that assisted in balancing the uses for their most appropriate locations.
The design of the Public Pier also recognizes its immediate environmental context through its detail design. The breakwater function of the Pier is greatest as the distance increases from the shoreline. The Public Pier uses sheet-pile construction for sections further from the shoreline and pile supported decking for sections closer in. As a result water circulation is maximized near the shoreline, there will be less need for dredging, and more Bay habitat areas will be retained.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. The project promotes economic sustainability for the Bay Area region by assisting in meeting its water transit needs and featuring to the public the functions of the ferry terminal facility from the Public Pier. The Public Pier project is part of the larger Port plans that have included removing the Embarcadero Freeway and replacing it with an urban boulevard and pedestrian promenade. The Ferry Terminal facility replaces a portion of the transportation demand from the removed freeway with water transit. Use of public transit in this densely populated area lessens the environmental impacts of transportation and parking and allows preferred sustainable uses along the shoreline. The project also enhances the desirability of living in the nearby high-density Rincon Point, South Beach and Golden Gate residential neighborhoods, thereby further reducing transportation demand.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. The interpretive signage component of the project will provide education on the Bay environment and the ferry system within the Bay.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 72 Draft Plan, October 2001 The signage will also serve to further the environmental sustainability goals of the comprehensive Land Use Plan for the San Francisco waterfront.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. The project site is State owned land, held in trust for the people of California under the jurisdiction of the Port of San Francisco. The ferry terminal breakwater and public recreation purposes of the project are consistent with the State Lands allowable uses for the property.
Cost Estimate: Breakwater (subtotal): $3,050,000 Public Pier Trestle to connect to Promenade $450,000 Railing and site furnishings $350,000 Electrical $ 65,000 Pier turnaround $ 90,000 Subtotal $955,000
Escalation @ 4% $ 38,000 Construction Administration @10% $ 95,000 Contingency @10% $ 95,000
Public Pier (subtotal): $1,183,000 Total: $4,233,000
Available Funds:
Breakwater:
FTA funding, section 3 $2,400,000 CTC Proposition 116 447,760 Port Capital 202,240 Total: $3,050,000
Public Pier Improvements:
California Coastal Conservancy $400,000 Port Capital 300,000 ABAG Bay Trail 200,000 State TEA Funds* 200,000 California Resources Agency - CIAP* 105,920 Total: $1,205,920
* Funds not yet committed.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 73 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Timeline Construction on the breakwater portion of the project is scheduled for completion in July, 2001. The breakwater includes many features that anticipate or are part of the Public Pier. Following approval of the grant, the Port will complete final design drawings for the Public Pier portion of the project by September 31, 2001, request bids and approve a contract by January 15, 2002, and complete construction by June 30, 2002.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 74 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Lisa Plowman Phone number: (805) 568-2025 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Isla Vista Natural Resource Preservation and Enhancement Project location: Isla Vista, a 350 acre coastal community, 12 miles west of Santa Barbara Total cost: $40,000 Funding request: $40,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 75 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Isla Vista is an unincorporated community located atop a coastal mesa within the Goleta Valley. The area is surrounded on three sides by the University of California, Santa Barbara and on the fourth by the Pacific Ocean. Although an urbanized area, Isla Vista is noted for an abundance of natural resources, including vernal pools, open grasslands and coastal bluffs. The preservation of open space in this densely populated community is not only critical for its residents, but also for the protection of these ecologically important areas.
Santa Barbara County has obtained funds to restore and develop several underutilized blufftop parcels in Isla Vista with trails, landscaping, recreation areas and improved beach access. A program of interpretative signage will increase awareness of the coastal environment. The project involves restoration and development of a park program on three contiguous parcels.
The County, the University of California at Santa Barbara and the Isla Vista Recreation and Parks District are preparing an Isla Vista Master Plan to guide future development and redevelopment projects in this coastal community. The Master Plan will propose measures to protect and enhance environmentally sensitive coastal resources and to promote coastal recreation. To supplement this general effort, the County Planning and Development Department is seeking $40,000 in CIAP funds for planning improvements to existing publicly owned coastal properties and access, including landscaping, habitat restoration, beach access stair and ramp upgrades, paths, etc. The funds would also be used to study additional sites for resource protection and recreation, which would include:
· Review of resource and recreational potential of vacant properties for possible public acquisition; · Review of existing developed ocean front parcels where such development is severely threatened by coastal erosion for possible public acquisition for recreation or habitat. The goals of such acquisition would be to minimize demand for seawalls to protect such damaged and threatened structures and eventual creation of a public bluff top park in this densely populated community. · Consideration of habitat protection and restoration potential and coastal recreational opportunities on adjacent University owned land.
This proposal is consistent with the mission of the CIAP: “to ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for benefit of current and future generations” by protecting and enhancing coastal resources, open space and recreation.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal aligns most closely with the following Goal No. 1: Stewardship – to assess, conserve, and manage California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports these resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 76 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expenditure Staff salaries $30,000 Contractor $10,000 Total $40,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate completion of this project two years after commencement, and plan to commence as soon as CIAP funds are available.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 77 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: County of Los Angeles Department: Department of Beaches and Harbors Prepared by: Lyn Wallensak, Principal Analyst Phone number: (213) 974-4267 Address: Chief Administrative Office 754 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 E-mail: [email protected] Title of proposed project: Los Angeles County Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repairs Project Project location: Los Angeles County Total cost: $435,261 Funding request: $435,261
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 78 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The County of Los Angeles’ 72 miles of shoreline include approximately 27 miles of public beaches that draw an annual attendance of more than 53 million visitors. Continued public enjoyment of these coastal resources includes the provision of appropriate amenities and adequate access for the public.
The Los Angeles County Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repairs Project furthers this goal of providing adequate access for the public and protecting recreational resources. Manhattan Beach, located between 36th Street and 45th Street in the City of Manhattan Beach, is one of the most popular public beaches in the County. In addition to swimming and surfing, visitors can access the Beach bike path, stroll the Strand Walkway and play beach volleyball on a number of volleyball courts. Manhattan Beach also includes swings and a children’s playground, as well as restrooms and showers, fishing equipment rentals and a bait shop.
The Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repairs Project would repair and/or replace an existing retaining wall and access stairs, which have deteriorated from public use and the elements. The retaining wall provides support for the vehicular parking lot and separates the parking lot from the active beach area. The access stairs lead from the parking lot to the South Bay Bicycle Trail, which is part of the Beach bike path that traverses nearly the entire Los Angeles County coast.
Consistency with Mission and Goal:
The Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repairs Project is designed to address an immediate need to ensure public access and enjoyment of its beaches and protect the long-term integrity of the recreational resources, which are enjoyed by the County’s 10 million residents and the millions of tourists that are attracted to Southern California in large part by its coastal resources. Specifically, Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repairs Project will further the State of California’s goals in the areas of Stewardship and Economic Sustainability.
Goal 1, Stewardship: The Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repair Project will further the goal of conserving and managing the Los Angeles County coastal resources by ensuring the continued public access to this well-used County beach for both current and future visitors. Without this project, the deteriorating conditions could limit public use of Manhattan Beach and impact the bike trail.
Goal 2, Economic Sustainability: The County’s beaches and coastal amenities are significant assets in attracting tourists to the County, which in turn provides a substantial economic benefit to the County and to the State of California. It is estimated that tourism supports more than 437,000 jobs in the County, and the estimated 23.8 million overnight visitors to the County contributed more than $12.3 billion to the County’s economy during 1999 alone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 79 Draft Plan, October 2001 The Manhattan Beach Coastal Access Repair component will also help maintain this economically important resource by ensuring continued access to Manhattan Beach and its amenities.
Goal 3, Research, Education and Technology: Not Applicable.
Goal 4, Jurisdiction and Ownership: Not Applicable.
Budget and Cost Estimate:
Item Amount Total Project Budget $435,261
Coastal Impact Assistance Program $435,261
Total Funding $435,261
Project Cost Estimate
Acquisition $0
Architectural & Engineering Services $43,000 Consultant Services $15,000 Project Management $32,000 Permits and Plan Check $4,500 County Services $10,765 Misc. Costs $1,496
Construction $328,500
Total $435,261
Estimated Project Timeline (Assumes Funding Available on 10/01/2001):
Completion Date Board issues a “Request for Proposals” for construction drawings Oct. 01, 2001 Begin acquiring various permits necessary to construct Jan. 10, 2002 Board awards contract for construction Apr. 02, 2002 Construction begins May 13, 2002 Construction completed July 08, 2002
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 80 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Prepared by: Joseph LaClair Phone number: (415) 352-3656 Address: 50 California Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, California 94111 E-mail: [email protected] Title of Project: San Francisco Bay Trail Implementation and Construction Project location: San Francisco Bay Shoreline Total cost: $750,000 Funding request: $750,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 33 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Consistent with the State of California’s mission to ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations and the CIAP Program goals, BCDC proposes a program to increase public access to San Francisco Bay in concert with local and regional partners to facilitate implementation of the Bay Trail Project. Successful completion of the Bay Trail relies in part on the public access provided through the Commission’s permit program. This project includes several enhancements to BCDC’s public access program and capital outlays to facilitate completion of the trail. The following program of capital funds and program enhancements relies exclusively on partnerships with other agencies to achieve these goals.
In partnership with the Association of Bay Area Government’s (ABAG) Bay Trail Project and the State Coastal Conservancy, BCDC will undertake six program enhancements that will: update two BCDC publications that the public, developers and BCDC rely on when designing shoreline access, expand our knowledge regarding public access impacts on wildlife, increase the quantity and quality of shoreline access identification and interpretive signage, convene an ongoing discussion of the appropriate location and design of the Bay Trail adjacent to wildlife habitat restoration sites, prepare, in partnership with the Bay Trail print and electronic maps of shoreline public access areas and provide grants to counties and cities for Bay Trail construction. The grant program will be coordinated with the grant funding programs of the State Coastal Conservancy and the Bay Trail Project to maximize leverage and the amount of trail constructed.
Project Descriptions:
Public Access Design Guidelines Update BCDC’s Public Access Design Guidelines (Guidelines) provide recommendations to assist permit applicants, developers, and design professionals to design and develop attractive, usable and safe public access as part of their projects. Since the Guidelines were adopted by the Commission in 1985, new information on appropriate materials and design of public access has evolved and important trends have emerged that are not incorporated in the current Guidelines. A major recommendation of BCDC’s recently completed Public Access and Wildlife Study is to update the Guidelines to include siting and design measures that avoid or minimize adverse effects of public access on wildlife. Revision of the Guidelines will include important new information on siting and design techniques that avoid or minimize these effects. The incorporation of new design information to improve public access generally will provide essential information to the public and BCDC permit applicants, advancing the States goals of education and stewardship. The revision of the Guidelines will include the participation of other public agencies and non-governmental organizations. The Guidelines are then adopted by the Commission and used by staff, the Commission’s Design Review Board and the public to evaluate public access designs.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 34 Draft Plan, October 2001 Bay Shoreline Landscape Guide Update Another project element involves updating the “Bay Shoreline Landscape Guide: Planting Materials and Methods for San Francisco Bay Shoreline Projects.” The original guide was created in 1984 with financial assistance from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The guide, which provides recommendations of suitable plants within development projects on the San Francisco Bay shoreline, has been well received and greatly used by developers, design consultants, public agencies and organizations. However, the information in the guide is outdated and insufficient for current development practices. The new guide would include a revised list of appropriate shoreline plants, with an emphasis on shoreline and coastal natives, an up-to-date list of plant sources, and planting guidelines for the zone between tidal areas and adjacent development.
This project element is consistent with the State's goals of research, education and technology, and stewardship. Through the guidance of a technical advisory committee, the project will apply past research concerning appropriate and ecologically sensitive commercial shoreline landscaping. Additionally, the revised guide would continue to be a fundamental part of the ongoing educational program that is required when working within the regulatory framework. Updating this educational and technical document will lead to landscapes with greater wildlife habitat value and will provide for the commercial and recreational uses of the shoreline.
Wildlife and Public Access Study-Third Year Field Research BCDC will fund one additional year of ground-breaking field research and final data analysis for three years of data gathering on the successful, independent scientific inquiry sponsored by the ABAG Bay Trail Project. The study investigates the potential effects of non-motorized, recreational trail use on shorebirds and waterfowl that use mudflat foraging habitat adjacent to the San Francisco Bay. The study is designed to assess the potential effects of human trail use on the diversity, abundance and behavior of shorebirds and waterfowl in the San Francisco Bay Area through field research using paired trail and non-trail control sites. The following five tasks are proposed to conduct a third year of field research under the "Wildlife and Public Access Study:" 20 Research start-up: finalize the analysis of the first two research years and coordinate with the resource agencies to select a new research question for the third year of data collection. The research question will answer additional questions posed by the resource agencies which were not answered in the first two years of study; 21 Recruit and train field supervisors and observers; 22 Conduct a third year of field research; 23 Input, analyze and interpret the data; and 24 Prepare a report detailing the research findings and recommendations for siting, design and management strategies that would lessen impacts of public access on wildlife. No prior field scientific research with a similar level of rigor has been conducted on this topic in San Francisco Bay or elsewhere in the country. As population in the Bay Area increases and ever more people seek recreational opportunities on the Bay shoreline, the potential for adverse effects on wildlife from human recreation increase. This study will advance the States
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 35 Draft Plan, October 2001 goals of research and stewardship providing essential scientific information to guide Commission permit decisions to increase protection of important habitat and wildlife resources.
Public Access Sign Program This project element will improve and expand BCDC’s signage program to direct the public to shoreline access areas required in BCDC permits, identify public access area on the Bay shoreline and will improve the amount and quality of interpretive signage. Working in concert with Bay Area Cities and Counties and Caltrans, BCDC will develop a coordinated comprehensive sign program for the Bay shoreline to improve way finding for the public to Bay shoreline access areas from freeways and local streets and roads, and improve the quality and quantity of signage that interprets Bay resources, history and setting. The proposed sign program will include a suite of signs at different based on the particular message and audience. In addition, the project will establish consistent interpretive sign guidelines and develop resource information for permittees unfamiliar with this type of signage to improve the overall quality of shoreline interpretive signs. BCDC’s current sign program consists of a sin- gular sign used to identify public access areas. All other interpretive, way finding and public shore parking signs are developed on an ad hoc basis without a coordinated approach. This project advances the State goal of education by improving the quality of information available to the public seeking shoreline recreational opportunities. It also helps achieve the State goal of jurisdiction by more clearly identifying those areas where the State, through BCDC’s permit program, has established important public shoreline recreation resources.
Shoreline Access Forum: Bay Trail and Habitat Restoration Areas BCDC will convene a professionally facilitated forum of biologists, landscape architects, engineers and trail planners to continue the discussion on balancing Bay shoreline public access and wildlife protection that was begun by the Policy Advisory Committee as part of BCDC’s recent San Francisco Bay Plan public access policy update. This project will expand the scope of the panel to include additional experts to develop a collective vision for public access and wildlife protection for San Francisco Bay that experts and advocates can rally around. Using an overview of the baylands ecosystem restoration goals and the sensitive habitat identification project above, the forum will identify anticipated or current "pressure points" of public access and public access routes and design innovations that minimize wildlife impacts. The discussion will focus primarily on upcoming Bay wetland restoration sites where the Commission is likely to require public access and the potential to plan the public access, including the Bay Trail route around restoration sites so that adverse effects on wildlife can be avoided or minimized. The State mission to ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources is precisely what this project is about. By bringing together diverse viewpoints on where and how public access, including the Bay Trail, should be sited, the project increases our chances of achieving consensus and advances State goals on stewardship and jurisdiction, because maximizing resource protection and shoreline access will be the focus of this effort.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 36 Draft Plan, October 2001 Bay Trail Grant Funding In partnership with CIAP recipient counties, the Bay Trail Project and the State Coastal Con- servancy, BCDC will fund the construction of difficult to achieve segments of the Bay Trail. The Bay Trail Project is currently reviewing applications for construction and planning various segments of the Bay Trail. The State Coastal Conservancy is disbursing State general funds and State Park Bond funds to local governments for implementation of other segments of the Bay Trail. However, these funds are insufficient to complete the Bay Trail. BCDC, working in close cooperation with the Bay Trail Project and State Coastal Conservancy can optimize the expenditure of these funds to target those trail segments most ready to construct, those that will link up the most existing miles of shoreline trail and those that have the greatest level of local government support. Since neither agency has sufficient funding for all qualified projects, this program could leverage funds from CIAP counties to develop Bay Trail projects that might otherwise not obtain funding. The grant fund program will be modeled after the successful program developed by the Bay Trail Project and State Coastal Conservancy so that no staff time will be needed to develop the criteria and application materials for projects. Screening of potential projects with our partners will ensure maximum leverage of other funding and trail construction. This project advances the economic sustainability goals of the State by encouraging environmentally sound development of public trails and will accommodate future needs and uses of Bay shoreline resources.
Public Access Publication This project element will in partnership with the ABAG Bay Trail Project, update and publish the Bay Trail maps and produce them for distribution in areas stores, and post them on both ABAG and BCDC websites for widespread public access Although many miles of San Francisco Bay shoreline are improved for public access, little effort has been expended thus far, to notify the public of the availability of these recreational resources. The Bay Trail currently has posted maps of the route of the Bay Trail on its website. However, these maps are out of date, and do not include many of the public access areas obtained through BCDC permits. This project will update the maps to reflect the current route of the Bay Trail, and include all BCDC public access areas. Printed and electronic maps will be available to the public. Since BCDC and the ABAG Bay Trail project are both updating their respective maps with other funding, this project would take advantage of that investment and extend the capability of the project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 37 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Timelines and Budgets:
PUBLIC ACCESS DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE PROJECT SCHEDULE Task Duration BCDC staff draft revised guidelines 1 month Review draft guidelines with Technical Advisory Committee 1 month Revise guidelines and add graphics 1 month Review revised guidelines with Technical Advisory Committee 1 month Adoption of Guidelines by Commission 1 month Prepare final guidelines and print 1 month TOTAL 6 months
PUBLIC ACCESS DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE BUDGET Task Cost Document design/layout (consultant services) $10,000 Graphics (consultant services) $10,000 Printing $10,000 TOTAL $30,000 BCDC staff time Match (0.53PY) $50,000
SHORELINE LANDSCAPE GUIDE UPDATE PROJECT SCHEDULE Task Duration Form Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), outline and complete research 2 Months Develop draft landscape guide 1 Month Review draft landscape guide with TAC 1 Month Revise landscape guide and circulate for comments 1 Month Prepare final landscape guide and print 1 Month TOTAL 6 Months
SHORELINE LANDSCAPE GUIDE UPDATE PROJECT BUDGET Task Cost Document design/layout (consultant services) $10,000 Graphics (consultant services) $15,000 Printing $10,000 TOTAL $35,000 Match BCDC staff time (0.3 PY) $50,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 38 Draft Plan, October 2001 Wildlife and Public Access Study-3rd Year Field Research PROJECT BUDGET Task Cost Task I – Research Start-up $ 25,000 Task II – Recruit and Train Field Staff $ 7,500 Task III – Conduct Field Research $ 70,000 Task IV – Input, Analyze and Interpret Data $ 20,000 Task V – Prepare Research Report with Findings/Recommendations $ 10,000 Total Research Budget $132,500 Match BCDC staff time (0.1 PY) $16,000
Wildlife and Public Access Study-3rd Year Field Research PROJECT SCHEDULE Milestones and Deliverables Duration Research Start-up Month 1 Recruit and Train Field Staff Months 1-3 Establish Study Sites Month 3 Conduct Field Research Months 4-16 Input, Analyze and Interpret Data Months 17-22 Prepare Research Report Months 23-24 TOTAL 24 Months
PUBLIC ACCESS SIGN PROGRAM PROJECT BUDGET Task Cost Develop RFP for and Hire Sign Program Consultant (BCDC Staff) -- Consult Agencies to Refine Program Scope $15,000 Develop Sign Program $30,000 Purchase and Distribute Signs $55,000
Total Budget 100,000 Match BCDC staff time (0.32PY) $35,000
PUBLIC ACCESS SIGN PROGRAM PROJECT SCHEDULE Milestones and Deliverables Duration Develop RFP for and Hire Sign Program Consultant (BCDC Staff) 1 month Consult Agencies to Refine Program Scope 3 months Develop Sign Program 5 months Purchase and Distribute Signs 2 months
TOTAL 11 Months
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 39 Draft Plan, October 2001 FORUM PROJECT BUDGET Task Cost Identify Forum Participants and Program of Topics -- Develop RFP and Hire Facilitation Consultant-Conduct Meetings $25,000 Produce Maps and Graphics of Trail Routes and Designs 10,000 Total $35,000
FORUM PROJECT SCHEDULE Milestones and Deliverables Duration Identify Forum Participants and Program of Topics 1 Month Develop RFP and Hire Facilitation Consultant 1 Month Conduct Series of Meetings 12 Months Produce Maps and Graphics of Trail Routes and Designs 1 Month Total 15 Months
PUBLIC ACCESS DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE PROJECT SCHEDULE Task Duration BCDC staff draft revised guidelines 1 month Review draft guidelines with Technical Advisory Committee 1 month Revise guidelines and add graphics 1 month Review revised guidelines with Technical Advisory Committee 1 month Adoption of Guidelines by Commission 1 month Prepare final guidelines and print 1 month TOTAL 6 months
PUBLIC ACCESS PUBLICATION PARTNERSHIP Task Cost Update existing public access area maps (NOAA Grant Project) -- Update Bay Trail Alignment (ABAG Project) -- Combine Maps $10,000 Hire Consultants for Print Map Design $10,000 Hire Consultants for Web Page Design $10,000 Print Maps $10,000 TOTAL $40,000 BCDC staff time Match (0.2 PY) $35,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 40 Draft Plan, October 2001 PUBLIC ACCESS PUBLICATION PARTNERSHIP Task Cost Update existing public access area maps (NOAA Grant Project) 3 Months Update Bay Trail Alignment (ABAG Project) 3 Months Combine Maps 1 Month Hire Consultants for Print Map Design 2 Months Hire Consultants for Web Page Design 2 Months Print Maps 1 Month TOTAL 12 Months
Budget Summary Project Funding Public Access Design Guidelines $30,000 Shoreline Landscape Guide Update $35,000 Wildlife and Public Access Study-3rd Year Field $132,500 Research Public Access Sign Program $100,000 Shoreline Access Forum: Bay Trail and Habitat 35,000 Restoration Areas Public Access Publication Partnership $40,000 Bay Trail Project Grant Funding $377,500 Total $750,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 41 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: State Coastal Conservancy Prepared by: Steve Horn, Deputy Executive Officer Phone number: (510) 286-4157 Address: 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100 Oakland, CA 94610 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: Coastal Trail Implementation Plan Project location: Coastal Zone shoreline and adjacent Total cost: $800,000 Funding request: $300,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 42 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The vision of the California Coastal Trail is of a continuous trail from the Oregon to the Mexican border, running along or near the shoreline. The trail would be related to various public and private facilities such as parks, campgrounds, hostels, hotels, and individual access points. Much of the trail already exists, but there are many gaps. Additionally, in some cases the trail runs along the highway or on city streets and makes wide swings away from the coast. It is unsigned in most locations. There is no general agreement on what constitutes the trail in some places or if the current route is adequate or should be changed in the future. The purpose of the Coastal Trail Implementation Plan is to remedy these problems and assist all concerned agencies (especially the Conservancy, Coastal Commission, State Parks, Caltrans and the State Lands Commission) in coordinating their efforts to accomplish this vision within the next few years.
These requested funds would be used to create extensive maps and accompanying text describing various segments of the Coastal Trail that would detail the character and location of existing trail segments and show where new trails could be located. The maps would show where the trail could be constructed on existing public properties or similarly accessible lands, and where rights of way should be acquired to complete various segments. The maps would also detail the conditions of existing and proposed trail locations, including topography, environmentally sensitive areas, potential hazards, and various amenities. Detailed maps would also be developed at a parcel-level scale to be used in project development. They would be used to designate specific properties for trail construction and rights-of-way acquisitions. They could also be used to more accurately designate trail routes for various user groups. For example, it may be necessary in some cases to designate separate routes for cyclists or equestrians and to specify locations where special emphasis should be placed on facilities and trails for people who have limited mobility. Mapping would be done using standard geographic information system (GIS) software and could be easily updated. The maps would be used to plan and prioritize the development of the Coastal Trail, including developing detailed capital needs projections for the trail.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Development of an implementation plan for the California Coastal Trail would provide a coordinated, comprehensive solution to the problem of providing shoreline access for California residents and visitors, consistent with the mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
This effort would make a significant contribution to the management of coastal resources lands, through assuring that recreational facilities needed to meet the demands of population growth are integrated into the natural environment in a sensitive manner (Goal #1). The Coastal Trail Implementation Plan would also assure that the efforts of local, State and federal jurisdictions to develop coastal access facilities are complementary and promote the State’s interests (Goal #4).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 43 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Organize and convene technical oversight committee $ 20,000 Design and implement public outreach program 25,000 Complete final project work program and schedule 10,000 Select and employ professional consultants as needed 300,000 Design and develop electronic database/mapping system 35,000 Assemble and display existing CT conditions information 45,000 Assemble and display existing CT plans 15,000 Assemble and display environmental resources/constraints 25,000 Analyze and display priority actions to complete CT 60,000 Analyze and display implementation budget and timeline 10,000 Analyze and display initial projects 75,000 CEQA analyses and documentation 75,000 Complete, publish and present reports 30,000 Project administration 75,000
Total Project Cost $ 800,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 500,000 Proposed CIAP Grant 300,000
$ 800,000
Project Implementation Timetable:
Organize project management, technical oversight and public outreach program 1 month Complete final project work program and schedule 2 months Select database/mapping consultants 2 months Design and construct database system 2 months Assemble and display existing conditions information 4 months Prepare and present interim report: priority actions to 2 months complete the Coastal Trail Prepare and display six-year project implementation 3 months budget and timeline Design and display initial implementation projects 3 months Complete CEQA analysis on draft final report 2 months Complete and present final report: Coastal Trail implementation program 1 month
Total implementation 21 months
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 44 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Coastal Commission, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Prepared by: William J. Douros, Superintendent and Karen Grimmer, Multicultural Education Specialist Phone number: (831) 647-4201 Address: 299 Foam Street Monterey, CA 93940 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] Title of project: Implementation of Site-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program Project location: Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, California State Parks Total cost: $50,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 45 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Over the past nine months, NOAA’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary has developed a Hispanic component to its Multicultural Education Plan. There are three modules to the Hispanic outreach program, termed MERITO (Multicultural Education for Resource Issues Threatening Oceans):
· Professional Development Program for Hispanic-serving teachers, undergraduate and graduate level students to include the production of a set of universal, Spanish- language bilingual curricula and materials that can be utilized by other national marine sanctuaries, national estuarine research reserves and coastal zone management programs. · Site-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program for Hispanic youth and families in conjunction with the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve and California State Parks. · Community-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program for Hispanic youth, families and migrant farm workers.
Many local public schools, often predominantly Hispanic, conduct field trips to the Elkhorn Slough and several State Parks and beaches. Hispanic students rarely return to the sites with their families on weekends. The Site-Based Bilingual Ocean Outreach Program, targeting three state parks/beaches and Elkhorn Slough, will develop bilingual materials and programs aimed at Spanish-speaking students with the goal to increase visitation and wise use of these sites by families after a school field trip. The program will also reach out to Hispanic communities and present these four sites as viable, important places for family outings on weekends and holidays.
Education materials will address how families can protect these areas when they visit, how they can take action in their own lives to protect the ocean, and why ocean protection is a role all coastal citizens share. A variety of innovative, hands-on programs will encourage children, families, and adults to get actively involved, and will provide tangible “take home messages” in the form of a simple brochures, coloring books, stickers, or crafts that participants can bring home and pass on to their families and friends. Special evening and weekend interpretive programs will urge families to visit sites successively in order to experience a variety of coastal habitats and learn more about how these places connect to each other, and to our communities. Outreach will include Spanish language materials about the four coastal sites and the Sanctuary.
MERITO was developed in response to the present and growing need to reach out to the diverse communities who use ocean and coastal resources protected by the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Extensive community-based planning with leaders of universities, government agencies, school districts, city-run after-school programs from San Mateo County to San Luis Obispo County directed the Sanctuary to these three areas of need. By collaborating with the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve and California State Parks, we will increase the amount and effectiveness of our outreach to Hispanic communities.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 46 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals of CIAP:
The coast of California continues to be the most popular tourist and vacation destination in the State. As the State population expands, more Spanish-speaking residents of Hispanic culture use these important resources, yet typical education and outreach programs do not reach this diverse and growing community. For example, over 47% of Monterey County residents are Hispanic, yet nearly all education programs at State and federally-protected sites are in English. The main mission of the California Resources Agency CIAP will not be met unless the basic ocean and coastal outreach programs recognize this cultural diversity and design outreach efforts to reach our communities.
Goals 1, 2 and 3 are similarly affected if there is no formal program to reach the growing cultural divide among coastal users. Yet, when awareness among citizenry is properly raised, we have found that sound stewardship and sustainable practices closely follow. The future needs of coastal and ocean resources, as noted in Goal 3, involve more expanded education to Hispanic communities, and MERITO, with its site-based ocean outreach effort in central California is the precise program to deliver on that goal.
Timeline:
February/March 2002 Recruit, train and provide orientation for a bilingual, outreach instructor; purchase and prepare needed program equipment; facilitate program planning meetings with Calif. State Parks, ESNERR and MBNMS in order to develop a memorandum of agreement. This MOU will identify each agencies responsibility, describe program goals; prioritize program activities, locations and, schedules; identify program support needs; and put in place evaluation criteria. Meetings with any ancillary partners such as nonprofits, school districts, and after-school programs will be conducted.
April - September 2002 Program Implementation. All involved parties will work collaboratively to fulfill the MOU. The activities will contain “overlapping concepts” that highlight the links between the Slough’s habitats and the coastal and beach habitats of the Sanctuary, and demonstrate how our human communities use and impact those areas. The collaborative education team will ensure that each activity or interpretive program will have clear and defined goals with conservation messages, and when facilitated with school groups, will support the current classroom curriculum used by teachers. The programs and events will include environmental and conservation-related themes that celebrate our region’s rich cultural history through science, language-arts, and history. The activities will include, but are not limited to: plant and dune restoration projects; water quality monitoring projects; estuarine and marine field ecology; bird, mammal, and other wildlife surveys; beach and community clean-ups; fish dissections and fish printing, and special community events.
September – December 2002 Evaluation will be on-going, with periodic reports due. A final report will be due at the end of the year.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 47 Draft Plan, October 2001 Total Time - 10 months
Budget:
We have scaled back the original proposal for $135,000 that included support for a one-year, full time contract with a variety of educational resources, to a proposal for $50,000 that will support a part-time, seasonal educator equipped with the basics for an effective outreach program. Spring and Summer are seasonally the highest visitation for ESNERR and State Parks.
A seasonal contract (April through September) to provide $30,000 bilingual outreach education services (includes some additional for travel and incidental supplies)
Equipment for the bilingual outreach instructor: · Laptop computer $3,000 · Cell phone, plus monthly service $600 · GSA outreach vehicle (gas covered by Sanctuary) $5,000
Contract funds for program evaluation services $2,000
Contract funds for quality, Spanish-language translation services $2,000
Equipment needed for various science & conservation-based outreach activities. · Restoration activities (plants, plant propagation materials, soil, $2,000 etc.) · Bird & marine mammal activities (10 sets binoculars, spotting $1,400 scope, tape recorder) · Misc. program materials such as an ice-chest, fish tanks, $2,000 buckets, laminated maps, posters, field guides, 3-D watershed model
Graphics and layout and printing costs for bilingual outreach materials. Initial ideas include: · a new brochure focusing on regional water quality issues $2,000 in Spanish and English highlighting the Slough/Sanctuary/ State Parks
Total Budget for Project $50,000
State Parks, the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary will provide staff support and coordination. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary will provide management and administrative oversight to the project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 48 Draft Plan, October 2001 The MBNMS MERITO plan is still under review with the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries and the National Ocean Service. The Sanctuary’s Multicultural Plan has so far met with much approval, and with the advent of a new fiscal year, we are confidant that NOAA will allocate additional funds to support this program. The issue of supporting diversity initiatives is a primary focus within NOAA this year, and the development of the MERITO Plan is a direct result of that interest. We hope that approval of this proposal by the Resources Agency will help to garner both internal and external support for funding of this program.
Enclosures: Support letters from Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, California State Parks, and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 49 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: State Coastal Conservancy Prepared by: Steve Horn, Deputy Executive Officer Phone number: (510) 286-4157 Address: 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100 Oakland, CA 94610 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Public Access Project Project location: Five oceanfront sites Total cost: $4,364,000 Funding request: $300,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 50 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The following pages describe the following public access projects:
1. Pfeiffer Beach $ 80,000 2. Dana Point Ocean Institute $ 80,000 3. Cambria East-West Ranch Access Mgmt Plan $ 60,000 4. Pacifica Coastal Trail $ 80,000 5. Eureka Waterfront Boardwalk $ 100,000
Consistency with Mission and Goals (All Public Access Projects):
The coastal access projects described below would support a principal policy goal of the Coastal Management Program: to provide maximum public access to and along the shoreline in a manner protective of natural resources and the rights of private landowners. These projects will promote the mission and goals of the California Coastal Impact Assistance Program, in that they will:
- maximize the interest of California residents in providing public access to State Tidelands (Goal #4) - maximize appropriate stewardship of coastal resources by designing public recreation facilities to avoid conflicts with natural resources, based upon sound environmental assessment of these needs and potential conflicts (Goal #1) - maximum sustainable economic activities in the coastal zone through providing environmentally sound facilities that will encourage and support tourism and visitor commercial uses without harm to the underlying resource lands (Goal #2)
1.) Pfeiffer Beach Access $ 80,000
Owned and operated by the U.S. Forest Service, Pfeiffer Beach Day Use Area is one of the most popular public shoreline access sites in Big Sur, receiving as many as 800 visitors per day. Existing parking, bathroom, and beach access trail facilities are inadequate to meet current as well as projected public use, and are not accessible to persons with disabilities. In addition, indiscriminate parking and pedestrian trails have resulted in trampled vegetation, wildlife and fisheries deterioration, and heritage resource impacts. The proposed project will correct these deficiencies by enhancing public access to Pfeiffer Beach through improved road, parking, trail, sanitation, and solid waste facilities and services. Adverse impacts to a sensitive riparian zone and prehistoric cultural site will be reduced, and access for persons with disabilities will be constructed. In addition, a transportation management plan (TMP) will be implemented along the road between Highway One and the Pfeiffer Beach. The TMP is intended to increase safety, reduce conflicts between residential and recreational users, and ensure that visitor use does not exceed the capacity of the proposed access facility and threaten sensitive coastal resources. The proposed CIAP grant would combine with Conservancy Proposition 12 funds and U.S. Forest Service funds to complete these improvements.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 51 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Plan/CEQA/permits $ 28,000 Final design and engineering 40,000 Materials and construction 660,000 Construction administration 80,000
Total Project Cost $ 808,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 70,000 U.S. Forest Service 658,000 Proposed CIAP Grant 80,000
$ 808,000
Project Implementation Timetable:
Plan/CEQA/permits 4 months Final design and engineering 2 months Construction 6 months
Total implementation 12 months
2.) Dana Point Ocean Institute Land’s End Accessway $80,000
The proposed project would create an environmentally-appropriate accessway to the Dana Point Marine Life Refuge. The accessway will both facilitate public access and act as a buffer and transition area separating the heavy use portions of the Dana Point Harbor from the sensitive habitat resources of the Refuge. It will use native and drought-tolerant planting and the creation of a natural topography of low berms and swales, to complement the existing bluff and create the feeling of a natural “Land’s End.” The existing public parking area will be relocated to the main parking lot on the opposite side of the Dana Point Ocean Center. An accessible pathway will be developed as a plank walkway from the existing promenade to the jetty adjacent to the Marine Refuge. Seating on natural stone slabs and picnic areas with rustic plank tables and stone and plank benches will be developed, including a whale-watching area. The shoreline access project will provide the potential for interpretation of maritime plant communities and the coastal shore environment. It will also reinforce the theme underlying both the Ocean Center and the Refuge: that education and understanding of nature lead to respect and caring for the environment. Signing and visual cues along the transition through
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 52 Draft Plan, October 2001 Land’s End to the Marine Refuge will inform the visitor that the area is sensitive and will suggest appropriate behavior for the Refuge area. The proposed project is part of a planned $16.5 million upgrade and expansion of the Dana Point Ocean Education Center. The site is operated by the Ocean Institute, a private nonprofit organization that provides marine, earth, life, and physical field science courses to more than 78,000 students a year. The proposed redesign and revegetation of the Land’s End shoreline access site would complement the effort of the Ocean Institute to provide expanded classrooms, improved life support systems, and expanded public display space.
Project Budget and Funding Sources (accessway only):
Summary of Budget
Materials and labor $ 385,000 Mobilization and construction management 130,000
Total Project Cost $ 515,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 170,000 Dana Point Ocean Institute 265,000 Proposed CIAP Grant 80,000
$ 515,000
Project Implementation Timetable:
Mobilization and construction 20 months
3.) Cambria East-West Ranch Access Mgmt Plan $60,000
The 422-acre East West Ranch property is an oceanfront site in Cambria that was purchased in November 2000. Title is held by the local Community Services District (CCSD). A principal purpose for the acquisition of the property was to provide the opportunity for substantial new public access, including the development of a public access trail connecting downtown Cambria with the ocean. There is also the potential for a trail along the bluff edge and connecting to Shamel County Park and San Simeon State Beach to the south. There is currently a modest level of public access on the property, but this access is primarily by local residents and is confined to a narrow corridor along the coastal bluff. As mentioned above, the property has many other areas that could provide opportunities to the public for access and recreation. However, the property also has a number of sensitive natural resources, including Santa Rosa Creek and the Monterey pine forest, in need of protection and enhancement. Careful planning is needed in order to realize the property’s full potential as a coastal accessway and at the same time protect its natural areas.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 53 Draft Plan, October 2001 Although the CCSD is the owner of the East West Ranch property, due to its limitations of staff and resources, the CCSD will not be managing the property on a day-to-day basis. Instead, the CCSD will enter into a long-term agreement with a local nonprofit organization that will be better suited to the tasks of planning and developing trails, carrying out restoration projects, conducting routine maintenance, and managing public access. An access management plan is necessary to support this function, to be developed by the CCSD and its property manager working in close consultation with the Coastal Conservancy and members of the local community. The management plan would include design of a public hiking and bicycle trail from downtown Cambria west along the floodplain of Santa Rosa Creek and onto the coastal terrace. Other likely elements would be the development of a 1.2-mile segment of coastal trail along the bluffs, and a link through an access easement on property owned by the CCSD (where parking will be provided) north to Shamel County Park and San Simeon State Beach, also known as Moonstone Beach. A County regional park could be developed on the portion of the property east of Highway 1 to provide for more active forms of recreation, park uses that are much needed in this region.
Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Data assemblage; mapping $ 25,000 Consultant preparation of access plan 60,000 CEQA analyses and documents 25,000 Public outreach and meeting facilitation 40,000
Total Project Cost $ 150,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 90,000 Proposed CIAP Grant 60,000
$ 150,000
Project Implementation Timetable:
Data assemblage; mapping 3 months Consultant preparation of access plan 4 months CEQA analyses and documents 3 months Public outreach and meeting facilitation 2 months
Total Implementation 12 months .
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 54 Draft Plan, October 2001 4.) Pacifica Coastal Trail $80,000
The proposed project is the construction of a wheelchair-accessible pedestrian walkway that would provide a connection between Rockaway Beach and Pacifica State Beach. The proposed walkway would consist of both paved trail segments and elevated boardwalk and would constitute a section of the Pacifica Coastal Trail. The City of Pacifica has just completed a combined bicycle lane and pedestrian path that starts at the northern city limit and ends at the north end of Rockaway Beach. The proposed CIAP project would connect to this recently completed trail, creating a continuous coastal accessway from the northern city limit all the way down to Pacifica State Beach. The project would replace the existing network of informal use trails that cross the area and would provide coastal access to wheelchair users as well as pedestrians. Located entirely on property owned in fee by the California Department of Transportation, which has agreed to make it available for this purpose, the improved trail help to redirect public access away from environmentally sensitive areas. The proliferation of these trails is degrading the dune vegetation and contributing to erosion of the dune area. The dunes around Pacifica State Beach support a winter population of the western snowy plover. Uncontrolled and undirected public access across the dunes disturbs the wintering birds and discourages any successful establishment of a snowy plover breeding population. The City will then be able to restore the dunes and re-establish native plants. Benches would be provided at regular intervals, and wheelchair platforms would be constructed every 30 feet as required by federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. The beaches of Pacifica are heavily used year-around by people from throughout the Bay area. Easily accessible from the Peninsula cities as well as San Francisco, Pacifica State Beach attracts more than 125,000 visitors each year. The proposed project would greatly improve the quality of that access.
Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Design/engineering/CEQA/permits $ 77,000 Materials 171,000 Contractor and Labor 433,000 Total Project Cost $ 681,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 220,000 City of Pacifica 112,000 ISTEA Grant 269,000 Proposed CIAP 80,000 Total Funding Available $ 681,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 55 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Implementation Timetable:
Design/engineering/CEQA/permits 4 months Contracting and construction 8 months
Total Implementation 12 months
5.) Eureka Waterfront Boardwalk $100,000
The proposed project includes the construction of a pedestrian boardwalk and related public access improvements along a _-mile section of the Eureka Waterfront, adjacent to the Old Town historic district of Eureka. The project will greatly enhance the City of Eureka’s efforts to revitalize its deteriorating waterfront area, by creating public access, seating/rest areas and a bayfront public plaza. The boardwalk will extend from C Street to approximately 190 feet east of F Street. It would be a trestle-type fixed concrete structure, varying in width from 16 to 24 feet. In order to construct the boardwalk, the City will remove a number of creosote-treated wood pilings and other debris, and will install rock slope protection under the boardwalk. The project will also include an interpretive kiosk at the foot of F Street. The Eureka City Council has made revitalization of its waterfront its number one priority. The City and its redevelopment agency have demonstrated their commitment through significant financial contributions to the project including the acquisition of several key waterfront properties. Through the City’s Inner Channel Dock and Boardwalk Revitalization Project, engineering plans and designs for the project have already been completed. CIAP funds would be matched with Conservancy Proposition 12 funds to implement this plan.
Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Final engineering, plans and specifications $ 150,000 Materials and construction, C Street Plaza 1,130,000 Materials and construction, C/D Sts. boardwalk 780,000 Construction management 150,000 Total Project Cost $2,210,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy Proposition 12 $ 400,000 City of Eureka 1,710,000 Proposed CIAP 100,000 Total Available Funding $2,210,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 56 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Implementation Timetable:
Final engineering, plans and specifications 3 months Construction 9 months
Total implementation 12 months
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 57 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Mendocino County Department: Department of Transportation Prepared by: Dennis Slota/Howard Dashiell Phone number: (707) 463-4589/(707) 467-2542 Address: 340 Lake Mendocino Drive Ukiah, CA 95482-9432 E-mail: [email protected]/[email protected] Title of project: Albion River Watershed – Replace Two Fish Barriers Project location: Albion River Watershed: Marsh Creek and Albion River Total cost: $288,650 Funding request: $72,287
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 116 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary: This project is to provide fish passage to coho salmon and steelhead trout at two culverts on Flynn Creek Road (a county road) in the Albion River Watershed in Coastal Mendocino County.
The Albion River crossing is ranked as the number 1 priority of 54 sites evaluated in Mendocino County by a fisheries biologist (Ross Taylor and Associates) and is ranked "Top Priority". The current culvert is sized for a 21-year storm Recurrence Interval (RI), while the current National Marine Fishery Services (NMFS) criterion is for 100 year RI. Moreover, the current culvert has been assessed as a total barrier to adult coho salmon and steelhead and for all age classes of juveniles, primarily due to excessive velocities, lack of depth and the leap required to enter the culvert. The site was habitat typed and electrofished in 1996 using CDFG protocols. There are about 24,100 feet of habitat rated as "good" above this barrier.
Marsh Creek is a tributary to the Albion River. This crossing is on the same road and about 0.15 miles from the crossing described above. This site is ranked as the number 4 priority of 54 sites evaluated by Ross Taylor & Associates and is ranked "High Priority". The culvert is sized for a 3-year RI and is rated as 8 % passable for adult coho salmon and steelhead, but a total barrier to juveniles, primarily due to excessive velocities. There are 3,900 feet of channel to an old mill pond; and there could be up to 12,900 feet of habitat if the pond is not a barrier. Habitat quality is rated as "fair".
Mendocino County is seeking $ 72,287 toward removal of these fish barriers. This money will be used as matching funds to a grant request to the Department of Fish and Game for replacement of these structures. The existing culverts would be replaced with bottomless multiplate structures that meet current NMFS criteria for fish passage.
Background: The Five County Salmonid Conservation Effort is an agreement among Mendocino, Humboldt, Trinity, Siskiyou and, Del Norte counties to cooperate and coordinate in efforts for improving anadromous fish habitat in these counties. Many actions are underway, including an extensive assessment of sediment delivery from county roads (and other facilities) into anadromous waterways. This information will be used to prioritize sites for treatment. Likewise, the 5- County effort has contracted with an independent fisheries biologist (Ross Taylor) to evaluate county culverts on fish bearing streams for fish passage barriers. The work product is to evaluate the crossings using the FishXing software package, evaluate fish utilization, upstream habitat, and to rank the projects. Mendocino County is interested in implementing these recommended high-priority projects and is seeking assistance to do so.
Consistency with Mission and Goals: This proposal is in direct support of goal # 1 of conserving resources by allowing listed endangered species (coho salmon and steelhead) access into useable habitat from which they are currently cut off, because of existing passage and migration barriers. Eventually, implementation of this project contributes to Goal #2 for economic sustainability of salmonid resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 117 Draft Plan, October 2001 Schedule: We anticipate that both fish barrier removal projects will be completed by the late summer of 2002.
Budget and Cost Estimate:
ALBION RIVER FISH BARRIER REMOVAL
Amount Amount Project Requested Cost Share Total
PERSONNEL COSTS Number of Hourly Level of Staff Hours Rate
Senior Engineer 15 50 $0.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 Civil Engineer 450 46 $0.00 $ 20,700.00 $ 20,700.00 R/W Agent/Env. Coordinator 40 39 $0.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,560.00 Engr. Tech. II 160 38 $0.00 $ 6,080.00 $ 6,080.00 *(Includes fully weighted staff rate)
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $0.00 $ 29,090.00 $ 29,090.00
OPERATING EXPENSES
Easements – Right of Way (R/W) LS $ 4,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 4,000.00 Construction area signs LS $ 1,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 1,500.00 Detour LS $10,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 10,000.00 Develop Water Supply LS $ 2,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,000.00 Structure Excavation (400 CY) 16 $ 6,400.00 $ 0.00 $ 6,400.00 Type II Barricade (6) 75 $ 450.00 $ 0.00 $ 450.00 Remove CMP LS $ 2,500.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,500.00 Clearing and Grubbing LS $ 5,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 5,000.00 Structural Backfill (Culvert, 200 CY) 55 $11,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 11,000.00 Erosion Control (Type D, 1 acre) LS $ 1,750.00 $ 0.00 $ 1,750.00 Class 3 Aggregate Base (45 tons) 65 $ 2,925.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,295.00 13’ x 7’ Bottomless Multi-Plate Corrugated Metal Box (40 LF) 800 $32,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 32,000.00 Multi Plate Corrugated Metal Headwalls and Wingwalls (2 EA) 2 $10,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 10,000.00 Rock Slope Protection (100 CY) 53 $ 5,300.00 $ 0.00 $ 5,300.00 Delineator (Class II) (4 EA)40 $ 160.00 $ 0.00 $ 160.00 Mobilization (LS) $ 6,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 6,000.00
SUBTOTAL Construction Expenses $100,485.00 $ 0.00 $100,485.00
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 118 Draft Plan, October 2001 Contingency (15%) $ 15,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 15,000.00
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $115,485.00 $ 0.00 $115,485.00
CEQA/NEPA/CEFG 1601 AGREEMENT ACOE/NMFS PERMITS $2,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,000.00
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $117,485.00 $ 0.00 $117,485.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET (ALBION) $117,485.00 $ 29,090.00 $146,575.00
PERCENT COST SHARE: 19.8%
MARSH CREEK FISH BARRIER REMOVAL
Amount Amount Project Requested Cost Share Total
PERSONNEL COSTS Number of Hourly Level of Staff Hours Rate*
Senior Engineer 15 50 $0.00 $ 750.00 $ 750.00 Civil Engineer 450 46 $0.00 $ 20,700.00 $ 20,700.00 R/W Agent/Env. Coordinator 40 39 $0.00 $ 1,560.00 $ 1,560.00 Engr. Tech. II 160 38 $0.00 $ 6,080.00 $ 6,080.00 *(Includes fully weighted staff rate)
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $0.00 $ 29,090.00 $ 29,090.00
OPERATING EXPENSES
Easements – Right of Way (R/W) LS $ 4,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 4,000.00 Construction area signs LS $ 1,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 1,500.00 Detour LS $10,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 10,000.00 Develop Water Supply LS $ 2,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,000.00 Structure Excavation (400 CY) 16 $ 6,400.00 $ 0.00 $ 6,400.00 Type II Barricade (6) 75 $ 450.00 $ 0.00 $ 450.00 Remove CMP LS $ 2,500.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,500.00 Clearing and Grubbing LS $ 5,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 5,000.00 Structural Backfill (Culvert, 200 CY) 55 $11,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 11,000.00 Erosion Control (Type D, 1 acre) LS $ 1,750.00 $ 0.00 $ 1,750.00 Class 3 Aggregate Base (45 tons) 65 $ 2,925.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,295.00 9’ x 3’ Bottomless Multi-Plate Corrugated Metal Box (40 LF) 700 $28,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 28,000.00
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 119 Draft Plan, October 2001 Multi Plate Corrugated Metal Headwalls and Wingwalls (2 EA) 2 $10,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 10,000.00 Rock Slope Protection (100 CY) 53 $ 5,300.00 $ 0.00 $ 5,300.00 Delineator (Class II) (4 EA)40 $ 160.00 $ 0.00 $ 160.00 Mobilization (LS) $ 6,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 6,000.00
SUBTOTAL Construction Expenses $ 96,485.00 $ 0.00 $ 96,485.00
Contingency (15%) $ 14,500.00 $ 0.00 $ 14,500.00
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $110,985.00 $ 0.00 $110,985.00
CEQA/NEPA/CEFG 1601 AGREEMENT ACOE/NMFS PERMITS $2,000.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,000.00
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $112,985.00 $ 0.00 $112,985.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET (MARSH) $112,985.00 $ 29,090.00 $142,075.00
PERCENT COST SHARE: 20.5%
TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET $230,470.00 $ 58,180.00 $288,650.00 FOR REMOVING BOTH BARRIERS
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 120 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Clara County Department: Parks and Recreation Department Prepared by: David J. Pierce, Sr. Management Analyst, Grants Program Manager Phone number: (408) 358-3741, Ext. 156 Address: 298 Garden Hill Drive Los Gatos, CA 95032 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Alviso Marina County Park, South San Francisco Bay Wetlands Habitat Improvements/Mitigation Project location: San Jose Total cost: $395,000 Funding request: $163,610
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 121 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project is to make improvements to wetlands and coastal habitat through removal of a former marina site and mitigation as a part of implementation of the Alviso Marina County Park Master Plan.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project is consistent with the State of California’s Mission because the project has involved numerous local, state, and federal resource agencies in development of the plan that will ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources.
The project is also consistent with several of the State’s goals. It addresses the goal of Stewardship because the Alviso Marina County Park Master Plan implementation provide the framework to assess, conserve, and manage California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
It is consistent with the goal of Economic Sustainability because its implementation will encourage environmentally sound, sustainable and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities. Review of the project during the planning processes by the public, environmental organizations, and local, state and federal resource agencies assure the validity of meeting this goal.
Budget:
This project is one portion of many improvements to the park which are part of a nearly $6 million dollar renovation to the park.
The projected current cost for the project is $395,000. The cost estimates prepared with the park Master Plan break the project into two categories:
1. removal of marina gates, floats, and pilings $ 79,000 2. wetland mitigation. $ 316,000
The source of funds for the project would be the available $163,610 in CIAP funds plus the balance of $231,390 that would be funded by County Parks and Recreation Department Park Charter funds. The Department has applied for grant funds from the Department of Boating and Waterways for this part of the Park Master Plan implementation. If the grant is successful, it is possible a portion of these funds will be also used for this project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 122 Draft Plan, October 2001 Timeline:
It is anticipated that the project would be implemented during 2002-2003. This would coincide with the other corresponding projects that are part of the park Master Plan implementation and would be carried out at the same time. The following is a more detailed schedule.
RFP for Design Contract 11/02 – 12/02 Award Design Contract and Contract Approval 1/03 – 2/03 Design - Production and Review 3/03 – 7/03 RFP for Construction 8/03 – 10/03 Award Construction and Contract Approval 11/03 – 2/04 Construction, Mob / Demobilization 4/03 – 9/03 Approval of Notice of Completion 10/03 – 11/03
Background/Additional Detail:
Location Alviso Marina County Park is a 29-acre park located at the southern edge of the San Francisco Bay next to the community of Alviso in San Jose, CA. State Highway 237, a recently improved six-lane freeway, passes within a mile of the southern edge of the site. Off-ramps provide convenient access to Alviso and the site. The site is also accessible by bus, bike, and foot trails.
Park Master Plan and EIR A Master Plan for the park was prepared over a two-year period with much participation from the community, adjacent landowners, recreational users, regulatory agencies, and environmental groups during numerous public meetings. These participants reviewed and commented on draft plan documents.
The County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors approved both the Final Master Plan and certified the Environmental Impact Report for the park by unanimous vote on October 21, 1997.
Marina Removal The deteriorating marina facilities are an attractive nuisance because of issues related to public liability, negative visual impact and potential environmental degradation. Accordingly, most of the existing marina facilities will be removed as part of the Master Plan implementation. One portion of the eastern-most float and access gateway will be retained and improved as an interpretive walkway into the marsh vegetation. $79,000 of the proposed CIAP funds would be used for these purposes.
Wetlands Mitigation One of the major considerations throughout the Master Plan process has been the need to improve small boat access to Alviso Slough and ultimately the San Francisco Bay. Boaters and others have noted the difficulty of using the present ramp due to the existing mud caused by
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 123 Draft Plan, October 2001 high rates of sedimentation. The surrounding community and public at large have been consistent in supporting the need for need for a new boat launch ramp at this County Park. This became most evident during the Alviso Marina County Park Master Plan that was prepared for the park.
Early in the process, the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) directed the County to consider an alternative location for the launch ramp to avoid potential environmental impacts related to dredging a channel for the existing launch ramp. The COE indicated it would not consider a launch ramp dredging permit application at the existing site until an alternate location had been pursued and found to be infeasible. Accordingly, the Master Plan proposes relocating the launch ramp to Alviso Slough on property that was formerly owned by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). County acquisition of this property has been completed by way of a property exchange with USFWS.
Soil and vegetation surveys of the property have indicated that the central portion of the site contains a seasonal wetland as defined by the COE. Despite this resource, staff members from the COE and other regulatory agencies indicated at an informal meeting (February 8, 1995), that launch ramp development of this parcel is preferable to dredging the existing launch ramp which causes damage of bulrush vegetation and wildlife habitat. With the proposed location at the Slough, the new launch ramp will be exposed to greater tidal flow and more scour than the present ramp and, as a result, less sedimentation will occur. Because of the slower buildup of sediment, the proposed ramp will need to be dredged less frequently and there will be less impact on wildlife and surrounding habitat. The launch ramp at the Slough was preliminarily viewed by the staff of regulatory agencies as "the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative."
The proposed launch ramp at the Slough will be usable a much greater percentage of the time than the current ramp. Although launch ramp usability is affected by a complex series of conditions, such as tidal range, bottom configuration, boat size or draft, the launch ramp would be very usable a high percentage of the time for small boats.
The center of the acquired parcel is lower than the surrounding levees that separate it from the Slough. As noted above, portions of this area are considered to be a seasonal wetland. In order to bring the low area of the 1.8-acre parcel up to a grade that would be even with the levees, fill earth would be brought to the site. Due to the presence of the seasonal wetland, development in this area will require a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
In order to provide access roads and trailer parking areas on the 1.8-acre acquisition parcel, the existing 0.58-acre seasonal wetland must be partially filled. The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) will require that this loss be mitigated through replacement of similar wetland. This will be accomplished at an on-site location at a ratio to be determined by the COE. The proposed site for this mitigation is the adjacent western remnant pond of the former Steamboat Slough.
As noted above the Master Plan EIR has been certified and a Notice of Determination completed. The Department has successfully completed negotiations with USFWS for the acquisition parcel and the launch ramp at the Slough was preliminarily viewed by the staff of regulatory agencies as "the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative." Therefore, the Department will pursue implementation of the Master Plan implementation and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 124 Draft Plan, October 2001 would use the remaining $85,649 from the CIAP funds (augmented by County Park Charter funds) to complete the wetlands mitigation for the boat launch relocation.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 125 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Contra Costa County Department: Community Development Department Prepared by: John Kopchik Phone number: (925) 335-1227 Address: 651 Pine Street, North Wing, 4th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Carquinez Strait Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Project Project location: Shoreline of Contra Costa County, from Point Isabel at the Alameda County line to Big Break near Oakley Total cost: $253,256 Funding request: $253,256
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 126 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Overview: Funds received by Contra Costa County from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program will be used to fund the Carquinez Strait Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Project. This Project includes several components, including a study of land acquisition, enhancement, and stewardship needs in the area, strategic seed money for three important acquisition and restoration projects, support for the exploratory effort to form a Carquinez Strait National Heritage Area, and a reserve implementation fund to address or begin to address the most pressing recommendations of the acquisition/enhancement/stewardship plan. Contra Costa County would partner with the Muir Heritage Land Trust and the East Bay Regional Park District to perform this project.
Project Components: 1) Carquinez Strait Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Plan ($30K). This Plan would identify opportunities for protecting and enhancing natural resources along the coast and coastal watersheds of Contra Costa County, from the Point Isabel area in the west to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in the east. It would also provide the baseline information necessary to define and prioritize specific implementation projects, be they land or habitat acquisition, habitat restoration, or long- term stewardship. By providing an overview of acquisition, enhancement, and restoration needs and opportunities, the Plan would provide a critical foundation for future fund-raising. Tasks to be performed in generating the Plan may include the following: · Inventory of existing protected lands in the area, including stewardship operations and funding sources, and proposed restoration projects. · Analysis of acquisition needs and opportunities. This analysis would consider trail connection needs and other public access needs as well as natural resource protection needs. The analysis would also consider costs and could include appraisals. · Analysis of, and recommendations on, specific habitat restoration projects. · Analysis of stewardship needs and constraints. Recommendations on improving stewardship oversight and funding. · Documentation of results and recommendations in a concise planning document.
Areas or conceptual projects which may be considered and synthesized the in Plan include the following: · Point San Pablo acquisitions, Bay Trail development, and restoration. · Rodeo marina rehabilitation and/or restoration. · Conversion/restoration of the Point Ozol military facilities to a public park and Bay Trail alignment. · Protection of scenery, biotic resources, and watershed functions in the Briones Hills Agricultural Preservation Area on the south side of the Carquinez Straits. · Praxis property acquisition at the mouth of the Walnut Creek Channel. · Lower Walnut Creek Channel restoration project and Iron Horse Trail extension to the Bay Trail. · Point Edith clean-up, signage, and public access.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 127 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Concord Naval Weapons Station wetlands restoration. · PG&E wetlands in the Bay Point area. · Creation of the Delta Science Center at Big Break. Some of these areas are proposed for separate funding in the additional Project components below. We propose including such areas in the Plan in a limited manner to assure completeness and coordination of effort.
2) Point San Pablo Peninsula acquisition, Bay Trail, and restoration/clean-up ($30K). The Point San Pablo Peninsula, just north of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, presents a very promising opportunity for future park development. With 5 miles of shoreline, scenic ridgelines, beautiful views of the Bay, and a rich human history evidenced in the structures of the Point Molate Naval Fuel Depot (which is in the process of closing), the Point San Pablo Peninsula could be a major park attraction very near a highly populated and, in places, economically disadvantaged area. Feasibility work is needed to determine land acquisition opportunities, to design Bay Trail construction, and to determine what clean-up and restoration work will be necessary. CIAP funds would be used as seed money for this effort, either for the feasibility study phase or for the implementation phase.
3) Point Ozol base conversion/Bay Trail segment ($30K). The former Point Ozol military installation lies in the heart of the scenic southern shore of the Carquinez Straits. The East Bay Regional Park District and the military have discussed for many years the possibility of converting the facility into a park. A key step toward achieving this outcome is the clean-up of the various remnants of the former military facility. Funding from the CIAP would be used toward clean-up and development of a Bay Trail segment through the property.
4) Lower Walnut Creek Channel Restoration Project and Iron Horse Trail Extension ($30K). The lower Walnut Creek Channel is an engineered, earthen trapezoidal channel constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and operated by the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. It drains to Suisun Bay just east of the Benicia Bridge. Significant silt deposition has reduced the capacity of the channel to well below design specifications. Traditionally, the Flood Control District would have dredged the channel to restore capacity. Such dredging would have destroyed aquatic habitat and harmed water quality. As an alternative, the Flood Control District has proposed setting back the earthen levees where possible north of Highway 242, recreating a flood plain and a meandering low flow channel, restoring native riparian vegetation, and providing for fish passage around the lowest drop structure near Highway 242. The East Bay Regional Park District plans to extend the Iron Horse Trail (which currently runs from the San Ramon area all the way to Concord) north along the edge of the Walnut Creek channel to the Bay and a connection with the Bay Trail. CIAP funds would be used for planning and feasibility work necessary to implement these creek and trail improvements.
5) Planning and public outreach work for the exploratory effort to form the Carquinez Strait National Historic Area ($30K). Following the successful completion of the Carquinez Strait Resource Plan, an exploratory effort was launched to consider the benefits and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 128 Draft Plan, October 2001 feasibility of designating the larger Carquinez Strait region as a National Heritage Area. Such designation signifies federal recognition of the scenic resources of the area and the key role the Straits have played in the political, economic, and social history of our state and nation. The practical impact of receiving the National Heritage Area designation is to coordinate interpretive efforts on human and natural history to tell a unified story and to attract future funds to a variety of land acquisition and restoration projects. CIAP funds would be used to perform the planning and public outreach work required to continue exploration of this concept.
6) Implementation of key recommendations of Acquisition/Restoration/ Stewardship Plan described in item 1) above ($80K). CIAP funds dedicated to this purpose would be used to fund specific land acquisition, restoration, and stewardship actions within the Carquinez Straight Heritage Corridor. Funds may be used for direct costs of implementation, such as actual land costs and the costs associated with the performance of restoration work, as well as specific preparatory work, including appraisals and design work.
Project Oversight and Management: The Carquinez Strait Heritage Corridor Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Project would be jointly managed by the Muir Heritage Land Trust (MHLT), the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) and the Contra Costa County Community Development Department (CDD). Each organization would delegate one or more staff persons to serve on a Steering Committee to guide implementation of the Project. Staff from these agencies would also manage any consultant contracts, oversee the expenditure of funds, and perform other work. We anticipate that the MHLT would act as the fiscal agent of the County in distributing CIAP funds. Such an arrangement would likely be formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding.
Administrative costs: Costs incurred by MHLT, EBRPD, and CDD to implement the Project will be covered with funds from the CIAP. MHLT, EBRPD, and CDD will maintain an accounting of their administrative costs and be reimbursed accordingly. Administrative costs reimbursed with CIAP funds shall not exceed $23,256 roughly 10% of the overall project cost)
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal is consistent with the Mission and Goals of the CIAP for the following reasons: · The Mission statement calls for the “…comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources…” Our Project includes a comprehensive plan tom address land acquisition, stewardship, and enhancement along our northern shoreline to do just that. Likewise, each of the other 5 components of our Project directly contribute to the conservation and enhancement of coastal resources. · Our project is consistent with each of the four CIAP goals. o Stewardship—Our plan component specifically addresses the need for coastal stewardship. Likewise, the three acquisition/restoration components of our proposal relate to improving resource values in neglected areas of our coast.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 129 Draft Plan, October 2001 o Economic sustainability—The Carquinez Straits Heritage Area component would seek recognition of the long-standing role our coastline and the ship channel through the Carquinez Strait has played in the development of Contra Costa County and the state. Such recognition and the work required to receive it would help to promote continued sustainable economic use of our coast. o Research, education, and technology—The Carquinez Heritage Area component would focus and coordinate interpretive efforts on our shoreline. Each of the acquisition/restoration components would include an interpretive component. o Jurisdiction and ownership—Three of our Project components facilitate future acquisitions of coastal lands and wetlands for conservation purposes. While the acquisition agents have yet to be identified for these, the EBRPD or some other agency created by the State to acquire and protect land would likely be involved.
Budget, Timeline, and Cost Estimate:
Task Estimated Anticipated Schedule Cost Fall Winter Spring Summer Fall Winter 2001 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 1) Carquinez Strait Heritage Corridor $30,000 Land Acquisition, Enhancement, and Stewardship Plan 2) Point San Pablo Peninsula $30,000 acquisition, Bay Trail, and restoration/clean-up 3) Point Ozol base conversion/Bay $30,000 Trail segment 4) Lower Walnut Creek Channel $30,000 Restoration Project and Iron Horse Trail Extension 5) Planning and public outreach work $30,000 for the exploratory effort to form the Carquinez Strait National Historic Area 6) Implementation of key $80,000 recommendations of Acquisition/Restoration/ Stewardship Plan described in item #1 above 7) Administrative costs $23,256 TOTAL $253,256
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 130 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Gaviota Coast Acquisition Project location: South Coast of Santa Barbara County, between Ellwood and Gaviota Total cost: $212,203 Funding request: $212,203
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 131 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Among other things, the Division administers annual mitigation funds for the purpose of mitigating or compensating for impacts to coastal resources and fisheries that result from oil and gas development offshore and the supporting onshore infrastructure.
Funding acquisitions of land or conservation easements along the Gaviota coast has been one of the priority uses of such mitigation funds. The Gaviota coast lies due west of the City of Santa Barbara and the unincorporated urban areas of Goleta and Ellwood (see attached map). For the purposes of this project, we have drawn the western boundary at Gaviota, where U.S. 101 changes to a predominately north-south orientation.
The Gaviota coast provides panoramic coastal views, from the slopes of the Santa Ynez Mountains on the north to the coastal bluffs, beaches, ocean and Channel Islands on the south. This area also represents 50% of the remaining rural coastline in Southern California. It is rich in history, cultural resources, recreational resources, and biological diversity, including numerous rare and endangered species. However, it is adjacent to several offshore oil and gas leases, many of which have been, or are undergoing development (see attached map). This latter characteristic has resulted in some major industrialization of an otherwise rural coastline over the last four decades, and has the potential to adversely impact the Gaviota coast for another four decades into the future as additional undeveloped offshore lease are brought into production.
Since 1994, the County has worked with the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County and other interested parties to acquire land and conservation easements on the Gaviota Coast. Towards this effort, the County has devoted $760,000 in local mitigation funds related to offshore development and has leveraged another $720,000 in state funds, allocated for the purpose of mitigating impacts from offshore oil and gas development. Using these and other funding sources, the Land Trust acquired the first conservation easement on the 660-acre Freeman Ranch. The Land Trust has also concluded negotiates to purchase the 782-acre Rancho Arroyo Hondo. Negotiations on two other easements are nearly concluded, and negotiations for other easements or land acquisitions are anticipated.
Although the foregoing efforts are noteworthy, they are only a first step towards preserving this spectacular rural coastline. The County seeks $212,203 to pursue acquisition of additional lands or conservation easements on the Gaviota Coast for the purpose of preserving and protecting sensitive cultural, historic, and biological resources in this coastal area. This project qualifies under several of the legislatively authorized uses of coastal impact assistance, including
· Conservation and protection of coastal habitats by preventing development; · Protection of coastal water quality otherwise threatened by pressures to develop land; · Conservation and protection of wetlands such as vernal pools also threatened by pressure to develop land; and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 132 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Mitigation of impacts of OCS activities by compensating an area that has endured several years of impacts from offshore oil and gas development.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project best fits with Goal No. 1: Stewardship. It enables preservation of significant coastal resources, including biology, archaeology, and history, by vesting stewardship of this land with the appropriate public agencies or non-profit organizations.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated CIAP Expense* Acquisition $200,000 Associated Administrative Costs** 12,203 TOTAL $212,203 * Does not include other funding sources that will be used to acquire land or easements. ** Includes title fees, appraisals, and negotiations.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 133 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County San Luis Obispo County Department: Department of Planning and Building Prepared by: Nancy E. Rollman, AICP, Environmental Specialist Phone number: (805) 781-5008 Address: County Government Center, Rm. 310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408-2040 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Natural Habitat Conservation Planning for the Los Osos Area Project location: Los Osos Total cost: $60,000 Funding request: $60,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 134 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project proposes to develop a regional multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that would balance planned development of the Los Osos area with the needs of conservation of the unique and sensitive habitats found in the community of Los Osos. The project would be a cooperative effort between the County of San Luis Obispo (County), the Los Osos Community Services District (LOCSD), California Coastal Commission (CCC), California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG), and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). The goal of the plan would be to identify recovery needs of various endangered species within a matrix of natural habitats found only in Los Osos, while determining appropriate levels and locations of future development in the area. The plan is intended to provide the rationale for permitting of a mandated wastewater treatment facility and subsequent buildout, as well as the framework for update of the Local Coastal Program, while insuring compliance with the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts and the California Coastal Act.
The grant request of $60,000 in contracting funds will cover development of the plan, the implementing agreement, establishment of a data management program for tracking the progress of the plan and compliance and the establishment of a management structure.
Coastal systems statewide are under tremendous pressure from human development and occupation; the coastal dune and wetland complex surrounding the town of Los Osos at the south end of Morro Bay are no exception. Loss of a significant portion of the area has resulted in the designation of the entire complex as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) in the Local Coastal Plan, requiring strict development standards be implemented for the protection of the fragile resources. Loss of habitat has resulted in the designation of more than half dozen resident and endemic species as threatened or endangered under the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts. The inventory and protection of the area is a high priority of the Morro Bay National Estuary Program’s Comprehensive Conservation & Management Plan for Morro Bay (1999), and has resulted in an national award-winning cooperation between local, state and federal agencies and conservation organizations.
While it is clear that there is great national and state support for habitat conservation in the area, much of the habitat is in private ownership and a large amount is planned for development. Currently, there is a moratorium on building initiated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to address pollution of Morro Bay by the many individual septic systems in Los Osos; development of the area will expand greatly with completion of a wastewater treatment facility by the CSD, planned for mid-2004. The area has also been the subject of a number of individual Habitat Conservation Plans submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which have not been part of an integrated planning process.
This grant would augment funds currently available from the Los Osos CSD and a prior Coastal Resources grant for the first phase of the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan intended to support issuance of permits for authorization of take of state and federally listed species incidental to construction of the wastewater treatment facility and subsequent buildout in the community of Los Osos. The plan would be expanded to meet the goals of recovery of the subject species, and address species and habitats that are designated as defining ESHA pursuant to the Coastal Act. It is intended that the plan would be incorporated into the County
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 135 Draft Plan, October 2001 General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. In addition, a data base will be developed and maintained that will serve as a repository for information on the resources of the area, planning designations, parcel information and serve to track development and conservation activities required by the plan.
The process for development of the HCP would include the following steps:
(a) Development of a plan, including an implementing agreement that identifies conservation and management actions, responsible parties, schedule, funding, and monitoring needs. The plan would have the goal of recovering species and protecting habitats in the area; would establish acceptable and consistent habitat classification and delineation methods; and would determine an appropriate conservation strategy for the area which would identify the relative contribution of acquisition, mitigation and other conservation methods. The process would include input from other stakeholders including Morro Estuary Greenbelt Alliance, California Native Plant Society, MBNEP, and other parties with interest in the biological resources and the consequences of any conservation plan that might be developed.
(b) Identify means by which cost of implementing the plan may be offset by means of grants, subsidized conservation banks or planning mechanisms such as transfer of development credits. In addition, mechanisms for enabling tax savings and other incentives for the protection of land will be identified and made available to the potential sellers of land or easements. The possibility of using the State Revolving Fund to support the purchase of conservation lands will be explored.
(c) Development of a centralized data management system which will archive information related to the natural resources, parcel information, planning designations, mitigation lands, conservation lands, management initiated, and overall compliance with the program
(d) Establishment of a management structure for the implementation of the processes developed in the plan, including the purchase of lands for mitigation offsets. The goal of this task will be to set out a long-term strategy for the management of protected lands.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
MISSION: To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations. Consistency: The proposal is for the development of a HCP. The goal of the HCP is to go beyond the single species focus of the ESA and to provide for preservation of entire ecosystems in the marine, estuarine and nearshore environment. The product will be an Implementing Agreement amongst the County of San Luis Obispo, California Coastal Commission, California Department of Fish & Game, United States Fish & Wildlife Service, the Los Osos Community Services District and the Morro Estuary Greenbelt Alliance (MEGA).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 136 Draft Plan, October 2001 GOAL 1: STEWARDSHIP The watershed, estuarine and marine resources comprise a portion of the Morro Bay National Estuary. The project will assess resources and develop a plan for regional protection and perpetuation of natural ecosystem diversity, while allowing compatible and appropriate development and growth.
GOAL 2: ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY The project will result in a clear set of guidelines that will enable faster processing of building permits, a more easily obtainable estimation of the costs of development, and a degree of certainty for landowners regarding allowable development that is environmentally sound.
GOAL 3: RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND TECHNOLOGY The efforts will be coordinated with the Morro Bay National Estuary Program. All information will be developed on a Geographic Information System platform compatible with the NEP and the County allowing for a wide distribution of the research work.
GOAL 4: JURISDICTION AND OWNERSHIP The planning process to be set up with this program will identify resources which are the focus of the plan, including a sustainable conservation strategy which will incorporate the conservation and management of public trust resources; in addition, it will clearly define jurisdiction and ownership issues concerning the development of private land consistent with the resources which are the focus of the plan.
Project Completion Schedule and Quarterly Expenditure Plan:
Grant Project Grant Mar- July- Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Mar- July- Amount June Sept 2002 2003 June Sept 2002 2002 2003 2003 1 HCP $25,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 Preparation 2 Implementin $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 g Agreement 3 Data Mgt $18,000 $4,500 $4,500 $4,500 $4,500 System 4 Funding $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 Mechanism s 5 Protection $5,000 $2,500 $2,500 Plan
Total for $60,000 HCP
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 137 Draft Plan, October 2001 As specific opportunities for acquisition of land or easements come forward, the County will likely work with other interested entities to leverage matching funds from other sources. Such sources include the California Coastal Conservancy and the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last five years, commencing upon receipt of Coastal Impacts Assistance funds or authorization to commence the project, whichever occurs sooner. Acquisition of lands or easements may occur sooner; however, determining a more precise schedule would be premature at this time.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 138 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County San Luis Obispo County Department: Department of Planning and Building Prepared by: Nancy E. Rollman, AICP, Environmental Specialist Phone number: (805) 781-5008 Address: County Government Center, Rm. 310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408-2040 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Oceano Lagoon Wetlands System Biological and Hydrological Assessment Project location: Oceano Lagoon, Grover Beach Total cost: $23,600 Funding request: $23,600
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 139 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
As proposed, this project will be a complete biological and hydrological survey of the Oceano Lagoon wetland system, one of the components of the Nipomo Dunes and Wetlands (Smith, Speth and Browning 1976). The primary focus of this survey is the portion of the wetlands lying between Grand Avenue, near the intersection of Grand Avenue and Highway 1 in Grover Beach, and the levee separating Oceano Lagoon from Arroyo Grande Creek, a distance of approximately 1.5 miles. This section of the wetlands represents the lower end of the Meadow Creek watershed drainage. As time and funding allows, an effort will be made to survey the stretches of Meadow Creek lying upstream from the primary project area, principally the section between the Pismo Lake Ecological Area and the head of Oceano Lagoon at Grand Avenue. The project as proposed is a necessary first step upon which to base future restoration work in the Oceano Lagoon wetland system.
The proposed project is comprised of three studies: A survey of the biological resources, a detailed bathymetric (depth) profile, and a hydrological survey including chemical analysis of water and sediments.
A condition for permitting any future restoration in Oceano Lagoon is compliance with various aspects of the Endangered Species Act. Potential federal and state listed species that may occur in the Oceano Lagoon include south/central California steelhead trout, tidewater goby, California red-legged frog, California brown pelican, American peregrine falcon, bald eagle, and perhaps the California clapper rail and the California black rail. Several other species of special concern, particularly plants and birds, may also be present in the lagoon and subject to special conditions by various permitting agencies. The project proposed here for funding by Coastal Impact Assistance Program will supply data needed to address these issues.
Of primary biological interest are the aquatic organisms, including invertebrates, fishes, amphibians, reptiles and birds. Plants, including planktonic forms, will be surveyed. The methods are similar to those used by Ambrose (1995) for coastal wetland assessment in Santa Barbara County. These methods generally employ non-destructive sampling of the biological resources, although some sample collections are necessary. Oceano Lagoon will be surveyed at least two times, winter and summer, over a one-to-two year period although it may be visited more often for bird surveys. Results of these surveys will provide a detailed description of the plant, invertebrate, fish and bird communities.
In conjunction with the biological surveys, a detailed bathymetric survey using sensitive hydroacoustic and GPS methods will create a permanent data file of depth-at-precise-location. Water and sediment samples will be collected for analysis of pesticides, nutrients, asbestos, heavy metals and petroleum hydrocarbons. The hydrography of the Lagoon will be described in as complete detail as practical using historical records and on-site observations and measurements.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 140 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project proposed for grant funding is the first, very essential part of a larger restoration project envisioned for the Oceano Lagoon wetland system. Without the baseline data generated by this proposed study, which will define the “intrinsic value” in biological terms of this coastal wetland system, and the concomitant understanding of the relationships between the physical factors and biological integrity gained from the surveys, it is difficult to “ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement” of the resources for current or future generations. The consistency of the proposed project with the stated goals and mission of the Coastal Resources Agency Coastal Impact Assistance Program is, therefore, best understood in the context of the larger restoration project envisioned for Oceano Lagoon, of which the biological assessment project here proposed is the critical initial study to be performed.
Oceano Lagoon is one of the five principal wetland areas within the boundaries of the Nipomo Dunes and Wetland complex, bounded on the north by the City of Pismo Beach and on the south by the southern edge of the Santa Maria River flood plain (Smith, et al 1976). The Lagoon is the seaward extent of the approximately 3,800 acre Meadow Creek watershed. At the turn of the century a marsh area extended from Pismo Lake down through Meadow Creek and south along the dunes to the mouth of Arroyo Grande Creek. A levee completed in 1958 along Arroyo Grande Creek between Halcyon Road and the beach to control flooding effectively cut off the Oceano Lagoon system from the Creek. A flood-gate or tide-gate in this levee is the only outlet for the entire watershed.
The Oceano Lagoon as it exists today is largely a result of past efforts to improve water flow through the lagoon by increasing the depth of the main channel. These operations began in the 1920’s and continued until about 1961 (Smith, et al 1976; Harold Guiton, pers. comm). The last channel dredging operation apparently occurred in 1961 when the Lagoon became clogged with vegetation impairing water flow and causing flooding of the State Park lands north of Grand Avenue. The dredging operation was followed by hand removal of vegetation growing back into the channel which continued on a periodic basis until some time prior to 1976.
Today’s Oceano Lagoon is subject to poor water conditions quality particularly during the summer months and decreasing habitat value for fish, birds and wildlife. Water movement is sluggish, resulting in increased sedimentation and accumulation of vegetation debris. Debris accumulates in the Lagoon system because it cannot flush out through the tide gates. Degradation of this material results in high biological oxygen demand causing eutrophic conditions and likely contributes to periodic algal blooms and fish die-offs. Increased sedimentation results in shoaling of the open water areas and increased colonization by bulrushes, effectively reducing open water areas.
The primary goal of future restoration projects within the Oceano Lagoon wetland system is to increase the habitat values for birds, fishes and wildlife. Other goals include decreasing potential flooding of nearby areas, reduction of the population of mosquitoes in the summertime, and increasing recreational opportunities, particularly for fishing and nature viewing.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 141 Draft Plan, October 2001 Taken in the larger perspective, the proposed biological and hydrographic assessment of this coastal lagoon and wetland system is the first critical phase of larger program. Upon completion of this assessment, a project for the restoration, conservation and enhancement of the Oceano Lagoon wetland system can be proposed for funding through other grant programs. By itself, the proposed assessment addresses and is consistent with the stated mission and the goals for stewardship and research, education and technology of the Coastal Resources Agency Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
Project Completion Schedule and Quarterly Expenditure Plan:
Grant Project Grant Mar- July- Oct- Jan- Mar- July- Amount June Sept Dec Mar June Sept 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 1 Biological $8,500 $4,250 $4,250 Survey 2 Bathymetric $5,000 $2,500 $2,500 Survey 3 Water/Sedimen $4,000 $2,000 $2,000 t Sampling 4 Data Analysis $2,600 $2,600 5 Final Report $3,500 $3,500
Total for $23,600 Wetland
Literature Cited:
Ambrose, R., Principal Investigator. 1995. Coastal Wetland Resources of the Santa Barbara County Mainland. Final Report to the County of Santa Barbara, December 1995.
Smith, K.A. J.W. Speth and B.M. Browning. 1976. The Natural Resources of the Nipomo Dunes and Wetlands. California Department of Fish and Game, Coastal Wetland Series #15 106 p.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 142 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Solano County Department: Environmental Management Prepared by: Ron Glas Phone number: (707) 745-3243 Address: 601 Texas St Fairfield, CA 94533 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Solano County Wetlands Restoration Projects Project location: Various sites throughout Solano County Total cost: $294,667 Funding request: $294,667
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 143 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Solano County, as an eligible Coastal Political Subdivision, proposes to act in an administrative capacity, i.e., a “re-granting” agency, in applying for and disbursing funds made available to the County through the CIAP. In this capacity, Solano County has sought out project proposals eligible for CIAP funding from other governmental, quasi-governmental, and/or non-governmental agencies. Solano County has received three project proposals as a result of this current outreach effort.
The first is a proposal by the Greater Vallejo Recreation District (GVRD) for a marsh restoration project in the City of Vallejo on the east bank of the Napa River. The second is a proposal by the City of Benicia for a marsh restoration project on the Benicia waterfront. The third is a program, sponsored by the Suisun Resource Conservation District (SRCD), designed to restore and enhance managed wetlands to benefit waterfowl production and other wetland- dependent species in the Suisun Marsh. Attached to this application are applications submitted by the above-noted organizations which provide a full description of their proposed projects and funding needs.
Should Solano County be successful in its current application for CIAP funding, Solano County will review and evaluate these proposals for consistency with the mission and goals of the CIAP, and allocate funding to these projects based on the results of this evaluation.
Should additional CIAP funding become available in the future, Solano County would again search out eligible projects for funding under this program. Examples of projects that Solano County may fund include marsh and wetland restoration projects, watershed management and protection projects, habitat conservation plans, hillside erosion control projects, and other projects consistent with Section 4 of the “Draft Program Administration and Plan Development Guidance” document for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
Solano County has also reached a tentative agreement with the Solano County Farmlands and Open Space Foundation (Foundation) in order to allow the Foundation to act in a joint capacity with the County as a “co-regranting agency” in matters pertaining to the administrative duties and responsibilities outlined above. Under this agreement, Solano County would work cooperatively with the Foundation in reviewing and evaluating the project proposals submitted herewith, as well as proposals submitted in anticipation of future CIAP funding. As part of this agreement, each agency has also agreed to limit any administrative fees charged against the CIAP budget to not more than its actual administrative costs.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
MISSION
All of the above-noted proposals are designed to ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of the ecosystem that supports California’s ocean and coastal resources for its intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 144 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 1: Stewardship.
Solano County, the Solano County Farmland and Open Space Foundation, and the three public/quasi-public organizations noted above are all charged in various capacities with responsibility for assessing, conserving, and managing the ecosystem that supports California’s ocean and coastal resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability.
All of the above-noted proposals consist of environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology.
This project, including the above-noted proposals would advance research, educational programs, and technological developments to meet future needs and uses of the ecosystem that supports California’s coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. Each of the above-noted proposals will contribute to the overall effort to maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds and State Tidelands.
Budget:
Anticipated CIAP Funding - $294,667
Requested By: Amount Requested Final Grant Allocation ($) GVRD $419,250 To be determined City of Benicia $570,181 To be determined SRCD $100,000 To be determined TOTAL $1,089,431.00 $294,667
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 145 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Orange County Department: Public Facilities and Resources - Harbors, Beaches and Parks Prepared by: Barbara Doerr Phone number: (714) 834-6791 Address: 300 N. Flower Street Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: South Talbert Wetlands Habitat Enhancement Project location: Costa Mesa Total cost: $300,000 Funding request: $297,359
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 146 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Project consists of removal of invasive exotics to allow native habitat to reappear naturally, augmented by some new plantings for overall enhancement to wetlands habitat in South Talbert Nature Preserve. Invasive exotics removal will be done by a combination of mechanical removal and herbicide treatments. Selected wetlands habitat plantings will be consistent with species identified in the Park Enhancement Plan.
South Talbert is an approximately 88.5 acre portion of Talbert Nature Preserve located near the mouth of the Santa Ana, and adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Santa Ana River and its parallel Greenville-Banning Channel. It is approximately 1-1/2 miles from the coast. The Preserve includes a Corps of Engineers easement covering 11.4 acres at Victoria Pond (a significant wetland habitat resource), and is within the California Coastal Zone. Additionally, the North Talbert Nature Preserve consists of restored upland grassland habitat, and a small portion of wetlands (restoration project underway).
According to the "Fairview & Talbert Regional Park Enhancement Plan, South Talbert is "a mosaic of several habitat types and plant communities including pond, mule fat scrub, willow forest, and areas dominated by a mixture of exotic annual forbs and grasses, including pampas grass (Cortaderia atacamensis). Several areas are dominated by pampas grass, an exotic perennial that forms large wood/fibrous tussocks several feet tall and several feet in diameter. These large tussocks are persistent and exclude other species, including natives."
The proposed wetlands enhancement project will target those areas most impacted by invasive exotics as identified within the "Fairview & Talbert Regional Park Enhancement Plan" and by field inspection. The Plan specifically identifies areas within the Park for removal of exotic invasives. It states that an "eradication program to remove invasive weeds would need to be completed before any planting is initiated in this habitat . . . The species to be removed are: Tree tobacco, Castor bean, Pampas grass" (Page 7-4). Other non-native invasives such as arundo donax are targeted for removal.
Target invasives include: pampas grass, tree tobacco, castor bean, arundo donax, and other non-natives. Both pampas grass and arundo donax are species listed by the California Exotic Pest Plant Council as "List A-1: Most Invasive Wildland Pest Plants." New wetlands habitat plantings will be consistent with species identified in the Park Enhancement Plan. Plantings will primarily occur in the areas which are totally inundated by exotics, and after removal not natural re-growth can occur.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
The proposed South Talbert Nature Preserve Wetlands Enhancement project is consistent with the "Mission" for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program, and accomplishes or furthers
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 147 Draft Plan, October 2001 the four stated Goals. CIAP Goals that are consistent with the proposed project are shown in parentheses in the above "Project Summary and Consistency" section of this application.
The Wetlands Enhancement project is an allowable use as provided in "AUTHORIZED USES OF FUNDS" - "1(H) identification, prevention and control of invasive exotic and harmful non- indigenous species," and the following other uses authorized for the CIAP funds:
"1 (B) conservation, restoration, enhancement or protection of coastal or marine habitats including wetlands…"It is also consistent with the "Mission" as it provides coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of a valuable coastal resource for current and future generations.
"1 (F) addressing coastal conservation needs associated with seasonal or otherwise transient fluctuations in coastal populations."
"2. Projects and activities for the conservation, protection or restoration of wetlands;"
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
The proposed project is consistent with this goal. The "Fairview & Talbert Regional Park Enhancement Plan", was jointly funded by the State Coastal Conservancy and the County of Orange, was prepared to manage and protect valuable coastal wetlands within South Talbert Nature Preserve. Its goal is to ensure coordinated management, protection, and enhancement of a valuable coastal resource for current and future generations. The Plan identifies the surrounding habitat areas, responsible agencies, and calls for coordinated implementation.
The proposed wetlands enhancement project for Talbert Nature Preserve will provide quality management for this wetlands through removal of invasive non-native plants, and new plantings. The need for wetlands habitat enhancements within South Talbert has also been identified in documents produced by the Nature Reserve of Orange County.
This project protects valuable habitat for important coastal wildlife species affected by OCS gas & oil production. The Park Plan identifies: 1) "Three state and federally listed endangered species…" (brown pelican, least tern, Peregrine falcon); 2) "An additionally 13 species observed in the area are listed by the California Department of Fish & Game as species of special concern"; and 3) "Two species found on the project site, the white-faced ibis and willow flycatcher, are species of special concern on the first priority list." The Park is located along the Pacific Flyway.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Economic viability and sustainability of the South Talbert Nature Preserve Wetlands Enhancement project is ensured as it is a part of the Orange County PFRD/Harbors, Beaches & Parks system of regional facilities. The park site has an onsite Park Ranger, and is a part of
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 148 Draft Plan, October 2001 the Operations & Maintenance program for all Orange County regional parks. Enhancement will protect against further degradation of this coastal wetlands resource.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Further, the Plan acknowledges the important of this Preserve for interpretive/educational purposes. "Interpretive nature trail which would serve primarily for bird watching, and environmental education…"An enhanced wetlands at this site will provide a passive recreational area, and interpretive/educational wetlands habitat for millions of Southern California residents. Park access is provided by riding and hiking trails through the Preserve, a major bikeway along the Santa Ana River, and from the City's adjacent Fairview (bluff top) Park. This type of access provides interpretive/education opportunities for millions of nearby urban residents.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
South Talbert Nature Preserve is within the California Coastal Zone, and the County of Orange owns the lands within all of Talbert Nature Preserve. California's interests in coastal watersheds will continue to be protected by the County of Orange. Enhancements at South Talbert will contribute to other nearby regional coastal resources (ecosystem) including: Bolsa Chica Wetlands, Huntington Wetlands, Upper Newport Bay, San Joaquin Marsh, and the Corps of Engineers Santa Ana River and Marshland restoration project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 149 Draft Plan, October 2001 Cost Estimate and Budget:
Cost Estimate
Description Cost
Wetlands Plants/Trees/Materials $30,000
Removal of Invasive Exotic $260,000 (weeds) (Approx. 13 to 17 acres)
Monitoring $10,000
TOTAL $300,000
Budget
Coastal Impact Assistance $297,359 Program
County of Orange, PFRD/HBP * $2,641
TOTAL $300,000
* The County will be responsible for project management and costs exceeding CIAP grant amount.
Schedule: The project will take two full years to be implemented.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 150 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Cruz County Department: Planning Department Prepared by: Donna Bradford, Resource Planner IV Phone number: (831) 454-7580 Address: 701 Ocean Street, 4th Floor Santa Cruz, CA 95060 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Watsonville Sloughs System Restoration Project Project location: Upper Harkins Slough Total cost: $249,000 Funding request: $86,933
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 151 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project proposes to use Santa Cruz County’s allocation towards the acquisition of a strategically located site for the purpose of wetland and riparian habitat restoration and conservation. The project site is located in upper Harkins Slough as shown in Figure 1.
The site is approximately 8.7 acres in size. The slough channel, riparian corridor and flood plain occurs along the center of the parcel. The site is located in an area under intense development pressure for rural homesites and private equestrian facilities. This vacant parcel has been voluntarily offered for sale on the local real estate market. Future development of this site or other disruptive land uses threatens sensitive species known to occur in the area and adds to downstream cumulative impacts from erosion and sedimentation. Increased runoff from new impervious surfaces associated with development is causing accelerated rates of erosion along the slough channel on downstream properties.
This proposed project will implement recommendations included in the Watsonville Sloughs Watershed Conservation Plan, which calls for the acquisition of strategically located wetland and riparian habitats for multi-benefit restoration activities. The site is situated downstream from Calabasas Pond, an undisturbed micro-ecosystem that was acquired through efforts of the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The pond is confirmed breeding habitat for the federally and state listed endangered Santa Cruz long- toed salamander and the federally listed threatened California red-legged frog.
In addition to providing protection to habitat utilized by these listed species, the site will be utilized for the temporary detention and slowing of stormwater flows. Presently, high stormwater velocities are causing severe downstream erosion. Even during relatively minor storms (5-7 years storm flow events) Larkin Valley Road experiences road wash-outs and flooding. Downstream sedimentation is another problem. Sediments deposited in the slough channels obstruct and alter drainage patterns, reduce water clarity, blanket vegetation and aquatic organisms and transport attached nutrients and pesticides into the receiving water.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed project potentially meets the two of the four goals established by the State of California to achieve the above mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic
How this project meets the above goals and how it is consistent with the State’s mission, “To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations” is described below.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 152 Draft Plan, October 2001 The Watsonville Sloughs System (WSS) is an 800-acre complex of primarily freshwater wetlands occurring along six “finger” sloughs (Watsonville, Gallighan, Harkins, Hanson, West Branch Struve and Struve) located within a watershed of approximately 13,000 acres. The WSS drains into the Pajaro River Lagoon which flows out to the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Such a large acreage of freshwater wetlands is rare on the coast, and it is not unusual for the WSS to have the highest and most diverse bird counts in the Monterey Bay region. The area sustains five (5) sensitive species, including the federally and state listed endangered Santa Cruz long-toed salamander, the federally listed threatened California red- legged frog, and is potential habitat for sixteen (16) additional sensitive species.
The Watsonville Sloughs Watershed lies in one of California’s most important agricultural regions, and supports a mix of agricultural, urban, industrial, rural residential, wildlife refuges and open space land uses. It also includes portions of the City of Watsonville. The demand for flood control, municipal and agricultural water supply, crop and grazing land, sites for residential, commercial and industrial development, as well as infrastructure associated with these land uses, has resulted in a loss of wetland acreage and degradation of wetland values. The water quality has been degraded by sedimentation, runoff contaminated with pesticides and a lack of circulation. Historically, portions of the wetland channels are periodically dredged to clear sediment and vegetation for flood control. The WSS is included in the Clean Water Act section 303(d) listing of water bodies having impaired water quality for elevated levels of pesticides, pathogens, siltation, metals and oil and grease.
This project is also supported by policies and programs in the Santa Cruz County General Plan and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan certified by the California Coastal Commission in 1994 including but not limited to:
1) Identify and seek funding sources to acquire special sensitive habitats; 2) Continue to ensure survival of the endangered Santa Cruz Long-Toed Salamander; and 3) Preserve, protect and restore all riparian corridors and wetlands for the protection of wildlife and aquatic habitat, water quality, erosion control, open space, aesthetic and recreational values and the conveyance and storage of flood waters.
The proposed site was identified through the Watsonville Sloughs Watershed Conservation and Enhancement Plan. This plan considers a number of resource issues including native plant and wildlife habitat, wetland functions, drainage control, water quality, urbanization and agricultural use. Funded in 1999 by a $200,000 grant to the County from the California State Coastal Conservancy, the plan will be finalized by late 2001 and will include both site specific projects to enhance and protect natural and water resources and other measures to promote greater compatibility between land use and natural resources.
Budget:
Santa Cruz County CIAP Allocation $ 86,933 Private Non-profit Agency match 162,067 Total Cost $249,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 153 Draft Plan, October 2001 Cost Estimate:
Listed price (Assessor’s parcel Number 049-022-43): $249,000
Timeline for Completion:
The project can be completed within two years from the date the State issues the sub-award or contract to Santa Cruz County. If acquisition of this specific site proves to not be possible, the allocation of $86,933 will be used to leverage acquisitions of other wetland or riparian areas (through fee-title transfer or conservation easements) in the Watsonville Sloughs System.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 154 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Ventura County Department: Resource Management Agency/Flood Control District Prepared by: Deborah Millais/Vicky Musgrove Phone number: (805) 543-5037/(805) 654-5051 Address: 800 S. Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009-1700 E-mail: [email protected]/ [email protected] Title of project: Wetlands Task Force Project location: Ventura County Total cost: $282,229 Funding request: $282,229
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 155 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary and Consistency:
Project Summary. The proposed project consists of the formation of a Wetlands Task Force (WTF). The WTF would carry out the following tasks:
1. Interagency coordination. Numerous federal, state, and local agencies as well as Non- Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) are involved in wetlands issues. The WTF would bring together such agencies as the Ventura County Resources Management Agency, the Flood Control District, the Coastal Commission, the Coastal Conservancy, the University of California at Santa Barbara, the affected Water Districts and Sanitary Districts, the Matilija Dam Coalition, the Tri-County Fish Team, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office, the Santa Clara River Enhancement and Management Plan Group and other groups active in wetlands issues. 2. Data management and organization. The WTF would locate, inventory, develop, and make available information needed for wetlands assessment. This would be based on the template now being developed by Coastal Conservancy under a grant from the Environmental Protection Agency, called the Southern California Watershed Inventory. It would include Geographical Information System (GIS) layers as well as key databases. Examples of such databases are a matrix for hydrologic units (please see attached sample format), a summary matrix of agencies with permitting powers, funding ability, research ability, and other forms of involvement. The GIS data would include an inventory of the available GIS layers relevant to wetlands management, and an identification of gaps in the available information. 3. Research existing mechanisms for wetlands assessment, and assist in adapting them to local circumstances. Many manuals and techniques for watershed assessment exist, such as the Oregon Watershed Assessment Manual, or the Watershed Analysis Tool for Environmental Review (WATER) which can be adapted to Ventura County’s needs. The WTF would research the available approaches, select the most applicable, and adapt them to local circumstances. Staff would also participate in relevant workshops and pursue further grant funding for wetlands restoration. 4. Encourage coordination among agencies involved in watershed issues. It is difficult to manage wetlands areas without taking into consideration wider watershed issues. Ideally, agencies currently involved in watershed planning should coordinate their activities, but no funding exists for this purpose. The agencies involved in wetlands assessment are essentially the same as those involved in watershed issues. After beginning with wetlands issues, the WTF would move to expand the wetlands coordination effort to cover watershed-wide issues through the formation of Watershed Task Forces for two of the three watersheds in Ventura (coordinating groups are needed for the Ventura and Santa Clara River watersheds; such a group already exists for Calleguas Creek). The WTF would form the nucleus and model for the Watershed Task Forces. It is intended to start with the Ventura River Watershed, because it is smaller and because of the critical issues raised by the projected removal of the Matilija Dam and protection of endangered steelhead trout.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 156 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed project is consistent with the mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program in that it would provide comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of Ventura County’s wetlands.
Goal 1: The Wetlands Task Force will provide for coordinated assessment, conservation and management of the County’s wetlands, where now there is no coordination or consistent information sharing. This is particularly important at this time due to the projected removal of the Matilija Dam in the Ventura River Watershed. Accurate assessment of the impacts of such projects are critical to any wetlands effort, and the proposed coordination and information management would greatly aid this effort. Another critical issue in this watershed is restoration of the endangered steelhead trout. The coordination and information management to be provided through this project will substantially aid this effort.
Goal 2: In order to determine whether projects are environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial it is necessary to have a baseline assessment of existing conditions, as well as mechanisms for evaluating the potential impacts of proposed activities. Tasks 2 and 3 above would provide these tools.
Goal 3: A key component of the proposed project is to develop and share tools and data necessary to wetlands assessment. The adaptation of these tools to Ventura County’s circumstances would be of great assistance in evaluating the impacts of proposed projects. In particular, development of a system for evaluating the impacts of dam removal would be useful for other such projects, as there are many other dams currently being considered for removal.
Estimated Project Cost Estimate and Budget:
Item Cost Fulltime Planner IV for 2 years, to provide the necessary coordination, $146,000 @ $73,000 per year (salary and benefits) Geographic Information System (GIS) Management Analyst; half-time $87,000 for two years to acquire, organize, coordinate GIS needs, and establish a maintenance and update program for data layers, @ $43,500 per year Geographic Information System (GIS) Technician, half-time for 18 $36,000 months to digitize and maintain data layers @24,000 per year Computer hardware & software (server, ArcView/ArcInfo, etc) to store $9,229 and organize the data Grant Research, Workshops, Travel $4,000 Total $282,229
Anticipated Project Schedule: The project will span a two-year time schedule commencing upon receipt of Coastal Impact Assistance funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 157 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Sonoma County Department: C o un t y A d m i n is t r a t o r ’ s O f f i c e Prepared by: Gayle Goldberg Phone number: (831) 454-7580 Address: 575 Administration Drive, Suite 104-A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 E-mail: g g ol d b e r @ s o n om a - c ou n t y .o r g Title of project: Willow Creek Road Culverts Project location: Various locations along Willow Creek Total cost: $68,415 Funding request: $68,415
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 158 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Willow Creek flows from the hills west of the small town of Occidental to the Russian River, near the river’s outlet to the ocean at Jenner (map attached). The lower reach of Willow Creek contains a large marsh, and the outlet of the creek is into the Russian River estuary. The proposed project will upsize various roadway culverts along Willow Creek to enhance fish passage and reduce sediment loads caused by erosion. It is estimated that approximately seven (7) locations could be improved along a five-mile stretch of road between the Russian River and Post Mile 15.00. Culverts would be upsized to 48"diameter on average. The locations would be determined in the field through consultation with fishery groups and regulatory agencies. The work would be performed by the County’s road maintenance forces. The cost of the work would be approximately $10,000 per site for a total of $68,415.
Project Implementation, Site Identification, Preliminary Engineering, and Cost Estimates: Sonoma County Transportation and Public Works Department (TPWD) staff will meet with local representatives from the California Department of Fish and Game and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service to identify approximately seven road culvert locations on Willow Creek Road that best meet the need for culvert upgrading for fish habitat enhancement. The enhancement will involve replacing the existing undersized culverts with new, larger culverts. The design of the new culverts will take into account fish habitat design criteria such as minimum slope, buried inlet and outlet conditions, 100-year flow pipe size diameter, and other appurtenances such as erosion and sediment control features. Following agreement between the agencies as to the selection of the road culvert sites, TPWD engineering staff will size the culverts for hydraulic capacity. Preliminary costs will be estimated for each of the prospective sites. The actual number of culvert sites to be upgraded will be determined after the estimates are completed.
Design Engineering: TPWD engineering staff will generate construction plans for each site. These plans will include details that incorporate Q100 pipe diameters, inlet and outlet conditions, slopes, and other appurtenances necessary for fish habitat enhancement. The larger capacity culverts will allow for improved fish passage by creating larger openings and by providing a “natural” creek bottom by burying the new pipes inverts to simulate the steam bed on either side of the new culvert. The larger opening will also reduce stream velocities and reduce erosive impacts as compared to the existing road culverts.
Construction Permit Application: Following the design process, the application process for construction permits through the County’s Permits and Resource Management Department (PRMD) will begin. Environmental staff with PRMD will process the applications and work with various governmental agencies in order to obtain construction permits. As a minimum, the applications require approval by the California Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries Service, Army Corps of Engineers, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region. It is anticipated that the permit process will be expedited by the various agencies because of the fish enhancement attributes of the work involved.
Construction: After all permits are obtained, materials will be ordered, and construction will begin based upon the time limitations outlined in the various permits. Construction will be performed by TPWD road maintenance staff that specializes in road culvert construction work.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 159 Draft Plan, October 2001 TPWD engineering staff will inspect and control the construction phases of the project. Installation will take approximately one to two weeks each depending on the size, length, and depth of the new culvert.
Project Closeout: Final construction reports will be written by TPWD engineering staff and final project accounting will be performed by TPWD accounting staff. Reports will be submitted to the necessary responsible agencies.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The upsizing of the Willow Creek culverts meets the goal of the California Impact Assistance Program, primarily through the goal of stewardship in conserving California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. The Sonoma County coast represents significant marine and anadromous resources in an extremely dynamic coastal ecosystem. The “Coastal Impact Assistance Program: Program Administration and Plan Development Guidance” specifically sites projects that assist in the “conservation, restoration, enhancement or protection of coastal or marine habitats including wetlands, estuaries, coastal barrier islands, coastal fishery resources and coral reefs” [IV.1.B]; “protection, restoration and enhancement of coastal water quality” [IV.1.C.]; and “mitigating damage to fish, wildlife or natural resources” [IV.3] as authorized uses of funds.
As stated previously, Willow Creek drains to the Russian River near the coast. The creek is a significant fish habitat area for both the Central California Coast Steelhead evolutionary significant unit (ES) and the Central California Coast Coho salmon ES, both of which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Increasing the size of the various culverts will mitigate damage to fish by enhancing the fish passage area through the culverts. This will reduce silt deposition in the creek bed, which will prevent degradation of fish habitat. The project will have additional benefits in that any reduction in streambank erosion will also improve water quality and help protect the marsh habitat in the lower reach of the creek and the estuary downstream from the mouth of the creek.
Cost Estimate:
Accurate cost estimates can not be determined until the actual road culvert sites are selected in the field by representatives from TPWD and other participating agencies. It is anticipated that each site will cost approximately $10,000, but such factors as pipe sizes and depth of pipe placement will greatly influence the actual cost of construction. Permit requirements for erosions and sediment control may also affect the actual cost. Until preliminary engineering can be performed, the estimates are truly guesswork in nature.
Task Cost Preliminary Engineering (10%) and Permits $ 1,000 Design and Field Engineering (10%) 1,000 Construction (75%) 7,500 Project Closeout (5%) 500 Estimated Total Cost Per Culvert $10,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 160 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Schedule Completion Dates:
July 1, 2001 Submission of projects October 1, 2001 NOAA initial plan approval January 15, 2002 Projects sites identified and preliminary engineering completed May 1, 2002 Design engineering completed July 1, 2002 Obtain permits and begin construction October 15, 2002 Construction completed December 31, 2002 Project closeout
Budget:
Assuming the estimate of $10,000 is correct and seven culverts are constructed, TPWD will provide the $1,585 budgetary shortfall ($70,000 - $68,415). There are no other sources of funding identified for this project.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 161 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Coastal Commission and the California Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Becky Christensen, Reserve Manager Phone number: (831) 728-2822 Address: Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve 1700 Elkhorn Road Watsonville, CA 95076 E-mail: [email protected] Title of proposed project: Coordinating Stewardship of Elkhorn Slough: Development of a Tidal Wetland Action Plan Project location: Elkhorn Slough, Monterey County Total cost: $360,000 Funding request: $300,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 82 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Synopsis The purpose of this project is to develop a science-based action plan for a major resource management issue at Elkhorn Slough: the hydrological management of tidal wetlands. This critical issue will be thoroughly researched and synthesized so the ecological implications of all possible actions can be well understood. We will bring together all the key stakeholders and decision-makers for the tidal wetlands of Elkhorn Slough and surrounding waters in order to jointly reach consensus about the best management practices for each issue. Moreover, we will work together to build a shared vision of general management goals for Slough habitats and biological communities. The coordinated stewardship approach that will be developed and tested during this three-year period will then be in place for addressing other estuary-wide, multi-jurisdictional resource issues in the future. This project will exemplify integrated coastal management in its collaborative effort between the National Estuarine Research Reserve, the National Marine Sanctuary, and the California Coastal Commission, among others.
Background Elkhorn Slough is a seven-mile-long seasonal estuary located in the center of Monterey Bay’s coastline. It is a biologically rich wetland, providing habitat for a wide variety of birds, fishes, invertebrates, and marine mammals. Endangered Southern Sea Otters and California Brown Pelicans are common in Elkhorn Slough. The Slough serves as an important nursery ground for many aquatic species, and provides diverse recreational, educational, and research opportunities for human visitors.
Management and stewardship of the Slough is shared by many agencies, organizations, businesses, and private landowners. A preliminary count includes twenty five entities who have either formal jurisdiction or a strong interest in the Slough. The Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve (ESNERR) comprises a 1400-acre section of marsh and upland, owned and managed by the California Department of Fish and Game. The tidal waters of the Slough are within the boundaries of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). This is the only place in the country where a National Estuarine Research Reserve and a National Marine Sanctuary share a boundary. In addition to these agencies, many others, including the California Coastal Commission and the Moss Landing Harbor District play a role in the management of the Slough. The Elkhorn Slough Foundation, a private non-profit organization has been involved in Slough research, education, and stewardship activities for over 20 years.
Resource issues affecting Elkhorn Slough are large-scale and complicated. Elkhorn Slough, while providing extremely valuable habitat, has also been intensely impacted by humans for well over a century. Opening the mouth of the Slough in 1946 to create the Moss Landing Harbor has resulted in serious tidal scour and significant loss of vegetated salt marsh in the area. The Union Pacific Railroad, often carrying hazardous materials, travels through the middle of the Slough on a daily basis. The Moss Landing Power Plant, one of the largest electricity-generating plants in California, is located at the entrance to Elkhorn Slough. Highly erodable, adjacent sloped lands are intensively cultivated resulting in large chemical and nutrient inputs into the Slough. Marine invasive species have been transported to Elkhorn Slough via ships, oysters, and currents. Old dikes and levees from past gun clubs and dairies
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 83 Draft Plan, October 2001 exist in various stages of erosion. Increasing numbers of kayakers paddle Slough waters each year bringing both their concern for this fragile environment and also their unintentional impacts to its wildlife. These and many other potential human influences comprise the conservation and management issues for this estuary.
Statement of the Problem:
There are two major challenges with the way the Elkhorn Slough is currently managed:
Fragmented management. Currently, unless legal permits are required, each landowner or authority acts independently from the others. While coordination occurs between some entities, like the ESNERR and the MBNMS, it does not formally include all other entities, and it has not thus far resulted in solving major Elkhorn Slough resource problems. No single entity is responsible for managing the whole Slough, and there is not a shared vision of management goals among the various existing interested parties. The result is a “the tragedy of the commons” where the big problems are never thoroughly addressed. Another significant roadblock to management is that no one entity has staff available to dedicate to Slough-wide issues because their current employees are fully booked with site-specific duties.
Inadequate knowledge about key resource issues. The resource issues are complicated and the solutions are not obvious. We know too little about the nature of different potential threats to prioritize between them. Furthermore, the science and expertise required to solve these problems is not readily available to local resource managers. Indeed, the research necessary to determine best mechanisms for addressing the threats has yet to be conducted for some key problems. Existing management plans are either outdated or they do not address resource issues with enough detail to yield a quality management decision. Low confidence in the ability to make wise decisions too often means no action is taken.
Proposed Project: General Approach and Goals:
We propose a three-year project that will develop a process for responsible and effective stewardship of Elkhorn Slough. Our general approach includes two main components, each designed to address one of the key challenges to management described above. The administrative implementation of this project will include a cooperative effort between the California Coastal Commission, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the Elkhorn Slough Foundation. Project oversight will be the responsibility of the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve.
Coordinated stewardship. We will identify and bring together stakeholders with jurisdictions, authority, or interest in Elkhorn Slough and adjacent waters and lands. Key agencies and organizations in this process will include the California Department of Fish and Game, the California Coastal Commission, the California Coastal Conservancy, the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, and the Elkhorn Slough Foundation. The first critical step that has never been attempted will be to reach a shared vision for Slough habitats and biological communities. We will seek consensus to set over-arching estuary-wide conservation priorities
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 84 Draft Plan, October 2001 and management goals. Criteria such as historical baselines, needs of threatened and endangered species, preservation of rare habitat types, support of rich biological communities, and feasibility given human modifications will be evaluated in setting these goals. We will determine what mix of habitats participants believe would be ideal, and what communities and species should be conservation priorities, and in which places. Whenever possible, we will draw upon existing regional plans. However, this initial process will surely require additional field research to assess habitat value, literature reviews to synthesize estuarine patterns coast- wide, and consultation with specialists on the habitat needs of particular species or groups of concern. Once a shared vision has been developed, we will jointly build understanding of key threats to Slough resources and reach decisions about how best to address them. Involving all stakeholders will give them ownership of resulting decisions and make implementation likely.
To build this process of joint decision-making, we have requested a full-time coordinator position for three years (see budget). This position would operate under the direction of the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve manager. Our success depends on the dedicated work of a coordinator with a broad scientific background, deft political skills, and intimate knowledge of regional issues to oversee and facilitate this process.
Research on key threats to Slough resources and the best ways of diminishing them. Working under the supervision of the coordinator, a resource fellow (see budget) will investigate key Slough management issues. He or she will examine the impacts of potential threats on Slough habitats and communities, synthesizing existing studies from the Slough and other similar estuarine systems and carrying out additional research as necessary. The MBNMS’s Sanctuary Integrated Monitoring Network (SIMON), a collaborative regional monitoring effort, will be focusing on Slough monitoring related to the Duke Energy Moss Landing Power Plant upgrade over the next five years. Results from this work will also be incorporated into the syntheses carried out by the fellows. The fellows will then determine whether any management intervention is necessary to meet conservation goals for the Slough. If so, they will evaluate the effectiveness and consequences of a variety of management options, based on firsthand research, synthesis of existing literature, and consultation with experts. The fellow will also assess which agencies or organizations are best suited to implementing different management approaches, and what sort of regulation might be appropriate. This background research on threats and possible solutions will serve as the basis for coordinated workshops with all stakeholders to determine the best course of action. Based on the outcome of these workshops, the coordinator and fellow will prepare a draft action plan. After feedback, editing, and approval from the coordinated group, final versions of the action plan will be distributed, ready for immediate implementation.
An Estuary-wide Action Plan The concrete product of this project will be an action plan with detailed “marching orders” for resource problem-solving in Elkhorn Slough.
Hydrological management of tidal wetlands. Some of the most urgent yet complex management issues at the Slough revolve around tidal flow. Like many estuaries, the Slough has been extensively diked. Wetland habitat can thus be created returning tidal flow to previously diked areas. However, unlike most estuaries, the Slough is an erosional system due to the artificially created harbor mouth, and strong tidal flushing has resulted in extensive
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 85 Draft Plan, October 2001 loss of marsh and mudflat and widening of tidal creeks. Therefore, in this unusual system, key habitats can perhaps best be protected in the long run by maintaining existing tidegates and levees, and perhaps even by adding new ones.
A three-year resource fellow will thoroughly examine these issues. In particular, the fellow will establish historical baselines and document changes in wetland habitats over time. The role of tidal scour will be thoroughly investigated. In consultation with hydrologists, projections will be made as to the likely consequences to Slough habitats if tidal erosion continues unchecked. Will the Slough transform into a muddy fiord with no intertidal mudflats or marsh? Or will erosion rates decelerate and an equilibrium not very different than current conditions be reached? These questions must be resolved before resource management decisions can be made.
Once the nature of tidal flow problems has been characterized, potential hydrodynamic engineering solutions will be evaluated. For instance, installing tidegates under the Parson’s Slough railroad bridge would greatly reduce tidal volume in the Slough, and therefore likely diminish erosion rates in the system as a whole, but would decrease the value of upstream habitats for large animals such as the leopard sharks now abundant there. Such complex trade-offs will be weighed by the entire coordination team, and a action plan for hydrological management will be jointly formulated. The plan will reiterate the shared management goals reached initially with regard to the optimal percentage of freshwater marsh vs. saltwater marsh vs. eelgrass bed vs. mudflat vs. tidal creeks vs. open water habitats in the system, and will contain recommended measures by specific agencies and organizations for accomplishing and maintaining this desired balance.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project is directly linked to the mission, as it will serve to “ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources.” The project will meet the stated goals for the funding as follows:
Goal 1: Stewardship. This project will build coordinated stewardship of Elkhorn Slough. The resulting action plans will give managers clear direction regarding how to best conserve and manage key Slough resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. The project will encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial activities by accommodating uses in ways that best protect the resources. Goal 3: Research, Education, and Technology. The action plan will draw upon research, including technology such as hydrological modeling and GIS analyses, in order to solve resource issues, and will involve education and outreach components once completed.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. The plan will coordinate various state, federal, local, and private jurisdictions and owners to maximize California’s interests in the Elkhorn Slough coastal watershed.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 86 Draft Plan, October 2001 Timeline:
This project will require 3 years to complete. Time is needed to conduct research, coordinate with interested parties, meet with partners and the public, conduct decisionmaking “think tanks”, generate maps and support materials, and draft/revise the action plan.
Year 1: Coordinator and fellow are hired and begin work. Coordinator identifies stakeholders and jurisdictions, initiates and facilitates discussions with the ESNERR Reserve Advisory Committee and staff, and develops the coordinated stewardship process. Fellow carries out research and information gathering. First meetings of stakeholders; development of shared vision of management goals for the Slough and dissemination of summary thereof.
Year 2: Continued general stewardship coordination involving all stakeholders; expert workshops conducted, consultants contracted, and action plan sections drafted in consultation with stakeholder committee.
Year 3: Continuation of Year 1 and 2 activities. Draft Action Plan completed and reviewed by stakeholder committee. Action Plan final.
Budget:
Some of the costs of this project will be born by the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve with regular programmatic funding. This includes extensive time to be contributed by the Reserve’s Manager, Restoration Coordinator, Research Coordinator, and Education Coordinator, as well as space and facilities for personnel involved with the project. However, success of the project depends vitally on additional funds, primarily for a coordinator, a fellow, and consultant time. The estimated costs for completing the project consist of:
Slough Stewardship Coordinator (55K/yr X 3 yrs) $165,000 Tidal Wetland Hydrology Fellow (35K/yr X 3 yrs) 105,000 Consultants ($100/hr X 200 hours) 20,000 Computers, printers, software, supplies 10,000 Indirect costs (20% of the direct costs) 60,000 Total Requested $360,000
The CIAP allocation from the California Resources Agency is $300,000 as of July 24, 2001. We respectfully request that this allocation be increased to $360,000 in order to accommodate the absolute minimum needs to complete this project. If these funds cannot be made available through the CIAP, the Reserve will attempt to find this funding elsewhere through state, federal, and private means.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 87 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Resources Agency Prepared by: Chris Potter Phone number: (916)654-0536 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Form Central Coast Wetlands Joint Venture: Project location: Sacramento Total cost: $75,000 Funding request: $75,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 88 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The California Resources Agency proposes to contract with consultants over two years to create a Central Coast wetlands partnership. The Central Coast is currently the only region of the state that is not covered by some type of wetlands restoration, acquisition, and planning partnership.
Background:
The California Wetlands Conservation Policy (Policy) which was established by executive order on August 23, 1993 identifies three main elements for implementation.
1) Statewide policy initiatives including: 25 a Statewide wetlands inventory 1) support for wetland planning 2) improved administration of existing regulatory programs 3) strengthened landowner incentives to protect wetlands 4) support for mitigation banking 5) development and expansion of other wetlands programs 6) integration of wetlands policy and planning with other environmental and land use processes
1) Three geographically based regional strategies in which wetlands programs can be implemented, refined, and combined in unique ways to achieve the goals and objectives of the policy. 1) The Central Valley 2) San Francisco Bay Area, and 3) Southern California
2) Creation of an interagency wetlands task force on wetlands to direct and coordinate administration and implementation of the policy.
In response to element 2, the Resources Agency in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the State Coastal Conservancy, and other state federal and agencies created the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project (formerly known as the Southern California Wetlands Clearinghouse) in October 1997. In addition to the Wetlands Recovery Project, numerous other regional wetland planning efforts exist throughout the state. They include:
1) The Pacific Coast Joint Venture – Coastal Marin County onto British Columbia -, 2) the Central Valley Habitat Joint Venture – the California Central Valley - 3) the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture (SFBJV)– San Francisco Bay and coastal Bay Area counties -, and 4) the Intermountain West Joint Venture – Sierra and Cascade Mountains.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 89 Draft Plan, October 2001 The only other region in California with significant wetlands not represented on the list above is the Central Coast; i.e., from Northern Santa Barbara County to Santa Cruz County. These significant wetlands include Pescadero Marsh, Elkhorn Slough, and Morro Bay, to name a few. Further, a Central Coast wetlands partnership would bridge areas of the Coast already covered by the Wetland Recovery Project and the SFBJV.
For the purposes of gauging public interest in establishing such a partnership, the Resources Agency and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency convened public workshops in Morro Bay in November 2000 and in Monterey in March 2001. Feedback received at these workshops indicated that there was indeed broad public support for forming a Central Coast wetlands partnership.
This CIAP proposal if funded would build upon these workshops by working with local stakeholders in exploring all options for establishing a Central Coast wetlands partnership; e.g., Joint Venture, Wetlands Recovery Project, etc. In addition, technical assistance has been offered by the adjacent Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project and the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal would be fully consistent with the mission established by the Resources Agency for the use of CIAP funds in California and would achieve the Agency’s goals by: (1) promoting environmental stewardship through effective design and assessment of wetland restoration and acquisition projects along the Central Coast Region and (2) maximizing the application of coordinated regional wetlands planning along the Central Coast.
Budget and Cost Estimate:
The requested CIAP funding would support one part-time contract position for 1.5 years. In addition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX is pursuing a funding augmentation to this budget.
Project Schedule:
The proposed project will commence as soon as CIAP funding becomes available and will last 1.5 years. At the end of the 1.5-year period the project will be assessed by the Resources Agency, US EPA, and other interested parties for long-term viability and funding.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 90 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation, Oceano District Prepared by: Laura Gardner Phone number: (805) 473-7232 Address: Oceano Dunes District 576 Camino Mercado Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Oceano Dunes Foredunes Restoration Project location: San Luis Obispo County - Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area – Pismo State Beach Total cost: $200,000 Funding request: $200,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 91 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project proposes development and first phase implementation of a foredune habitat restoration plan within an approximate 2,400 ft. length of foredunes in Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area – Pismo State Beach between Pier Avenue and Arroyo Grande Creek, Oceano, CA.
The project site is bordered on the north by stabilized foredunes adjacent to the Pier Avenue public restroom, on the east by the Pier Avenue public parking lot and residences along Strand Avenue, on the south by Arroyo Grande Creek, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. The project involves the restoration of approximately 11 acres of foredune habitat, now primarily comprised of either barren sand or covered with exotic plant species such as European Beach Grass or Ice Plant.
Periodic sand removal activities undertaken over the past 20 – 30 years to protect residences along Strand Way from drifting sand dunes have significantly degraded the habitat. Approximately half the length of the project area is devoid of vegetation, and sand movement generated by onshore winds annually threatens damage to many of the residences. Exotic plant species introduced many years ago in efforts to stabilize the foredunes have degraded the quality of the habitat. The development and implementation of a foredune restoration plan will both result in the restoration and reestablishment of nearly one half mile of sensitive shoreline habitat, and, through the stabilizing effect of native vegetation, will afford the homeowners residences a measure of protection from drifting sands.
This project will provide funding for the development of a long-range management plan for this foredune area, the conduct of all necessary environmental reviews and approvals per CEQA and NEPA, the securing of permits from various regulatory agencies, and will provide funding for the initial planting and fenced protection of native plant species throughout the project area. The plan will include the provision for public pedestrian access from the neighboring community to the beach through the foredunes. The development of public access paths / boardwalks would be undertaken at a future date upon securing additional funding.
The project involves properties owned by the State of California, Department of Parks and Recreation and by the County of San Luis Obispo.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Goal 1 – Stewardship
This project directly improves coastal habitat through the establishment and restoration of native vegetation / wildlife habitat within an approximate 2,400 ft length of coastal foredunes. The project will meet the expressed desire of the California Coastal Commission and the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors to establish a long term management plan for this site that both protects coastal resources and reduces the need for emergency permitting to nearby homeowners for the removal of drifted sands impacting their homes. Planning will involve input from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 92 Draft Plan, October 2001 Game relative to the possibilities this project provides for the establishment or protection of critical habitat and the enhancement of populations of the threatened Western Snowy Plover, the endangered California Least Tern, and several listed plant species, including the endangered La Graciosa Thistle.
Goal 2 – Economic Sustainability
The project will greatly reduce, and nearly eliminate the need for the issuance of sand removal permits to homeowners located adjacent to the foredunes. The stabilization of the foredunes through establishment of native plants, and a well considered and regulated provision in the foredune area management plan for the removal of sands impacting the neighboring homes, will decrease the need for environmentally disruptive heavy equipment operations for sand removal activities near the homes. The planning and provision for future establishment of pedestrian access ways through the foredunes will reduce resource maintenance costs over time by reducing the need for additional vegetation planting.
Goal 3 – Research, Education and Technology
The project provides the opportunity to establish protocols and methodologies that might be utilized elsewhere along California’s central and southern coastline in the reestablishment or restoration of foredune ecosystems.
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Total - $200,000
All phases of this project will be accomplished under contract
Development of Management and Restoration Plan - $ 90,000
Coastal geomorphologist and engineering - $15,000 Environmental Analysis and permitting - $ 60, 000 Public Meeting Process - $ 10,000 Landscape Architecture - $ 5,000
Management and Restoration Plan Implementation - $ 95,600
Materials (seed, small tools, fencing) purchase – $ 59,700 Site Preparation (grading, sand stabilization, interim fencing) – $ 20,600 Labor – (project supervisor and laborers) - $ 15,300
Department of Parks and Recreation Project Coordination – $ 14,400
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 93 Draft Plan, October 2001 Funding Sources
This project will be funded entirely by the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. Future phases of the pedestrian boardwalk / coastal access component will be funded by the State of California or County of San Luis Obispo subject to obtaining additional alternative grant funding.
Timeline: 0 to 3 months · Prepare project RFP · Select contractor
3 to 6 months · Hold public workshops, · Consult with agencies · Preliminary Dune Restoration plan
6 to 9 months Final Dune Restoration Plan
9 to 12 months Draft CEQA documentation
12 to 18 months · Obtain necessary permits from local, state, and federal agencies · Final CEQA documentation
18 to 21 months · Prepare bid package · Advertise · Select/Award · Contract
21 to 24 months 7) Construction 8) Work completed
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 94 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Victoria Seidman Phone number: (415)330-6327 Address: Bay Area District 250 Executive Park Blvd., #4900 San Francisco, CA 94134 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Pescadero Marsh Habitat Restoration Project location: Pescadero State Beach (Pescadero Marsh Natural Preserve) Total cost: $150,000 Funding request: $150,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 95 Draft Plan, October 2001 PROJECT SUMMARY:
The project would remove approximately 150 feet of levee on Pescadero Creek and begin to restore an approximately 13 acre fallow agricultural field, which was formerly a wetland, back to its natural condition. The Pescadero Marsh Natural Preserve is home to numerous plant and wildlife species, including many sensitive species such as the California Red-legged Frog, San Francisco Garter Snake, Steelhead Trout, and Townsend’s Big-eared Bat. In addition to restoring wetland habitat to a coastal ecosystem, it would also allow Pescadero Creek to begin to once again have a functional floodplain thus enabling natural processes in the ecosystem to occur. Restoring the functional floodplain may also help reduce flooding concerns on adjacent private property. This project will serve as a model for additional levee removal projects in the watershed. Our goal is to restore wetland habitat and recreate a functional floodplain in conjunction with human habitation in the floodplain.
The funding requested from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program would begin the process of wetland habitat restoration along Pescadero Creek in the Pescadero Marsh Natural Preserve. The project entails removing the levee and either depositing the spoils off-site or placing the spoils in a manner to create upland habitat for sensitive terrestrial species, such as the San Francisco Garter Snake. We will remove non-native plants from the fallow field, and begin revegetation with appropriate species. Native plant materials from local genetic sources will be used. All work will be carefully monitored during construction to minimize any potential short-term impacts associated with restoration. The project includes a strong monitoring component, which is crucial to ensure the success of the restoration project and allow adaptive management. Extensive monitoring is required to weed non-native species from restoration areas and ensure the survival of newly planted material. Success of the project will be determined by the re-establishment of wetland habitat and a functional floodplain and the ability of the project to provide some flood relief for landowners inhabiting the floodplain by providing hydrologic conveyance of flood waters.
This wetland restoration project ties into regional conservation efforts that California State Parks and the Pescadero Marsh Natural Preserve are a part of. We are currently working with the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, which encompasses Pescadero Marsh, to develop monitoring protocols. California State Parks is also an active member of the newly-formed Central Coast Conservation Partnership which seeks to conserve biological diversity along the central coast of California. Within the Pescadero watershed, a Watershed Assessment is getting underway to look at sediment inputs and restoration opportunities for sensitive species; we serve on the Technical Advisory Committee for this project. Our restoration project is consistent with these watershed-level efforts. The Coastal Conservancy is supportive of this restoration project because they feel Pescadero Marsh is an important wetland resource on the central coast and they feel strongly about re-creating additional habitat in the ecosystem. They are interested in working with us on the details of this project.
CONSISTENCY WITH MISSION AND GOALS:
Restoring wetland habitat in this coastal ecosystem is an excellent opportunity for coastal resources stewardship. It is consistent with the management objectives of the
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 96 Draft Plan, October 2001 Pescadero Marsh Natural Preserve, which seek to restore the wetland to conditions that would have existed without historical human activities. This restoration project would allow this presently altered ecosystem to function in a more natural, self-maintaining manner. The entire marsh ecosystem has been altered by previous land uses, namely construction of dikes, levees, and channels to allow farming, and State Parks has been working for the past two decades to re-create the functioning ecosystem once present. This project is one of the important next steps necessary to restore hydrologic and wetland ecosystem function to the marsh as a whole. Functional floodplain and wetland habitat are important ecosystem components for many marsh-dependent plant and animal species. This project will directly benefit several sensitive species. We hope this project will serve as a model for additional work in the watershed to restore the functional floodplain while providing some flood relief to nearby landowners.
BUDGET:
Due to the presence of multiple threatened and endangered species, some with competing needs, and the multiple agencies involved, the permitting process will be time intensive. This restoration project is contingent upon successful environmental review and permitting. The cost for levee removal may be less than budgeted if levee materials can be disposed of on-site in a manner that enhances habitat for endangered species rather than off- site.
Pre-construction environmental surveys and baseline monitoring $8,000
Surveying, mapping, and hydrological modeling $10,000
Plan design $15,000
Environmental review and permitting $15,000
Removal of 150 feet of levee adjacent to Pescadero Creek $75,000
Non-native species removal and native species revegetation $5,000
Project monitoring and adaptive management $10,000
Project management and administration $12,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $150,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 97 Draft Plan, October 2001 TIMELINE:
All restoration activities will be timed to minimize potential short-term and seasonal impacts to sensitive species. The exact timeline will be decided upon when it is determined when the funding will be available.
Months 1-4: surveying, mapping, and hydrological modeling; plan design; initiate permitting with agencies
Months 4-14: environmental review and permitting; pre-construction environmental surveys and baseline monitoring; non-native species removal
Month 14: levee removal
Months 14-18: native species revegetation and non-native species removal
Months 14-24: project monitoring and adaptive management
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 98 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the California Resources Agency Prepared by: Christopher Potter Phone number: (916)654-0536 Address: 50 California Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: San Francisco Bay Wetland Recovery Program Project location: San Francisco Bay Region Total cost: $225,000 Funding request: $125,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 99 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the California Resources Agency request $125,000 in Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) funding to be used for activities relative to wetlands recovery in San Francisco Bay including: (1) consultant and professional services needed by BCDC to carry out its enforcement and permit responsibilities relative to wetlands and (2) consultant and professional services needed to participate in wetlands management partnerships ( e.g., the Bay Area Wetlands Recovery Project and the San Francisco Bay Joint Venture) that address critical issues facing San Francisco Bay relative to wetlands.
Background:
As a follow-up to the San Francisco Bay Habitat Goals Project, a number of agencies have been engaged in the development of a San Francisco Bay Wetlands Recovery Project. Because wetland restoration science is still evolving, one elements of the Bay Wetlands Recovery Project would involve providing technical assistance to agencies, organizations and private interests which propose wetland restoration projects. Such assistance would ensure that wetland restoration projects have the highest chance of success and can benefit from the lessons learned from past restoration efforts. Building on the success BCDC has achieved by using its Design Review Board and Engineering Criteria Review Board, a panel of wetland restoration experts would be convened to review wetland restoration proposals and offer technical assistance to the project designers. The panelists would include staff from other agencies who would provide their assistance on a pro-bono basis, as well as professionals in the field of wetland restoration who would be compensated for their participation on the panel.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal would be fully consistent with the mission established by the Resources Agency for the use of CIAP funds in California and would achieve the Agency’s goals by: (1) promoting environmental stewardship through effective design and assessment of wetland restoration projects; (2) advancing economic sustainability by providing the analysis needed to support the approval of wetland projects that are consistent with the Commission’s laws and policies; (3) providing financial resources to support more thorough research and analysis to provide the Commission, public and other organizations with the knowledge necessary to make informed decisions regarding wetlands restoration; (4) and maximizing the application of BCDC’s management policies through the formulation of partnerships with other organization that share BCDC’s policies objectives.
Budget and Cost Estimate:
The requested CIAP funding would support one staff position at BCDC and retain consultants with expertise in wetland restoration on a as needed basis. It is anticipated that consultants will be paid no more than $75.00/hour for their services.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 100 Draft Plan, October 2001 An additional $100,000 has been committed for this project by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Region IX. Total identified potential funding for this project is currently $225,000. Additional funding for this project will be sought as opportunities present themselves.
Project Schedule:
The proposed project will commence as soon as CIAP funding becomes available and will last 3 years. At the end of the 3-year period the project will be assessed by the Resources Agency, BCDC, US EPA, and other Wetlands Recovery Project members for long-term viability and funding.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 101 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Douglas Updike Phone number: (916) 653-1937 Address: Wildlife and Inland Fisheries Division 1416 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Santa Cruz Island Ecosystem Restoration Project location: Santa Cruz Island, (Santa Barbara Channel Islands) Total cost: $500,000 Funding request: $500,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 102 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project would partner the California Department of Fish and Game, (CDFG), with The Nature Conservancy, (TNC), in ongoing efforts to restore the unique ecosystem of Santa Cruz Island in the Santa Barbara Channel Islands. These efforts are urgently needed to protect a large number of protected, endemic taxa now in dramatic decline. These include nine federally listed plant species, five of which are also state listed. One animal, the Island fox Urocyon littoralis, is officially listed by the State of California as “Threatened”, but currently has no federal status. It is essentially on the brink of extinction.
The Work: The Nature Conservancy and the National Park Service, (NPS), the two island landowners, are jointly pursuing integrated island-wide restoration. A DEIS, (Santa Cruz Island Primary Restoration Plan), was released in February and completed its public review period on April 24th, 2001. State Historic Preservation Office consultation is currently underway and full NEPA compliance is expected by winter. This plan includes the eradication of feral pigs, which pose the most significant remaining threat to the listed species. Funding for the hunting component is expected to come to the Channel Islands National Park under the Natural Resources Challenge in FY 2002. The Nature Conservancy has also already provided significant funding and is pursuing additional support through its own private fundraising efforts.
However, funding has not yet been secured for fence construction which must begin as the first step in plan implementation. The funding requested would be in the form of a grant to TNC to construct marine environment-resistant pig-proof fencing to begin to divide the island into six discrete units. This will allow implementation of the most reliable and cost-effective hunting program. Design and materials, (see last page), are field tested and proven in comparable and demanding environments. Fencing for the first unit must be begun in Spring 2002 for the work to go forward: Immediate implementation of these restoration actions is critical to recover the Island fox and to prevent the extinction of other listed organisms. Federal Line Item Construction money for fencing is expected to be included in the FY’03 budget to continue the work.
The Department’s Role TNC’s work on Santa Cruz Island has had the active support of the California Department of Fish and Game through its Wildlife Programs Branch for more than ten years. This has included advice and assistance in addressing wild pig depredation of rare plant and archaeological sites, and input on the development of actions proposed in the restoration plan currently under public review. CDFG will conduct a supervised public hunt on TNC’s property, under its Wild Pig Program, as a last opportunity for sport hunters before the restoration plan is implemented.
The State of California has therefore already been very constructively involved in the management of pigs on the island. This proposal would allow it to add its financial support to the efforts of the other two key partners—TNC and NPS—and thereby play a key role at a very critical time in the restoration effort. Through this funding, the State would participate more fully in the restoration of this unique coastal California ecosystem and the eventual recovery of state and federally listed species that exist nowhere else in the world.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 103 Draft Plan, October 2001 Coastal Resources Santa Cruz Island is the largest of the Santa Barbara Channel islands. The Nature Conservancy owns seventy-six percent, a total of 46,000 acres. All fencing will be constructed on TNC land. The National Park Service owns the remaining twenty-four percent of Santa Cruz, as well as several smaller islands in the vicinity. The islands are surrounded by a marine sanctuary, and share the Santa Barbara Channel with extensive off-shore oil and gas facilities. Currently there are seventeen platforms in the Channel.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Santa Cruz Island is 96 square miles and has 74 miles of coastline. It is strongly influenced by the marine environment and everything which happens on it in turn influences the marine. Extensive and dramatic rooting activity of nearly five thousand pigs causes erosion of soils and sedimentation of creeks, drainages and estuarine interface areas all around the island. This goes beyond non-point source pollution. Two years ago, a landslide in an eroded area dumped enough soil into the ocean to expand the island by almost an acre!
Santa Cruz Island’s ecosystems support unique and vulnerable biological resources unparalleled elsewhere on the mainland. With over fifty endemic taxa, they are a part of the legacy of every Californian. Boaters who regularly visit the dozens of coves and anchorages and hike and picnic on TNC’s property enjoy the beautiful Santa Cruz Island silver lotus (State: Threatened) and dozens of other rare plants. Last year over a hundred thousand people visited the National Park Service’s holdings on the island’s east end. In past years visitors all over the island have regularly enjoyed seeing island foxes which are playful, day-active and unafraid. Due to predation by golden eagles attracted to the island by feral pigs, this is no longer the case. On two smaller islands, local subspecies of the island fox have been reduced by more than 90% and now survive only in captive breeding facilities.
Eradicating pigs is the key critical restoration action for the protection, recovery and future effective conservation of Santa Cruz Island ecosystems and resources. Without it, nine listed plants will continue to decline, and island foxes, state listed as Threatened, may well become extinct. The Santa Cruz Island Archeological District, listed on the National Register, will continue to be degraded, with burials unearthed and human bones scattered by pigs.
This project supports the Coastal Impact Assistance Program’s mission specifically in:
Goal 1: Stewardship, in that it will serve to conserve unique coastal resources and the ecosystems which support them. Specifically it will serve to recover State-listed animals and plants, including the unique island fox.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability, in that Santa Cruz and the other Channel Islands are a world- class natural area which already attract large numbers of visitors, despite the need to travel by boat to get there. A healthy island supports the quality of life for the more than one million people who live within sight of it on the mainland. It is a primary destination for most of the private boaters in Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties who support harbors, chandleries and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 104 Draft Plan, October 2001 other business ventures. Commercial tourism is well established and likely to continue to grow with the area’s increasing population.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology, in that Santa Cruz Island is a part of the University of California Natural Reserves System which maintains a station on TNC property. The University will be an integral part of the island restoration, particularly in monitoring and documenting ecological impacts of the restoration effort.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership, in that the Nature Conservancy’s property is a private in- holding in the Channel Islands National Park. Its 46,000 acres are under the jurisdiction of the State of California. In addition, the rationale for the federal appropriation of these Coastal Impact Assistance funds was that states do not currently share in the revenues from off shore oil production in adjacent federal waters. This project is very consistent with that underlying congressional rationale in that the Minerals Management Service lists seventeen oil and gas platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel. That is over seventy percent of the platforms off of California. The remaining units consist of four platforms each in the Santa Maria Basin and Long Beach areas.
This project also supports direction of the legislation: (from Discussion Draft January 23, 2001)
III.3. Coordination with other Federal Resources and Programs: “For example, a state or local government could use funds to expand or improve an existing restoration project, acquire habitat areas needed to protect endangered species, or develop and implement regional restoration plans…” This work is an opportunity for the State to contribute a pivotal piece to a restoration effort that already has significant federal (NPS) and private (TNC) engagement.
IV. 1. (H) “Identification, prevention and control of invasive exotic and harmful non-indigenous species” Wild pigs on Santa Cruz Island are descended from domestic swine abandoned there in the 1850s. In this isolated environment, rich in endemic species, they are causing direct harm. In addition, they are spreading invasive weeds, including fennel, which now covers 10% of the island, to the exclusion of native species including state and federally listed plants.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 105 Draft Plan, October 2001 Fencing for Santa Cruz Island Restoration Implementation:
The fencing proposed was developed in Hawaii and has been field tested there and on Catalina Island. It has been demonstrated to hold up to both marine influences and pigs with a functional life of at least ten years. Based on the specialized materials, demanding topography and especially the risk to sensitive resources, we plan to contract with South West Fence and Supply Company. This firm has years of experience in exactly this kind of work under comparable conditions on Catalina Island. Details are provided below:
Materials: Material consists of triple galvanized steel, (both posts and wire). Posts extend 39 inches above the ground, and wire configuration is as “hog wire”: That is that it has the wires farther apart on the top and get progressively closer together as they approach the bottom. This keeps even small piglets from getting through, but is still permeable to island foxes and spotted skunks which climb easily. A special barbed wire, (4 barbs every 2 inches as opposed to 2 barbs every 6 inches on normal wire), is strung along the bottom of the fence to prevent pigs from rooting under and then pushing up the wire in order to get through. In very rugged areas, such as exposed bedrock on ridge tops, instead of roll-wire, pre-welded panels are brought in and cut with bolt-cutters to fit the ground profile on site.
Implementation: Zones contain an average of 12,000 acres, a size which is proving practical to effectively hunt- out in one year in comparable work currently underway on Catalina Island. Zones will be fenced in a clockwise sequence, starting with the South SCI zone, where vegetation recovery since sheep removal threatens to close in, making it inaccessible to hunters. The whole project contains a total of approximately 45 miles of fencing. The cost per mile is estimated to be $52,000, based on experience in Hawaii and on Catalina Island. Total fencing cost is over $2 million.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 106 Draft Plan, October 2001 Installation will be preceded by fence route site survey. Separate contracts will be let for archaeological resources and for sensitive plant species. These will be used to fine-tune the fence route and identify areas for special care during implementation.
Fencing the entire South SCI Zone, the first unit, will be the most costly, at $ 728,000 for the construction contract alone, and $1,000,000 in total costs. Subsequent units will be adjacent and share existing fence lines and so will be less costly. It will be necessary to fence at least one unit per year.
Cost Estimate:
Salaries and benefits: Salaries (TNC staff support at one fifth time) $ 8,055 Benefits @ 37% 2,980 Total salaries and benefits 11,035 Contract fees: Fencing contract, approx. 7 miles, materials & labor 364,000 Total contract costs 364,000 Transport and travel: Boat and landing craft transport – materials/equipment 12,000 Helicopter transport of materials on island 18,000 Staff travel costs (flights to island, meals & lodging) 4,800 Total transport and travel costs 34,800
Direct cost subtotal 409,835 Indirect Cost Rate per NICRA* (22%) 90,165 Total cost $ 500,000
* NIRCA – Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 107 Draft Plan, October 2001 Timeline:
* indicates action proposed for CIAP funding
Timing (calendar Actions year) · Ground truth and GPS fence-line route for establishment of Summer surveys* · Initiate contracting process with archeologist for survey of fence- 2001 lines for Chumash sites and other cultural resources · Complete survey of fence-lines by archeologist · Fall Adjust fence-lines as necessary · Initiate contracting process with fencing contractor* 2001 · Complete contract for fence building* · Calculate materials needs and do logistics planning* · Begin renovation of infrastructure to accommodate fencing Winter project (housing, communications, etc) 2001-2002 · Contract for rare, sensitive, and endangered plant surveys along fence-lines
· Complete fence-line survey for plants · Adjust fence-lines as necessary and finalize route with contractor* · Transport materials, vehicles, and equipment to the island by Spring boat and landing craft for staging* · Complete infrastructure renovation to accommodate fencing 2002 crew
Summer · Helicopter materials to remote depot locations along fence lines* 2002 · Begin installation of fence for South SCI Zone* Fall · Complete installation of fence for South SCI Zone 2002 Winter · Conduct regular monitoring of fences for breaks and weather 2002-2008 damage; repair as necessary
General Budget Summary and Sources:
The Santa Cruz Island Primary Restoration Plan is the product of a multi-year collaboration between TNC and NPS, with significant input from CDFG. Implementation of the plan will begin with construction of fencing for the first of six hunting units. This would be funded under
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 108 Draft Plan, October 2001 CIAP. Funding for the remainder of the work, which will take place over seven years, is expected to come from a variety of sources. They are listed here and further described below.
(Note that Channel Islands National Park’s enabling legislation specifically permits the expenditure of federal funds on TNC’s conservation lands on Santa Cruz Island for resources management purposes.)
Funding Program Timing Use Amount & Source Coastal Impact Fall 2001 Launch $ 500,000 Assistance implementation by Program fencing largest hunting unit NPS End of year Money Apply for allocation in Complete fencing $ 500,000 Summer 2002 of first unit Natural Resources Federal Fiscal Year 2002 on, Implement hunting $ 3.5 million Challenge (Federal $498,000 for seven years component of plan budget) Line Item Construction Federal Fiscal Year 2003 on, Complete fencing $ 2.1 million Funds (Federal budget) “no-year” funding of hunting zones (up to) Nature Conservancy Ongoing participation in Plan $ 1.0 million (private fundraising) eagle removal, fox studies, implementation facilitation Fire Program Funds Fall 2002 (appx) Prescribed fire as $ 80,000 (National Park Service) part of fennel control work Natural Resources Fall 2002-03 Herbicide $ 450,000 Preservation Prog. component of (NPS) fennel control
Over 7 Years: Restoration Implementation 8.13 million Plan Total Cost
Natural Resources Challenge: A federal program designed to provide funding to National Parks specifically for control and eradication of non-native species. This allocation will begin in federal fiscal year 2002 and continue throughout the life of the project. Channel Islands National Park is one of only twenty parks nationally to be included for funding through this program in fiscal year 2002. At $498,000 per year it is the largest allocation made to any park under this program. It will be used to fund the hunting component of pig eradication, which includes infrastructure upgrades, communications equipment, contracted hunters, and contract administration.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 109 Draft Plan, October 2001 Line-Item Construction Funding: A National Park Service (NPS) program designed to fund maintenance and construction projects within NPS. This program is reserved for projects that are estimated to cost more than $500,000, and so requires projects to be of a significant scale. These funds will be used to conduct surveys for fence construction compliance, complete the construction of fenced zones and provide maintenance and monitoring support for the fences for the life of the project and possibly for partial removal of fences upon completion of the project.
The Nature Conservancy Project Funds: TNC has worked very hard in initiating and supporting this project. TNC staffed the federal compliance process for this project, has provided planning and logistics consultation, biological resource expertise, weed control techniques, and on-island support. TNC will continue to focus its efforts on this work for the duration of the project.
National Park Service Fire Program: Designed as a program for fuels management within national parks, the NPS fire program will contribute critical funds and expertise for the control of the non-native weed, fennel, an essential part of the restoration program. Fire program funds will be used to execute a prescribed fire over 1500 acres of fennel, which is required as the first step of control needed to make this area accessible for hunting pigs, actions included in the Restoration Plan.
Natural Resources Preservation Program: A second funding source for fennel control, this program would provide key dollars for the low- dose application of a selective herbicide to dense fennel areas following prescribed fire treatment. These funds will be used for the purchase and aerial application of a herbicide containing the active ingredient triclopyr. This action is also included in the Restoration Plan.
Other Contributors: In addition to hard dollars being used to implement the restoration work on Santa Cruz Island, considerable time and energy has been committed and will continue to be applied to the project by a broad array of experts. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel have consulted on pig impacts to the nine federally-listed threatened and endangered plant species. California Department of Fish and Game staff assisted with methods development and logistics consultation. University of California and California State University researchers have contributed extensive expertise on the unique resources and ecosystem processes on Santa Cruz Island.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 110 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: State Coastal Conservancy Prepared by: Steve Horn, Deputy Executive Officer Phone number: (510) 286-4157 Address: 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100 Oakland, CA 94610 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project Science Advisory Project Project location: Santa Barbara County to the International Border Total cost: $249,000 Funding request: $200,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 111 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Synopsis
The Coastal Conservancy, in conjunction with the Science Advisory Panel of the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project, proposes to do the following:
· Address critical issues that could constrain or enhance wetlands restoration efforts; · Develop a more sophisticated planning context for setting Wetlands Recovery Project priorities; · Improve wetland restoration techniques; and · Determine the most telling and cost-effective evaluation methods for wetlands projects.
Context
For the past four years, seventeen state and federal agencies have worked together under a cooperative agreement as the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project (SCWRP) to pursue restoration and long-term protection of southern California’s coastal wetlands and the watersheds that affect them. The Coastal Conservancy serves as staff to SCWRP. A Science Advisory Panel has provided guidance to the agencies on criteria for setting project priorities. Other important and active components of SCWRP include citizen taskforces in each of the five south coast counties and a public advisory committee composed of local elected officials and representatives from the business community, environmental organizations, and others. SCWRP has already established an excellent track record for accomplishing property acquisitions, preparing restoration plans, and constructing wetland improvements.
Last year, SCWRPS’s Board of Governors, led by Secretary for Resources Mary Nichols, took steps to encourage and facilitate increased participation of the science advisors, particularly in advising the Board on the scientific aspects of issues affecting wetland restoration feasibility, assisting with preparation of a regional plan, and in promoting research to fill significant gaps in knowledge of wetland ecology. To these ends, the Board endorsed the use of SCWRP funds to engage a qualified _-time aide to the science advisors, approved the selection of Dr. Stephen Weisberg as chair of the advisors, and approved a one-year work program that included assistance with the regional plan and an effort to stimulate research on public health issues affecting wetland restoration. Funds appropriated to the Coastal Conservancy for SCWRP were used to provide a grant to the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, which is directed by Dr. Weisberg, to engage the _-time assistant for one year. Funding has not yet been available to address the public health issues.
Need for Proposed Project
The feasibility of continuing to restore southern California’s coastal wetlands, the effectiveness of restoration measures, and the prudent deployment of staff and funding resources all depend upon obtaining timely and sound advice from wetland scientists. Some of the issues affecting restoration feasibility are unanswered questions about possible contribution of pathogens to beaches, threats of rampant colonization by non-native species, and the relationship between certain types of wetlands and water treatment. The first issue in particular raises questions
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 112 Draft Plan, October 2001 about public health and safety and also presents political and legal obstacles to restoring tidal action in coastal wetlands. SCWRP must engage the scientific community to design and carry out pertinent studies, help interpret the findings, and convey the findings to agencies and the public.
Certain habitat benefits of coastal wetland restoration—such as introduction of fish with the return of tidal action--are relatively easy to determine. Less easily detected benefits and adverse impacts—such as to important insects or nutrient distribution—are less clearly understood, but may also be critical for effective wetland restoration. In order to ensure that restoration funds are well-spent and that habitat is indeed effectively restored, more scientifically-sound work needs to be done to formulate cost-effective monitoring programs and restoration techniques.
Finally, the participation of the science advisors is needed in refining a SCWRP regional plan, particularly in helping identify critical stressors and restoration measures in watersheds, where the geographic scope of publicly-funded projects cannot be comprehensive and must be strategically designed.
In each of these matters affecting restoration of southern California wetlands, the science advisors to SCWRP are needed to both advise the agencies and promote pertinent, well- crafted studies by other scientists. The funds requested in this proposal would be employed to serve these needs by ensuring that a qualified part-time assistant remains available to coordinate and report on the work of the science advisors and by providing funds to support selected studies.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed project would contribute substantially to the assessment, protection, and restoration of coastal wetlands and the watersheds that affect them by enabling the seventeen SCWRP agencies to work together to establish and implement restoration priorities that are clearly based upon sound scientific principles (Goal #1). This effort would also have a clear educational and research benefit because it would yield advances in wetland science, translation of those advances into improvements in practical wetland restoration measures, and dissemination of the new information among the SCWRP taskforces and public advisory committee and the general public (Goal #3). This coordinated, public, science-based approach to resource decision-making will provide the best assurance that the state’s interest in the coastal zone will be maximized (Goal #4).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 113 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Budget and Funding Sources:
Summary of Budget
Staff assistance to Science Advisory Panel (part-time for 24 mos.) 59,000 Research and analysis 175,000 Incidental costs 15,000
Total Project Cost $249,000
Funding Sources
Coastal Conservancy (SCWRP) $ 49,000 Proposed CIAP Grant 200,000
$249,000
Project Implementation Timetable:
Staff assistance to Science Advisory Panel 24 months Research and analysis 18 months
Total implementation* 24 months
*Budget elements are for work to be undertaken concurrently
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 114 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Resources Agency, Office of the Secretary Prepared by: Melissa Miller-Henson Phone number: (916) 654-2506 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: California Element of the National Ocean Economics Project Project location: Entire California Coast Total cost: $100,000 Funding request: $100,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 163 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary
Background. The California coastline includes a diverse group of ocean-dependent economies, ranging from densely populated urban areas, such as Los Angeles in Southern California, to small rural communities, such as Bodega Bay in Northern California. These coastal economies all depend on the ocean to varying degrees. A study conducted in the early 1990s by the California Research Bureau found that seven ocean-dependent industries directly contributed just over $10 billion to the California economy and approximately $17.3 billion when taking into account indirect effects.
The California Research Bureau's Economic Assessment of Ocean-Dependent Activities remains the “only show in town” for California and is widely quoted and misquoted. As excellent and useful as it is, the study:
· needs updating, because it has been ten years since it was completed. · was only a snapshot of a single year and did not indicate trends in those sectors to assist planners in understanding the direction and status of the studied activities in any context. · covered only seven industries and in such a way that part of their values and those of other activities not covered were overlooked. · did not attempt to estimate the value of California's “ocean capital,” or stocks such as fisheries and offshore minerals, as a part of the ocean economy's contribution to the state.
Since the Research Bureau's study, we have gained additional insight and understanding of how to value the coast and ocean and have new tools and concepts to help us calculate these values more precisely and in more detail.
Proposal: Estimate California's Ocean Economy. The Secretary for Resources proposes to fund the California portion ($100,000) of a national ocean economic study to estimate the size of California's ocean economy.
This project will update the California Research Bureau study and produce estimates of California’s ocean economy that will be the envy of other coastal state planners and managers. This project will also serve as the prototype for the national model being built and, based on data availability, provide California with the following:
· The size of the California ocean economy relative to the rest of the nation. (i.e., what portion of California’s contribution to the U.S. gross domestic product is from the ocean- based economy). · Measure size and changes in California’s ocean economy over a period of 15-30 years.
If the project coordinator is able to obtain access to detailed data from the state, the project can show regional economic data for specific areas of California. Which regional boundaries are appropriate (e.g. Southern, Central, Northern; or Urban, Rural; or Marine Sanctuaries and their adjacent coastal lands) will be determined by the project coordinator in coordination with the Secretary for Resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 164 Draft Plan, October 2001
The following industries will be covered by the study: · Tourism and Recreation · Real Estate · Fisheries · Marine transportation · Ship and boat building · Coastal Construction, restoration, maintenance and repair · Offshore minerals · State government
It is expected that the following estimates will be made for each industry: · the output of each industry and its contribution to the total economy; · how many people are employed in each industry (provided there is access to state employment figures); · personal income generated from each economic activity; · how other sectors in the California economy indirectly use and depend on the ocean; · the cost of transporting goods to and from California businesses using California ports; · the availability of fresh seafood in California restaurants from local fishing efforts; and · tourism revenues derived from beach visitors and other coastal recreational activities related to clean coastal waters.
Finally, the study will attempt to estimate the value of specific fisheries, such as the salmon fishery, that represent the ocean’s capital. This final element is cutting edge and highly dependent on the availability of past data. Recent work by the National Research Council provides the conceptual framework for carrying out this valuation. Californians will be able to use the time-series data to examine historical trends and for the first time be able to weigh the needs for sustainable practices in the future.
This data will be made publicly available on the Web, both through the Resources Agency’s highly effective Internet website (the California Environmental Resources Evaluation System, or CERES) and the National Ocean Economics Project.
Consistency with Mission and One or More Goals
Mission: The California element of the National Ocean Economics Project will provide the data necessary to justify future expenditures for managing, conserving and enhancing California's valuable ocean and coastal resources for current and future generations.
Goal 1, Stewardship: This project addresses stewardship of ocean and coastal resources by arming resource managers with the economic data they need for justifying management, conservation and enhancement expenditures. The results of this project will show that California's ocean and coastal resources, if properly managed, contribute significantly to California's economy, thus arguing for effective and efficient stewardship to maintain healthy marine resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 165 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 2, Economic Sustainability: The California Research Bureau's 1995 economic assessment of seven ocean-dependent industries indicated that those industries directly and indirectly contributed $17.3 billion to the state economy in 1992, creating over 370,000 jobs that year. Those industries are largely based on the existence of clean coastal waters for swimming, healthy marine resources, sustainable fisheries, and beaches that are safe from erosion. This project will update the California Research Bureau's findings, as well as show the relative contribution California makes to the national economy. As the sixth largest economy in the world, California’s management efforts have national implications for both the environment and the economy.
Project Budget
· Economic sector information gathering $16,000 · Tourism and real estate sector staff 6,000 · Tourism and real estate sectors information gathering/data 10,000 compilation · Port and shipping sector information gathering/compilation 5,000 · Website and database development 16,000 · Project management and coordination 20,000 · Travel 4,000 · Cost to acquire EDD data 23,000 · Total $82,000
Project Timeline
The staff for this project are already in place and poised to begin work as soon as funding becomes available. The project will require 12-14 months to complete once funding is received.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 166 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development Prepared by: Steve Mason Phone number: (805) 568-2070 Address: 123 E. Anapamu, Suite 18 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: GIS Coastal Zone Enhancements Project location: Countywide Total cost: $106,000 Funding request: $106,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 175 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Planning and Development with enhance our geographic information system (GIS) and other databases in the following ways:
Digitize Santa Barbara County Coastal Plan overlays that delineate environmentally sensitive habitat areas, flood zones and view corridors. Currently this data is available in paper form only. Staff and the public will be able to access these important features through our GIS.
Link our current GIS system with the Shoreline Inventory system. The data is currently not electronically available to staff or the public. This inventory is part of a program that consists of biannual monitoring of 24 rocky intertidal sites in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura County. This information is used as a baseline assessment of the coastline rocky intertidal biological resources in the event of an oil spill. Making this data available electronically will enable more comprehensive analysis of biological resources in the County’s intertidal area.
Digitize and rectify Coastal Commission Appeals and Permit Jurisdiction boundary areas. Having these boundaries available in our GIS will allow analysis of coastal development trends.
Resource, development and habitat mapping associated with the Proposed Devereux/Ellwood Regional Open Space Plan.
Incorporate land use and permit information into our GIS system to enhance the analysis of urban runoff and ocean water quality.
The department will acquire 3d modeling software for coastal buff retreat analysis and modeling. Several areas in the County bluff retreat threatens structures.
Purchase and install GIS software to allow permitting and planning staff to access the department’s GIS resources, including the items listed above.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project is consistent with the mission by providing sound information to make land use decisions and increase the analysis of coastal resources and trends. More specifically, the project increases the information available to staff and decision-makers for the analysis of land use development applications in the coastal zone. Much of the data in our GIS system is available to the public for educational and research purposes. The department collaborates closely and shares GIS data with the University of California at Santa Barbara on research in the county’s coastal region. This project specifically addresses Goals 1, 2 and 3.
Preliminary Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 176 Draft Plan, October 2001 Review and compilation existing mapped data $11,000 GIS data conversion, programming 72,000 Software, 3d Modeling, ArcView 23,000 Total Project $106,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to one and one half years, commencing September 2001 and ending February of 2003.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 177 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: San Diego County Department: Department of Planning and Land Use Prepared by: Robert E. Asher Phone number: (858) 694-3722 Address: 5201 Ruffin Road, Suite B San Diego, CA 92123 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Geographic Information System (GIS) Support for Stormwater Permit Compliance Project location: Various/San Diego County Total cost: $296,107 Funding request: $296,107
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 178 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary: The San Diego region is composed of 18 cities, the County of San Diego as well as state, federal, and tribal lands. Recent events such as the increased number of beach closures, the size and number of fines imposed upon the local jurisdictions by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB), and the adoption (February, 2001) of the Municipal Storm Water Permit (Order No. 2001-01, NPDES N0. CAS0108758) have raised interest among the jurisdictions for improving regional water quality. The newly adopted Municipal Storm Water Permit (MSWP) and Federal Clean Water Act Section 404(b) place substantial requirements on jurisdictional agencies to mobilize and implement a myriad of programs, technologies, and resources aimed at addressing runoff issues to be completed by February 22, 2002. Also, scientists in the environmental think tank, Resources for the Future, have concluded that the new EPA water quality regulations (Clean Water Act 303 (d)) are likely to spur new improvements in water quality, but progress will be tempered by serious scientific and technical challenges. These scientists conclude that there is a need for more and better data collection regarding sources of pollution. In addition, the County of San Diego Board of Supervisors initiated Project Clean Water to provide a framework for regional commitment to protect and improve water quality. Through coordinated assessment and planning, a Regional Clean Water Strategic Plan and an Action Plan for implementation will be developed to guide solutions for clean water. Project Clean Water is an investment in San Diego's future. It serves to inspire and benefit water quality while encouraging efforts to be mutually supportive and complimentary of each other, rather than duplicative and competitive. The Stormwater Permit requires the development of several different databases in support of Permit implementation. GIS/Remote Sensing Technology can be used to highlight the areas of significant water quality impacts resulting from urban development. The scope of the project involves applying this technology to developing these useful databases. Projects of particular land use types also have greater potential to significantly impact receiving waters due to the presence of typically large amounts of pollutants on site or an increased potential for pollutants to move off site from construction and/or municipal, industrial, commercial and residential land uses. The GIS products developed through this project are intended to address the following requirements to be implemented in multiple watersheds/regions that involve coordination between numerous authorities and meet the conditions of the Permit for all Co-permittees:
Permi t Section F.2.d . Source Iden tifi catio n (Co n structi on ) requ i res each Co- pe r mitte e to deve l op a nd up date , pri o r to the rai ny seaso n, a wate r shed base d inve ntor y of all constr u ction sites w ithin its juri sdi cti on re gard l ess of site size or owne r ship . Thi s req uire m ent is app lica b le to all constr ucti o n sites re gard l ess of whe ther the constr ucti o n site is subj e ct to the Cali for ni a state w ide Gener a l NPDES Perm it for Storm Wate r Discha rg e s Associated With Co nstru ction Activiti es (her e inafter Gene ra l Con str uctio n Permi t), or oth e r ind ividu al NPDES per mi t. The use o f an auto m ated data b ase system , such as Geographical Information System (GIS) is hig hly r ecomm ende d .
Permi t Section F.3.a .(2 ) Source Iden tifi catio n (Mu n icipa l) requ i res each Co- pe r mitte e to deve l op, a nd up date annu a lly, a water sh e d based in vento ry of the name , add r ess (if ap plica bl e) , and d escri ption of all mu nici p al la nd use are as an d activities wh ich gen er a te po lluta nts. The use of a n autom ate d datab ase system, such as Geographical Information System (GIS) is hig hly r ecomm ende d .
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 179 Draft Plan, October 2001 Permit Section F.3.b.(2) Source Identification (Industrial) requires each Co-permittee to develop and update annually a watershed-based inventory of all industrial sites within its jurisdiction regardless of site ownership. This requirement is applicable to all industrial sites regardless of whether the industrial site is subject the California statewide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated With Industrial Activities, Except Construction (hereinafter General Industrial Permit) or other individual NPDES permit. The inventory shall include the following minimum information for each industrial site: name; address; and a narrative description including SIC codes which best reflects the principal products or services provided by each facility. The use of an automated database system, such as Geographical Information System (GIS) is highly recommended.
Permit Section F.3.c(2) Source Identification (Commercial) requires each Co-permittee to develop and update annually an inventory of a number of high priority threat to water quality commercial sites/sources.The use of an au toma ted da taba se system, such as Geographical Information System (GIS) i s hig hly recom m ende d .
Permit Section F.3.d.(2) Threat to Water Quality Prioritization (Residential) requires each co- permittee to identify high priority residential areas and activities. This activity also lends itself to Geographical Information System (GIS).
Section J. Watershed Urban Runoff Management Program requires each Co-permittee to collaborate with all other Co-permittees discharging urban runoff into the same watershed to d evelo p and imp l emen t a Wate rsh ed Ur ban Run off Man a geme n t Pro gram (Watershe d URM P) for the respe cti ve wa tersh ed . Each Watershed URMP shall include an accurate map of the watershed (preferably in Geographical Information System [GIS] format) that identifies all receiving waters (including the Pacific Ocean); all Clean Water Act section 303(d) impaired receiving waters (including the Pacific Ocean); land uses; MS4s, major highways; jurisdictional boundaries; and inventoried commercial, construction, industrial, municipal sites, and residential areas.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: “To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit and current generations.”
The State of California has encouraged local jurisdictions to take a watershed-based approach when addressing water quality issues. Indeed, applicants for competitive Proposition 13 funding received strong support from the regional water quality control board for development of watershed management framework plans that addressed water quality issues downstream from the source to the ocean. In addition to the watershed efforts, several jurisdictions and departments within the County of San Diego are involved in developing a plan for complying with the conditions of the Permit including, the Board of Supervisors Chief Administrative Office, Department of Environmental Health, Department of Planning and Land Use, Department of Public Works, County Counsel and Department of General Services. The GIS
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 180 Draft Plan, October 2001 function would serve as a comprehensive central bank of data information collected by each of the County departments as well as other local municipalities and Co-permittees for use in coordinating the various activities required to develop and implement watershed management plans as well as to comply with the Stormwater Permit.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve and manage California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
GIS capabilities can be utilized to assess and locate dischargers, map land uses of potential pollutant sources, problem areas, identify all needed program enhancements by area, map the inventory of County facilities and activities subject to the Permit, map water corridors, natural systems, traffic-related pollutants, post development run-off areas. Enforcement actions can be enhanced by mapping enforcement histories for various locations, tracking areas issued grading permits and mapping construction projects, and keeping an inventory of ongoing planning, implementation, enforcement and inspection activities.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
By mapping the existing uses, sensitive environmental resources, recreation areas and potential wetland enhancement areas, GIS can alleviate the cost and time spent on creating a viable plan for the watershed, determine where threats to water quality are most likely to occur and enable the County to take a proactive rather than reactive approach to maintaining an environmentally sound and sustainable program. Simply creating GIS data is not sufficient to long-term sustainability, rather, the data must be maintained regularly.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Through the use of GIS and Remote Sensing (satellite or airborne systems) information collected can be utilized for modeling physical and cultural phenomena. Research institutions, such as San Diego State University and University of California San Diego Super Computer Center have proven to be leaders in research and development. Their products can help the region achieve a coordinated and comprehensive data resource.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership: To maximize California’s interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
The State of California has encouraged local jurisdictions to take a watershed-based approach when addressing water quality issues. Indeed, applicants for competitive Proposition 13 funding received strong support from the regional water quality control board for development of watershed management framework plans that addressed water quality issues downstream from the source to the ocean. In addition to the watershed efforts, several jurisdictions and departments within the County of San Diego are involved in developing a plan for complying with the conditions of the Permit including, the Board of Supervisors Chief Administrative
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 181 Draft Plan, October 2001 Office, Department of Environmental Health, Department of Planning and Land Use, Department of Public Works, County Counsel and Department of General Services. The GIS function would serve as a comprehensive central bank of data information collected by each of the County departments as well as other local jurisdictions and Co-permittees for use in coordinating the various activities required to develop and implement watershed management plans as well as to comply with the Stormwater Permit and Clean Water Act.
Budget:
Item Cost (FY 2001) 1) Identify data needs, 2) determine data $127,920 available, 3) populate the data structure, 4) develop data updating mechanism, and 5) distribute data to other co-permittees. Equipment/Data $168,187 Total $296,107
Project Schedule:
Task Date Identify data needs 07/01/01 -- 08/01/01 Determine data that is available 08/01/01 -- 10/01/01 Develop data structure 10/01/01 -- 11/01/01 Populate data structure 11/01/01 -- 02/01/02 Develop data update mechanism 11/01/01 -- 07/01/02 Distribute data to all co-permittees 02/01/02 -- 02/22/02
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 182 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Coastal Commission, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Prepared by: William J. Douros, Superintendent and Dr. Mario N. Tamburri, Research Fellow Phone number: (831) 647-4201 Address: 299 Foam Street Monterey, CA 93940 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] Title of project: Revised Oil Wildlife Sensitivity Maps for Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Project location: Central California coast, from Marin to Cambria Total cost: $154,000 Funding request: $75,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 168 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Synopsis Reliable Environmental Sensitivity Indexes (ESI) of the abundances and distributions of resources and habitats are critical for effective management and conservation of coastal zones, especially protected areas such as the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). From data collected in 1992, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Office of Spill Preventions and Response (OSPR), published a series of ESI documents containing detailed maps of marine resources that are sensitive to oil spills for the entire California coastline. Although developed mainly for spill response, these maps have become invaluable tools for the management of California coastal environments, including the Sanctuary. However, given the dynamic nature of shorelines and biological communities, many aspects of the original maps produced nearly 10 years ago have now become outdated or unreliable. If funded, this grant would be matched with existing MBNMS funds to update and expand the current ESI database within the Sanctuary boundaries.
Background A comprehensive understanding of habitat locations and species distributions is a fundamental element of resource management and protection. In particular, complete, reliable and accessible resource maps are critical to safeguard vulnerable communities and habitats from threats and to respond effectively to disturbances. The best example of this for California coastal environments are the ESI databases and maps (Sensitivity of Coastal Environments and Wildlife to Spilled Oil) produced by California Department of Fish and Game’s OSPR program for response to oil spills. These habitat sensitivity documents identify California shoreline habitat types in 14 categories (e.g., exposed rocky cliff, gravel beach, marsh) and their associated wave and tidal energy, biological productivity and sensitivity, and ease of oil spill cleanup. The databases and maps also distinguish sensitive biological resources (birds, mammals, fish, invertebrates and plants), critical areas (including seabird nesting colonies, anadromous fish runs, marine fish spawning grounds and nursery areas, migratory whale concentration areas and calving grounds, and seal and sea lion pupping and haul-out sites), and 18 separate human-use features (e.g., aquaculture operations, archaeological and historic sites, recreational beaches). If an oil spill occurs along the California coast, this information is essential for determining potential impacts and for designing appropriate containment, cleanup and recovery measures.
The guidelines for use of Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) funds state that up to 23% will be dedicated to “public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities”. The most critical portions of the MBNMS that could be affected by oil are the southern half of the Sanctuary including the Big Sur coast. The Minerals Management Service’s own environmental analyses show that blowouts, pipeline failures and marine tanker spills from OCS activities offshore Santa Barbara County could easily affect central California. Moreover, expanded development offshore of Santa Barbara County as well as in Alaska will certainly mean more oil tanker shipments off coastal California, greatly increasing the chance of impact from spilled oil. Comprehensive, up-to-date ESI data and maps are therefore of particular importance for the Sanctuary.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 169 Draft Plan, October 2001 The value of these databases, however, goes far beyond providing the ability to respond effectively to oil spills. The MBNMS, on a nearly day-to-day basis, utilizes the existing ESI information in several ways. For example, the Sanctuary uses the existing habitat sensitivity maps in responses to other coastal accidents, such as grounded ships and untreated sewage release. Furthermore, both the MBNMS and the California Coastal Commission (CCC) often consider the information found in the existing ESI databases for their permitting process of coastal activities including shoreline development projects, low flying aircrafts, and CalTrans road slide disposal.
Statement of Problem Although extremely valuable, the existing ESI database and maps have a major limitation; several components are outdated and incomplete. Data for the original maps was collected in 1992 and published in 1994. Since then, a large portion of the shoreline has been modified due to factors such as erosion and coastal development. Biological communities are also very dynamic and many have changed considerably since 1992. For example, in the past few years a large population of Elephant seals has begun utilizing beaches at Piedras Blancas as a haul out and pupping site (much further south than previously recorded).
Furthermore, the current ESI data for California extends offshore only as far as the outer edge of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangles used during original data collection and atlas production. Therefore, important resources reaching from nearshore waters beyond the USGS plots are not fully represented in the existing ESI documents. The current trend in environmental and habitat sensitivity data development, especially during update periods, is to extend the ESI study area to at least the offshore extent of state waters, and where National Marine Sanctuaries are involved (Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Hawaii to date), offshore study areas have encompassed at least the full offshore extent of the sanctuaries.
Proposed Project
Objective 1 Update and expand both in detail and geographically (i.e., offshore) the Shoreline Habitats, Sensitive Biological Resources, and Human Use Features in the existing California Department of Fish and Game’s ESI database within the boundaries of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Objective 2 Provide updated and expanded digitized information and maps as hard copies, electronic documents, and GIS (Geographic Information System) layers that can be distributed via the Internet for use by the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, California Coastal Commission, California Department of Fish and Game, other agencies and organizations, and the general public.
Methods Shoreline classification - Because some regions of the MBNMS are fairly stable through time (e.g., granite shores of the Monterey Peninsula), while other regions are very dynamic (e.g., Big Sur landslides), the first major step in the process of updating the existing ESI database
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 170 Draft Plan, October 2001 and maps is to revise coastline positions and classifications. Most revisions will be done by photo-interpretation using current USGS digital ortho quarterquads (DOQs) and aerial infrared images of the central California coastline collected by the MBNMS in August 2000. This information will be compared with the existing ESI classification using Arc/Info software. Original digital representations of coastline position will be used for areas identified as unchanged, whereas the position of areas identified as having changed significantly will be re- digitized and mapped. Through this process, areas that will require field verification of shoreline classification will also be flagged. Overflights (at low altitude and slow air speed) and site visits for precise measurements and ground truthing (e.g., biological community types, quantitative beach profiles) will be utilized to draft final revisions on position and classification to a set of working maps.
Biological and human-use resources - The second step for updating and expanding the ESI database and maps is to evaluate the biological and human-use resources. Species, communities, habitats and human-use resources that are know to have changed, or merit addition to the ESI database, will be prioritized to identify areas of greatest need of revision. Regional scientists and managers with expertise in all components of the ESI database will then be found to help identify other resource requiring modification or addition to the existing database, and to provide the up to date information. Starting with the high priority areas, the experts will be asked to review specific locations or resources of the current ESI to: (1) identify the specific data that require revision and/or expansion, (2) edit or add information to copies of the existing maps, and (3) fill out standardized data forms with relevant information (e.g., species name, common name, population size, life history parameters, federal and/or state listed status, etc.). For example, investigators with the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO) are currently surveying and studying rockyshore intertidal and subtidal communities throughout California and Oregon to in part provide information to the MBNMS for resource management and conservation. PISCO can therefore provide valuable, detailed and comprehensive data on the current locations and species composition of algae, invertebrates and fish communities along the Sanctuary’s rockyshores. As part of this exercise, contact information for all appropriate experts, agencies and organizations included in part of the original ESI documents will also be updated and expanded.
In addition to expert surveys, specific data sets that can provide the information needed to update and expand the ESI database and maps will also be located through the Sanctuary Integrated Monitoring Network (SIMoN). Summaries of all available data on resources throughout the MBNMS were compiled as a first step in the development of SIMoN and are a convenient tool for identifying and locating existing information.
Similar to the update of shoreline classifications, some fieldwork will be required to better characterize biological and human-use resources in areas where little is currently known. This is particularly true for offshore locations and the remote coastline of Big Sur. This work will be linked closely to the efforts of the Marine Resource Surveys Related to CalTrans/Hwy 1 program also proposed by MBNMS and CCC. Therefore, shoreline classification data and direct surveys of the abundance and distribution of various biological resources (such as bird nesting sites and intertidal shellfish) by foot, air, boat or divers will be coordinated so efforts are not duplicated and so all data can be shared across program.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 171 Draft Plan, October 2001 Products and Collaborations All biological and human-use resource data edits and additions will be incorporated into the updated digitized shoreline positions and classifications to produce a comprehensive MBNMS database and a series of maps. A new ESI document containing all the information will then be produced in three formats; (1) full sized hard copies, (2) electronic versions on CD-ROM, and (3) as digital GIS data layers accessible through Arc/View and related software applications.
The primary method for distribution of the new ESI database and maps to management agencies for decision-making, to regional researchers as basic characterization data, and the general public as an educational tool on sensitive resources and habitats, will be via the Internet. The distribution of the updated and expanded ESI database and maps will be coordinated through the SIMoN effort. This MBNMS sponsored program is being initiated as a hub for integrating, synthesizing and disseminating monitoring information through various approaches including a web portal based on a GIS map of the Sanctuary with links to research and monitoring data summaries and full data sets. The electronic ESI database for the MBNMS will provide valuable basic GIS layers of habitats classifications and resources for the SIMoN program and will be directly linked to, and integrated with, larger data sets that provide extended information on various locations, species, communities and processes.
This proposed work to update and expand the current ESI will be conducted in collaboration with the California Department of Fish and Game and the California Coastal Commission. In particular, we will work directly with John Tarpley (ES IV, Supervisor, CDFG) to assure that our Sanctuary ESI database and products are built directly upon the current OSPR habitat sensitivity documents he helped design. It is also our aim to utilize this proposed effort as the first step in a three-phased approach (southern, central and northern California) by OSPR to update all coastal ESI databases and maps. Although CDFG has yet to allocate funds for ESI updates, this effort can be viewed as matching support for one third (central California) of this important statewide endeavor.
Lastly, it is important to point out that the MBNMS has already secured the funds required to address two specific components of the ESI process. The costs of resurveying and mapping sea and shorebird nesting sites and marine mammal haul out and pupping sites will be covered by Sanctuary matching support ($79,000). These funds will not only update and expand the ESI information on two important biological resources but will also consider changes to the locations and habitats they utilize (i.e., general coastal positions and classifications). The funds requested from CIAP to address other regions and resources of the Sanctuary are therefore reduced significantly.
Consistency with CIAP Mission and Goals:
This project will meet the State’s mission by developing strategies to protect California’s most valuable natural resource, its coastline, from its various threats including dramatic and pervasive oil spills. Future generations will rely upon today’s actions to protect coastal resources from threats, and by knowing the location of critical, sensitive habitats and wildlife, we can better safeguard and manage these critical resources. Therefore, Goal 1 that
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 172 Draft Plan, October 2001 mandates proper stewardship of coastal resources is met by this proposed work. Moreover, lacking such protective information, our society may be unwilling to allow development of offshore petroleum reserves, thereby exacerbating current energy crises. Thus, this effort allows Goal 2 to be met by ensuring coastal energy extraction will not place an undue burden on coastal resources. The results of this effort will also provide a valuable basic spatial framework (classifications and maps) for disseminating information through the SIMoN program to the local research community and the general public. It therefore addresses Goal 3 of advancing research and educational development. Lastly, as stated above, this project also meets the goals of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program by identifying a critical mitigation need from development of Outer Continental Shelf resources.
Timeline:
Digital classifications and field surveys 4 months
Literature reviews and expert surveys 4 months
Field surveys to characterize resources 12 months
Analysis, mapping and final products 4 months
Total time 24 months
Budget:
The funds requested will be used to hire contractors to work closely with MBNMS, CDFG and CCC staff to conduct the following components of the proposed work:
Digital classifications and mapping work $10,000
Literature reviews and expert surveys $5,000
Field surveys to classify shoreline and characterize $37,000 resources (excluding bird nesting and marine mammal haul out site)
Analysis, mapping and final products $23,000
Matching funds from the MBNMS $79,000 (to map sensitive bird and marine mammal habitats)
Total project budget $154,000
Total requested from CIAP funds $75,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 173 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Ventura County Department: General Services Agency Prepared by: David Inger, Energy Coordinator Phone number: (805) 543-5037/(805) 654-5051 Address: 800 S. Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Energy Conservation – Installation of Photovoltaic “Net Metering” Systems at 23 Fire Stations Project location: Countywide Total cost: $73,562 Funding request: $73,562
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 184 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
An important aspect of regulating offshore oil and gas development, including offshore platforms and onshore facilities, transportation, and storage activities is conservation of non- renewable resources, such as oil and gas. County staff coordinate with other regulatory agencies such as the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, California State Lands Commission, and the State Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources in order to promote environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development These issues are of key importance given California’s current energy crisis.
To promote conservation and less dependence on oil and gas resources, the County requests $73,652 to fund installation of photovoltaic (PV) systems at 23 Ventura County Fire District stations throughout Ventura County. Each system will be a “net metering” system. These systems are installed to interface with the utility (Southern California Edison) and essentially “run the meter backwards” from the solar-produced electricity during the day. If there is not enough self-generated power to meet the station’s needs, the utility will provide the difference. At night, the utility will provide the needed electricity. No on-site battery storage will be used.
Major system components include:
· 16 PV panels with a total area of approximately 170 square feet · 2000-watt dc-to ac inverter · Mounting hardware · Electrical safety components required by the local code enforcement agency and the Southern California Edison.
Based on a local solar data, each system will typically generate 12.2 kilowatt-hours (KWH) per day, or 4453 KWH per year.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This program addresses Coastal Impact Assistance Program Goals 1, 2 and 3 by funding energy conservation and the use of renewable, sustainable technologies.
The project is responsive to Goal # 1 in that use of energy conservation and renewable, sustainable technologies will conserve and help manage California’s ocean and coastal resources, specifically offshore oil and gas. It also addresses Goal #2, encouraging environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities, in that conservation of oil and gas resources promotes sound environmental practices and the sustainability of California’s coastal and oceanic resources. Specifically, this project will fund the use of energy technologies (photovoltaic) that have no adverse effects on California’s coast. Finally, the project addresses Goal #3 because it would advance energy conservation and sustainable technologies, both of which will help meet future management of our offshore energy resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 185 Draft Plan, October 2001 This project is modest yet will be important in helping solve California’s on-going electrical supply shortage. By generating power during the middle of the day, the PV systems will offset demand during the most critical time of the day. When power is more plentiful at night, electricity will be delivered by the utility. Doing away with on-site battery storage has three major benefits. First, the initial system cost is reduced by 30-50%. Second, the cost associated with battery maintenance is avoided. Third, and of great importance, batteries have a limited life and need to be treated as hazardous waste for disposal purposes. Typical batteries have significant amounts of either lead or cadmium, both of which are hazardous and toxic.
Each watt of electricity generated by renewable systems lessens the need for and reliance on fossil fuel sources, such as those derived from coastal natural gas and oil development.
There are two economic benefits from this project. First, the 23 proposed systems will produce over 100,000kWh of electricity annually. The savings to local government (at a projected cost of $0.20/kWh) will be in excess of $20,000 per year. Second, the purchase of these systems will contribute to the economic viability of the growing but still small renewable energy industry. A number of renewable energy companies are located within Ventura.
Estimated Project Budget:
Each 2-kW PV system will have an installed cost of $12,500, or a total $287,500. The California energy Commission is offering a rebate of $3.00/perwatt for PV systems. At a rated capacity of 1920 watts for each system will receive a rebate of $5,760 or $132,480 for all 23 systems. This will bring the after-rebate cost down to $155,020. The County will provide a match of $81,458 for this project.
Line Item Estimated Expense Twenty three (23) 2-kW Photovoltaic system (CIAP Funds) $73,562 County Match $81,458 Total $155,020
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last 1 year, commencing upon receipt of Coastal Impacts Assistance funds or authorization to commence the project, whichever occurs sooner.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 186 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: San Mateo County Department: Environmental Services Agency, Parks and Recreation Division Prepared by: Ross Nakasone Phone number: (650) 363-4027 Address: 455 County Center, 4th Floor Redwood City, CA 94063-1646 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Resource Assessment Project Project location: Fitzgerald Marine Reserve, San Mateo County Coast Total cost: $145,934 Funding request: $145,934
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 220 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary
Two sentence summary of the project. San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Division (County Parks), the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), with the assistance of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS), will partner to develop and implement for the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve a resource assessment project that will: · Determine the amount (if any) of resource degradation from visitation, fishing and gathering; · Propose, relative to visitation, fishing and gathering, various actions that can best protect the Reserve’s natural resources; and · Evaluate how (if at all) these actions will affect those who visit, fish and gather at Fitzgerald Marine Reserve.
Brief Description of Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. The Reserve is located along the San Mateo County coast approximately 7 miles north of the City of Half Moon Bay. With 402 acres, the Reserve is essentially a narrow, 3-mile band of shoreline consisting of intermittent beaches, coastal bluffs, and intertidal reefs, which constitute 370 of the Reserve’s 402 total acres. The DFG and San Mateo County jointly acquired the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve (Reserve) in 1969. While the Reserve was acquired as a marine life refuge, legislation was passed allowing identified marine life species that can be taken from the Reserve without a written permit from DFG. County Parks has, over time, changed the main role of the Reserve from recreational to educational. Jurisdiction above the average high tide rests with County Parks, while DFG has jurisdiction of the Reserve below the high tide line. Portions of the Reserve fall within the boundaries of GGNRA. GFNMS co- manages with MBNMS educational outreach efforts and education research on a case-by-case basis within the MBNMS boundaries off the San Mateo County coast.
The unique conditions of the Reserve (including offshore rocks, sea level rocky reefs, surge channels and mild climate) create a mosaic of habitats that foster a tremendous diversity of marine life. Past studies and monitoring efforts have recorded 164 species (or taxa) of invertebrates, 134 species of algae and marine flora (this number could double with further research), common bird species, and several mammals including harbor seals, sea lions and sea otters. One of California’s most biodiverse, intertidal regions accessible at low tide, the intertidal zone is the most popular feature for Reserve visitors. While most of the reefs are accessible only during low tide periods, the reefs receive high levels of use primarily because of the shoreline rock formation, the diversity of marine life and the close proximity to the San Francisco Bay area’s dense population centers.
Fitzgerald Marine Reserve receives 110,000 annual visitors. Up to 15,000 people may visit the Reserve each month during the peak seasonal use (spring low tides—March though May and during the summer months). Peak use tends to concentrate during low tide weekends with up to 2,000 daily visitors. School groups (elementary through college) constitute 21% of Reserve visitors.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 221 Draft Plan, October 2001 Impacts to the Intertidal Regions. Visitor use plays an important role in meeting the educational mission of the Reserve. However, many people believe visitor use is also the primary cause of the Reserve’s natural resource degradation, especially in the intertidal zone. Since preservation is the other mission of the Reserve, County Parks must balance natural resource preservation and visitor use.
A variety of human activities impact intertidal marine life. Trampling of delicate algae and invertebrates, continued illegal collection of animals, displacement of animals and turning rocks without replacement most significantly impact intertidal marine life. Fishing of near-shore marine fish and under-rock eels and abalone harvesting (abalone harvesting is currently illegal) have also removed animals from the area. The number of visitors heightens the significance of human impacts on the intertidal zone. As noted above, visitation is heaviest from March through June. During low tides on clear spring and summer days, up to 2,000 people can be found walking on top of the Moss Beach Reef, a 350 acre area that receives the Reserve’s greatest use.
No scientific study with a high degree of certainty has been conducted to determine the significance of human impacts on the intertidal zone (hence the need for this proposed assessment). However, a monitoring program instituted in 1994 indicates that biodiversity has improved in small areas on Moss Beach Reef protected from human impact. Most scientists familiar with the Reserve agree that many groups of organisms that would be expected are under-represented or absent from the intertidal biota of the unprotected parts of Moss Beach Reef. Generally, there is increased biodiversity in the protected areas. In addition, increases in invertebrate populations occur during the winter and fall months (when high tides and inclement weather lower the number of visitors on the reef). These observations support the view that human impacts adversely affect the marine intertidal community. Available catch- per-hour data for under-rock eels also indicate a decline in eel populations in the Reserve. In response to the monitoring program results, County Parks began, for the first time, development of a Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Master Plan in 1997, which is near completion. The overall goal of the Master Plan is to change the management of the Reserve from a focus on recreation to increased education and natural resource management. Increased collaboration with Federal and state resource agencies will be critical in achieving the goals of the Master Plan.
Many factors indicate a need for an assessment of the Reserves marine resources. The sensitive nature of the intertidal environment, the easily exploitable nature of harvested marine organisms, and the recent, significant reductions in sport and commercial harvest levels of near-shore fishes all raise concerns about potential deterioration of the Reserve’s marine resources and habitat. This assessment to determine the impacts of current levels of visitation, fishing and gathering on the Reserve should be undertaken.
Fitzgerald Marine Reserve Resource Assessment Project County Parks will administer the assessment. The Department of Fish and Game, GGNRA, GFNMS, MBNMS, and other possible groups will partner with County Parks to create a technical advisory committee to oversee the assessment, provide relevant expertise and advice, and detail elements of the study matter. With the assistance of the technical advisory
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 222 Draft Plan, October 2001 committee, County Parks will develop and implement for the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve a resource assessment project that will: · Determine the amount (if any) of resource degradation from visitation, fishing and gathering; · Propose, relative to visitation, fishing and gathering, various actions that can best protect the Reserve’s natural resources; and · Evaluate how (if at all) these actions will affect those who visit, fish and gather at Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. This project will provide information for future decisions regarding Reserve management and establish an information baseline for future scientific research and monitoring activities. Through this assessment, County Parks can more effectively implement the Reserve Master Plan balancing the need to protect the natural resources while preserving the needs of the public who use the Reserve. The information gathered by this assessment will be used (if warranted) to modify existing management practices at the Reserve. Because DFG has management responsibility to protect the marine resources below the high tide line, the results of this assessment must be consistently applied by both County Parks and DFG. The results of this assessment will be shared with other interested agencies and the public through (at least one) public workshop.
Assessment of the resource degradation from visitation, fishing and gathering. Assessment of resource degradation from visitation, fishing and gathering must consider the associated activities for each category. The assessment will consider visitor activities including walking on the rocky reefs (trampling algae, sea grasses, kelp and small invertebrates that anchor to the tops of the rocky reefs), turning of rocks, pollution impacts such as litter, and intentional destructive acts. Fishing and gathering related activities will also be evaluated. Activities would include the taking of marine life itself and the effect the taking has on the ecology, food chain and population vacuum it creates. The assessment will also include an impact evaluation of San Vicente Creek waters, which run into the Reserve and rocky reef areas. The creek waters could contain bacteria, sediment, and chemical runoff.
Relative to visitation, fishing and gathering, possible actions that can best protect the natural resources. While the assessment will develop a variety of proposed actions to reduce negative impacts on marine resources, current suggested actions proposed in the Draft Master Plan will also be evaluated in this resource assessment project. The assessment will consider limiting or prohibiting access, fishing and gathering on the reef as suggested in the Draft Master Plan. Based on a limited amount of data, a 1993 study assessing the impacts of visitor use on the Reserve’s marine resources concluded the “carrying capacity” of the reef to be 300-500 daily visitors. According to the study, capping the Reserve to 300-500 daily visitors would prevent further deterioration of the Reserve’s marine resources. The Reserve Resource Assessment Project, which the Coastal Impact Assistance Program could fund, will evaluate various options. Those options will likely include factors such as access restrictions in specific geographic areas, access restrictions during specific periods of time and restrictions on visitor, fishing and gathering activities (such as rock turning, walking in water-filled tidal pools, and disturbing reef animal life). As part of this analysis, the assessment will also consider ways to best control access into and within the Reserve which has several access points along its three-mile length.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 223 Draft Plan, October 2001 One of the most likely suggested proposals will be the development of an educational and interpretive program to educate visitors about the potentially negative impacts their actions can have on the marine resources at the Reserve.
Evaluation of how the proposed actions could affect visitation, fishing and gathering at the Reserve. Visitor use plays an important role in meeting the educational mission of the Reserve. Fishing and gathering also play roles in the ecology and communities that come to the Reserve. As a result, the Reserve Resource Assessment project will also evaluate the possible effects the proposed ameliorative actions could have on visitation, fishing and gathering. The assessment will detail the benefits and disadvantages of various approaches to protecting the Reserve’s marine resources and develop a preferred approach which both County Parks and DFG would implement.
Consistency with Mission and Goals
The proposed assessment is consistent with the mission and goals of the California Resources Agency. Through a coordinated effort between stakeholders including County Parks, DFG and GGNRA, this resource assessment project will serve as a basis for comprehensive, coordinated management to conserve and enhance California’s coastal resources found at the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. As noted above, County Parks has management responsibility over areas above the average high tide line, while DFG has management responsibility over waters, marine life and habitats below the high tide line. This assessment would further the mission of the California Resources Agency by ensuring County Parks and its many partners have an agreed baseline of information and suggested solutions from which to coordinate a comprehensive management plan that conserves one of California’s most biodiverse rocky reefs while protecting use for future generations.
This assessment is also consistent with the mission and goals of DFG. With the recent passage of AB 993 (1999), DFG is beginning to refocus its mission to include increased protection for marine resources as evidenced by the establishment of the new Marine Life Reserves (MLR) designation. An MLR is a marine protected area in which all extractive activities, including the taking of marine species, and possibly including other activities that upset the natural ecology functions of an area are prohibited. The Reserve’s Master Plan recommends a MLR classification when reclassification is considered.
Stewardship. This project will assist San Mateo County Parks and Recreation to better steward the Reserve. Using this comprehensive assessment of activities that degrade the Reserve’s marine resources, County Parks can better understand the impacts (both positive and negative) visiting, fishing and gathering have on the Reserve’s resources and ecosystem. The assessment will also include an evaluation of potential ameliorative actions to protect the Reserve’s marine resources. This evaluation can guide decision makers including San Mateo County, DFG, and the public in making effective and appropriate decisions about what actions can be taken to better manage the Reserve. This project will also include public workshops to
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 224 Draft Plan, October 2001 share the results of the assessment to educate visitors about the impacts their actions can have on the sensitive rocky reef environment.
Economic Sustainability. This assessment project will also consider the impacts any ameliorative actions may have on visiting, fishing and gathering. As a result, decisions makers will be able to balance the needs of protecting the marine resources of the Reserve with the potential economic impacts such actions could have on visitation, fishing and gathering. Decision makers will have the information needed to modify the existing management practices that are environmentally sound and sustainable.
Research, Education and Technology. This assessment will also advance research and educational opportunities. The data baseline of impacts on the Reserve’s marine resources can provide a foundation for future research and enable further study of the Reserve. The assessment will likely advance educational programs. Using the data created from the assessment, educational programs and interpretive efforts can explain to visitors the impact their activities can have on the Reserve and what actions they should avoid.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 225 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Ventura County Department: Resource Management Agency, Flood Control District Prepared by: Vicki Musgrove, Manager Stormwater Quality Section Phone number: (805) 654-5051 Address: 800 S. Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009-1700 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Tri-County FISH Team Project location: San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties Total cost: $21,000 Funding request: $71,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 226 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Purpose:
The purpose of the Tri-County FISH Team is to work with federal, state, and local agencies and non-governmental groups to:
· Secure funding in support of salmonid recovery and habitat enhancement, · Improve information about restoration and recovery activities, and · Enhance public understanding and support for such actions in the tri-county area.
To succeed at this goal, the Tri-County FISH Team (FISH Team) will coordinate with local groups to develop a regional restoration approach. This effort will result in a scientifically based Regional Restoration Projects Plan for the tri-county area (San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties).
Project Summary:
The FISH Team is a regional organization of federal, state, and local agencies as well as non- governmental groups that work on fishery restoration and recovery issues within San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties (the tri-county area). The FISH Team includes participation by each of the three county governments as well as municipalities, special districts, and local watershed organizations (see “Project Participants” below).
The FISH Team has established a structure that allows for public participation and technical oversight of restoration activities within the region. A nine member executive committee heads the FISH Team with three representatives from each county representing three different types of organizations: local government, local special districts, and the public. The executive committee is responsible for directing the activities of the FISH Team with input from group participants. Quarterly, a public meeting of the Tri-County FISH Team is held at which time information is shared among the participants for review and comment.
Overall, the purpose of the Tri-County FISH Team is to provide an information-sharing forum that will help the participating agencies and organizations be more effective in working towards salmonid restoration in their respective geographical areas. The FISH Team intends to accomplish this goal in a number of ways. The FISH Team provides a regional forum for exchange of information on the types of restoration activities that are already occurring in the tri-county area. This process facilitates coordination where subject areas and/or geographic areas overlap between groups and projects. The FISH Team will also provide a regional perspective for restoration actions related to threatened and endangered steelhead. By taking a regional view of the area, attention and resources can be focused in those locations where the greatest positive effect can be achieved.
The Tri-County FISH Team is currently in the process of solidifying its operating procedures and its organization. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is in process to formerly establish the group and identify current members, although additional members will be able to join at any time. The next step in the process, for which we are applying for CIAP funding, is to develop a Regional Restoration Projects Plan. The purpose of this plan is to (1) identify the
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 227 Draft Plan, October 2001 types of steelhead restoration activities that are already occurring within the region and (2) identify priority projects within the region that will facilitate steelhead recovery.
Identification of steelhead restoration activities within the region will be accomplished through an outreach program. During the formation of the Tri-County FISH Team, attempts were made to publicize the group to attract interested parties. Funding from the CIAP will be used, in part, to distribute a formal outreach letter to the numerous additional agencies and organizations who are interested and active in salmonid restoration. The tri-county area has several local watershed restoration groups that we would like to have participate in our process. In addition, outreach to the resource agencies is needed to gain their assistance in the identification, assessment, and prioritization of proposed projects.
The second part of the Regional Restoration Projects Plan calls for the identification of priority projects within the region that will facilitate steelhead recovery. A Technical Review Committee (TRC) will be established to conduct biological prioritization. The TRC will be made up of fish biologists and fishery restoration experts representing the three counties (9 total). In addition, local representatives from the resource agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service, California Department of Fish and Game, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, etc.) will be invited to participate in the technical review process. The purpose of the TRC is to (1) establish a list of biological priorities by which to rank local restoration projects and (2) rank potential local restoration projects based on the priorities.
Currently, agencies and organizations participating in the FISH Team process have a number of individual restoration projects/actions that are in progress, under development, or recommended for implementation. Some of these projects have resulted from watershed restoration planning efforts, and many of these projects have resulted from local efforts. In each case, what is typically missing is a regional approach to the needs of steelhead restoration and recovery. The purpose of the FISH Team’s TRC is to review all of the identified projects within their identified framework of biological need and ability of the project to assist in the regional recovery of the listed species. The Tri-County FISH Team understands that there are additional factors that determine whether a project will be successful, beyond merely biological factors (e.g. willingness of landowners within a watershed to support fishery restoration activities). Therefore, once the TRC has completed its biological review of proposed restoration efforts, the FISH Team will then review the projects list and adjust it as necessary based on political and sociological factors.
The Regional Restoration Projects Plan is intended to be a multi-year plan that provides a guide for funding and implementation priorities. There will be a list of projects/restoration actions that should occur in the near term (i.e. higher priority) and projects that should occur in the long term (i.e. lower priority). The FISH Team will update this plan and the TRC as needed based on changes in restoration opportunities, funding opportunities, and resource needs. This Plan will be distributed to local, state, and federal agencies for use in funding decisions and recovery planning.
In summary, the $21,000 requested, combined with the additional $25,000 requested from both Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties, will provide funding for continued operation of the Tri-County FISH Team. The next step in the FISH Team process is the development of
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 228 Draft Plan, October 2001 the multi-year Regional Restoration Projects Plan for the San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties area. The Plan will include identification of the agencies and organizations working on steelhead restoration and recovery issues within the region, identification of potential restoration actions, and a multi-year prioritization of those actions.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The efforts of the Tri-County FISH Team are consistent with both the mission of the California Impact Assistance Program and the stated goals of the program. The FISH Team has been developed to specifically facilitate the coordinated conservation and enhancement of one of California’s threatened and endangered coastal resources, the steelhead trout. In 1997, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed steelhead in the tri-county area as threatened and endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The FISH Team’s goal is restoration and recovery of the listed steelhead, which will provide for their continued existence for the benefit of future generations. The initial coordination and recovery efforts of the FISH Team are focussed on this sensitive resource. However, understanding that additional fishery resources are sensitive and may perhaps need additional protection and restoration efforts in the future, the Tri-County FISH Team will be already in place to address new species as needed in the future.
The FISH Team will foster stewardship of California’s ocean and coastal resources by coordinating local efforts to assess, conserve, and manage California’s south-central coast steelhead populations. Currently, a number of mostly uncoordinated local efforts are occurring. The FISH Team proposes to coordinate these efforts so that each can be more effective and so that the region as a whole will realize the most benefit from restoration actions. While these habitat enhancement measures are targeted at the threatened and endangered steelhead, the majority of the enhancement measures will also benefit other coastal resources both fish and wildlife. For instance, modification of passage impediments will benefit coastal lamprey migration and riparian restoration will benefit other native fish, local wildlife, and migratory bird populations. In addition, enhancing public understanding and support for maintaining and restoring salmonid populations is a priority for the FISH Team.
The Tri-County FISH Team is also interested in ensuring that our knowledge about how best to restore the threatened and endangered steelhead improves over time. The FISH Team will be a regional forum in which to share information about what restoration actions have been successful, and which have not, and why. By coordinating restoration efforts, each participating organization can benefit from the experiences of others and make their processes more effective. In addition, the FISH Team is coordinating with other regional groups in the state to share similar information. The regional structure developing within the State of California, of which the Tri-County FISH Team is a part, will provide established avenues of communication for information on the species and restoration and recovery efforts targeted at salmonids and steelhead.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 229 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Participants:
The Tri-County FISH Team is open to all those with interest in fishery restoration and recovery activities in the San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties. Additional outreach to local groups continues, however presented below is a partial list of those working with the FISH Team:
San Luis Obispo County Cambria Community Services District City of San Luis Obispo Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District County of San Luis Obispo Steelhead & Stream Recovery Coalition of the South Central California Coast Greenspace The Cambria Land Trust Land Conservancy, San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara County Cachuma Conservation Release Board: - City of Santa Barbara - Carpinteria Valley Water District - Goleta Water District - Montecito Water District City of Carpinteria City of Santa Barbara County of Santa Barbara Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District, Improvement District No. 1 Community Environmental Counsel Santa Barbara County Fish and Game Commission South Coast Watershed Alliance
Ventura County County of Ventura City of Ventura Casitas Municipal Water District United Water Conservation District Ojai Valley Land Conservancy Environmental Coalition of Ventura County Ojai Valley Sanitary District Jim Ruch Ventura County Flood Control District Matilija Coalition
Regional Associations California Conservation Corps California Trout Environmental Defense Center
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 230 Draft Plan, October 2001 Central Coast Salmon Enhancement Conception Coast Project California Native Plant Society South-Central Coast Watersheds Restoration National Marine Fisheries Service California Department of Fish and Game
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 231 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Public Works, Water Agency Prepared by: Rob Almy, Water Resources Planning Manager Phone number: (805) 568-3542 Address: 123 E. Anapamu, Suite 18 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Tri-County FISH Team Project location: Santa Barbara, Ventura, and San Luis Obispo Counties Total cost: $71,000 Funding request: $25,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 232 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
A number of local agencies and organizations within Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura Counties have been working together over the past year to enhance fishery restoration resources in the tri-county area.
In the past, the California Resources Agency has often looked to similar regional groups in the central and northern part of the state for recommendations regarding funding for salmonid restoration projects. Until the formation of the Tri-County FISH Team, there was no similar organization for the Resources Agency to look to in our part of the State.
The Resources Agency is actively seeking groups to provide watershed organization support and assistance at a regional level that can assist in the development of a scientific framework for funding priorities in future years. The purpose of the Tri-County FISH Team is to work with federal, state and local agencies and non-governmental groups to (1) secure funding in support of salmonid recovery and habitat enhancement, (2) improve information about restoration and recovery activities, and (3) enhance public understanding and support for such actions. The FISH Team has already begun to address these important goals.
To date, the Tri-County Fish Team has coordinated a number of cities, counties, local special districts, and local watershed groups to understand what types of projects are occurring in our area. Several projects were submitted from the tri-county area for funding under the recent California Coastal Salmonid Recovery Program. Individual proposal writing efforts sponsored by several participating agencies combined with advocacy provided by the group’s representative to the funding Advisory Committee resulted in numerous successful proposals from this area. A total of almost $1.5 million (11% of the total) went to projects in the tri-county area.
Currently, $25,000 is being requested by Santa Barbara County and each of the other two counties that participate in the FISH Team. The funding requested will provide the necessary resources for the Tri-County FISH Team to continue to coordinate local efforts in the region and allow the FISH Team to develop a scientifically based, long term regional restoration projects plan. This plan, updated as new projects are identified, will provide a coordinated, regional basis for implementation of restoration efforts. The plan will provide the Resources Agency, county governments, and other funding agencies with a general regional approach to fishery restoration efforts.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project is consistent with the Mission and Goals 1 and 2. It meets Goal 1 in that it will effectively assess, conserve and manage California’s coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. It meets Goal 2 in that it will encourage environmentally sound, sustainable and economically beneficial coastal resource development activities.
In addition, this proposal is consistent with the following authorized uses pursuant to HR 5548: 1. Conservation, restoration, enhancement, protection of coastal or marine habitats;
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 233 Draft Plan, October 2001 2. Addressing of watershed protection or other coastal or marine conservation needs which cross jurisdictional boundaries; and 3. Mitigation damage to fish, wildlife, or natural resources. By coordinating efforts in the region, more effective enhancement and/or restoration of steelhead habitat will occur. Specifically, by increasing funding for local recovery and enhancement programs, a greater benefit to steelhead populations will be realized sooner.
Project Budget and Schedule:
The Project budget for this project is $71,000 for 2001-2002. The $25,000 provided by this grant request will be augmented by $21,000 and $25,000 from the Counties of Ventura and San Luis Obispo respectively. These Counties are also requesting these grants from the same source from their own designated funds. The timeline for use of the funds is throughout the 2001-2002 fiscal year, or for one year commencing with authorization to expend CIAP funds, for the Tri-County FISH Team to coordinate the local salmonid restoration efforts in the region and to develop the regional salmonid restoration projects plan.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 234 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County San Luis Obispo County Department: Department of Planning and Building Prepared by: Nancy E. Rollman, AICP, Environmental Specialist Phone number: (805) 781-5008 Address: County Government Center, Rm. 310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408-2040 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project Tri-County FISH Team Project location: San Luis Obispo, Ventura, and Santa Barbara Counties Total cost: $71,000 Funding request: $25,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 235 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Tri-County FISH Team (FISH) is a regional organization of federal, state, and local agencies as well as non-governmental groups working on fishery restoration and recovery issues within the Tri-County area of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties.
The FISH Team has established a structure that allows for public participation and technical oversight of restoration activities within the region. The FISH Team is headed by a nine- member executive committee with three representatives from each county, representing: Local government, local special districts, and the public. The executive committee is responsible for directing the activities of the FISH Team with input from group participants. Quarterly, a public meeting of the Tri-County FISH Team is held at which time information is shared among the participants for review and comment.
The FISH Team intends to accomplish it’s goals in a number of ways. The FISH Team provides a regional forum for exchange of information on the types of restoration activities that are already occurring in the tri-county area. The FISH Team will also provide a regional perspective for restoration actions related to threatened and endangered steelhead.
The FISH Team is in the process of solidifying its operating procedures and its organization. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is in process to formally establish the group and identify current members. The next step in the process, for which we are applying for CIAP funding, is to develop a Regional Restoration Projects Plan. The Plan is to (1) identify the types of steelhead restoration activities that are already occurring within the region and (2) identify priority projects within the region that will facilitate steelhead recovery.
Identification of steelhead restoration activities within the region will be accomplished through an outreach program. Funding from the CIAP will be used, in part, to distribute a formal outreach letter to the numerous additional agencies and organizations who are interested and active in salmonid restoration.
The second part of the Regional Restoration Projects Plan calls for the identification of priority projects within the region that will facilitate steelhead recovery. A Technical Review Committee (TRC) will be established to conduct biological prioritization. The TRC will be made up of fish biologists and fishery restoration experts representing the three counties (9 total). In addition, local representatives from the resource agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service, California Department of Fish and Game, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, etc.) will be invited to participate in the technical review process. The purpose of the TRC is to (1) establish a list of biological priorities by which to rank local restoration projects and (2) rank potential local restoration projects based on the priorities.
Currently, agencies and organizations participating in the FISH Team process have a number of individual restoration projects/actions that are in progress, under development, or recommended for implementation. The purpose of the FISH Team’s TRC is to review all of the identified projects within their identified framework of biological need and ability of the project to assist in the regional recovery of the listed species. Once the TRC has completed its
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 236 Draft Plan, October 2001 biological review of proposed restoration efforts, the FISH Team will then review the projects list and adjust it as necessary based on political and sociological factors.
The Regional Restoration Projects Plan is intended to be a multi-year plan that provides a guide for funding and implementation priorities. There will be a list of projects/restoration actions that should occur in the near term (i.e. higher priority) and projects that should occur in the long term (i.e. lower priority). This plan will be updated by the FISH Team and the TRC as needed based on changes in restoration opportunities, funding opportunities, and resource needs. This Plan will be distributed to local, state, and federal agencies for use in funding decisions and recovery planning.
In summary, the $25,000 requested, combined with the additional $25,000 requested from both Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, will provide funding for continued operation of the Tri-County FISH Team. The next step in the process is the development of the multi-year Regional Restoration Projects Plan for the Tri-Counties area. The Plan will include identification of the agencies and organizations working on steelhead restoration and recovery issues within the region, identification of potential restoration actions, and a multi-year prioritization of those actions.
Consistency with Mission and Goals
The efforts of the Tri-County FISH Team are consistent with both the mission of the California Impact Assistance Program and the stated goals of the program. The FISH Team has been developed to specifically facilitate the coordinated conservation and enhancement of one of California’s threatened and endangered coastal resources, the steelhead trout. In 1997, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed steelhead in the Tri-County area as threatened and endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The FISH Team’s goal is restoration and recovery of the listed steelhead which will provide for their continued existence for the benefit of future generations. The initial coordination and recovery efforts of the FISH Team are focused on this sensitive resource. However, understanding that additional fishery resources are sensitive and may perhaps need additional protection and restoration efforts in the future, the Tri-County FISH Team will be already in place to address new species as needed in the future.
The FISH Team will foster stewardship of California’s ocean and coastal resources by coordinating local efforts to assess, conserve, and manage California’s south-central coast steelhead populations so that each effort can be more effective and so that the region as a whole will realize the most benefit from restoration actions. While these habitat enhancement measures are targeted at the threatened and endangered steelhead, the majority of the enhancement measures will also benefit other coastal resources both fish and wildlife. For instance, modification of passage impediments will benefit coastal lamprey migration and riparian restoration will benefit other native fish, local wildlife, and migratory bird populations. In addition, enhancing public understanding and support for maintaining and restoring salmonid populations is a priority for the FISH Team.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 237 Draft Plan, October 2001 The FISH Team is also interested in ensuring that our knowledge about how best to restore the threatened and endangered steelhead improves over time. By coordinating restoration efforts, each participating organization can benefit from the experiences of others and make their processes more effective. In addition, the FISH Team is coordinating with other regional groups in the state to share similar information. The regional structure developing within the State of California will provide established avenues of communication for information on the species and restoration and recovery efforts targeted at salmoides and steelhead.
Project Participants:
The Tri-County FISH Team is open to all those with interest in fishery restoration and recovery activities in the San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties. Additional outreach to local groups continues, however presented below is a current list of those working with the FISH Team:
Project Participant List
San Luis Obispo County Cambria Community Services District City of San Luis Obispo Central Coast Salmon Enhancement Coastal San Luis Resource Conservation District County of San Luis Obispo Greenspace, The Cambria Land Trust Steelhead & Stream Recovery Coalition of the South Central California Coast
Santa Barbara County Cachuma Conservation Release Board: - City of Santa Barbara - Carpenteria Valley Water District - Goleta Water District - Montecito Water District City of Carpenteria City of Santa Barbara Community Environmental Council Conception Coast Project County of Santa Barbara Environmental Defense Center Santa Barbara County Fish & Game Commission Santa Ynez River Water Conservation District, Improvement Dist. No. 1 South Coast Watershed Alliance
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 238 Draft Plan, October 2001 Ventura County Casitas Municipal Water District City of Ventura County of Ventura Friends of the Ventura River Ojai Valley Land Conservancy Ojai Valley Sanitary District
Regional Associations California Conservation Corps California Trout
Project Completion Schedule and Quarterly Expenditure Plan:
Grant Project Grant Mar- July- Oct- Jan- Mar- July- Amount June Sept Dec Mar June Sept 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 1 Restoration $10,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 Plan 2 Recovery $3,000 $1,500 $1,500 Activities 3 Recovery $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 Issues 4 Proposed $5,000 $2,500 $2,500 Projects 5 Priority Projects $2,000 $1,000 $1,000
Total for Fish $25,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 239 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Patricia Wolf, Regional Manager Phone number: (562) 342-7108 Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Constituent Involvement for Marine Management Project location: Los Alamitos Total cost: $75,000 Funding request: $75,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 188 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Purpose The purpose of this project is to enable the Department to meet the requirements of the Marine Life Management Act (MLMA) by facilitating broad and effective involvement of constituents in fisheries management decisions. The Department requires training and manuals for staff to develop the understanding and skills necessary for longterm effective constituent involvement and requires professional facilitation of constituent involvement activities.
Background and Problem Statement The MLMA shifted the focus of decision-making about California’s living marine resources from the Legislature to the Department and Fish and Game Commission. To ensure that commercial and recreational fishermen, conservationists, processors, scientists, and the interested public are part of the decision-making process, the MLMA mandates an active effort to involve those interests most concerned with the health of marine resources in the development and implementation of new management measures. Generally, the MLMA calls for involving “all interested parties” in making decisions [Fish and Game Code, Section 7050 (b)(7)] and disseminating accurate information on marine life and its management [FGC Section 7050 (b)(8)], emphasizes ongoing communication among the Department, the Commission, and interested parties [FGC Section 7059 (a)(1)]; encourages the State to seek the help of specialists in science and other issues [FGC Section 7059(a)(2); and recommends meetings in areas most affected by decisions [FGC Section (7059(a)(4)]. The MLMA also directs the Department and Commission to seek to improve communication, collaboration and dispute resolution activities (FGC Section (7059(b)(1)].
The Department has traditionally focused on biological issues and analyses, and generally has little experience with constituent involvement processes. In addition, the Department has historically focused on individual species and fisheries, and has not used an ecosystem approach to marine resources management. In addition, effective constituent involvement is a critical element in the development of fishery management plans, which are the primary tool for managing California’s marine resources, and in the use of an ecosystem approach for managing resources. This is a major shift in how the Department develops fishery management measures, and in how the Department manages resources in general. Department staff require training in the fundamentals of constituent involvement, including techniques for public participation, facilitation and communication; dispute and conflict management and resolution; development and coordination of advisory groups; and effective public meetings. In addition to training, the Department needs to develop standard procedures that can be referenced and used during various constituent involvement activities and processes to ensure that constituent involvement becomes a standard element in the resources management process.
Project Description This funding will enable the Department to contract with specialists to 1) train Department staff in public involvement and participation; and 2) develop and implement procedures for public involvement, including a manual for constituent involvement.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 189 Draft Plan, October 2001 Training will be accomplished through general training sessions, advanced training for lead Department staff, and consultation during actual constituent involvement activities and programs during the development of fishery management plans and the implementation of the Marine Life Management Act. This will also provide specialist expertise for the development of priority fishery management plans as mandated by the Act.
A guide or manual for constituent involvement will be developed by Department staff with guidance from the consultant that references relevant policies; identifies roles and responsibilities; identifies and explains various procedures, including receiving and responding to public input; provides examples of letters, notices, newsletters, agendas, meeting groundrules and procedures, and advisory group structure and operating principles; specifies procedures for public meetings; and addresses other elements of public participation.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: Input from constituents results in a broad array of perspectives and issues that improve comprehensive and coordinated management. Effective involvement of representative constituent interests is a critical first step toward building consensus-based solutions for management of California’s marine resources and fisheries.
Goal 1: Stewardship. Input from a broad array of stakeholders also helps the Department use an ecosystem approach to resource stewardship. Constituent involvement helps expand the management process beyond a particular fishery or an individual species to include ecosystem considerations such as forage requirements by other animals, habitat protection, and multi-species interactions.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability: Constituent involvement helps ensure that economically beneficial activities are fully considered in the management process and addressed in an environmentally sound manner by including resources users and affected parties.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology: Constituent involvement includes participation of the scientific and academic communities in the management process, and assists with cooperation between the Department and other agencies and academic institutions to identify research needs and propose collaborative solutions. Effective constituent involvement also requires public outreach and education to share information, and develop management options and management decisions in a transparent manner. Technologies such as internet access, webpage communications, and video conferencing will be explored and can help meet future needs in resource management.
Timeline:
Fall 2001 Develop contract proposals and specifications for training and consultation on constituent involvement and for guidance on development of a manual on constituent involvement methods and procedures
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 190 Draft Plan, October 2001 Jan-Feb Develop statement of work, budget, and deliverables; issue contract. 2002
Mar-May Contractor advises on development of manual on constituent involvement 2002 methods and procedures.
Mar 2002 - Contractor develops and implements training program and provides May 2003 consultation for ongoing constituent involvement programs.
June 2003 Contractor produces final report on training program.
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Contract for Constituent Involvement Training and Consultation $75,000
TOTAL $75,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 191 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: David R. Pryor, Associate Resource Ecologist Phone number: (949) 497-1421 Address: 8471 North Coast Highway Laguna Beach CA 92651 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project Crystal Cove Underwater Preserve Monitoring for Impacts Project location: Orange County - Crystal Cove State Park, Laguna Beach Total cost: $35,000 Funding request: $35,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 192 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Irvine Coast Underwater Preserve is located within Crystal Cove State Park which lies about 1 mile southeast of Newport Harbor with it’s thousands of boats. The park is one of the first rocky reef areas near the harbor and thus receives innumerable visits by recreational and commercial vessels, and their resultant impacts from anchor drops, fishing, diving, etc. This monitoring effort will follow sampling protocols established by Dr. Valencic in the 1986 Crystal Cove State Park Underwater Research Project. Under contract, Dr. Valencic conducted both cold and warm season samples of established transect lines on 4 underwater reef areas within the Underwater Preserve. He used line transects, quadrat counts, and narrated underwater video to quantify the abundance of invertebrates and fish using methodology and indicator species as the National Parks Service had used in the Channel Island System. His final report made comments on overall ecosystem health, fish abundance, man-induced impacts, and recommendations for future management of the Preserve. His data were compared to W.E. Pequegnat’s data from 1963, and inferences on abundance, diversity, and system-wide health were made. This project will use the same four reefs, their same transect lines (still in place today), and fish count methodology to generate a similar data set that can then be compared to that established in 1986. At least two years of both cold and warm water data will be collected. Additionally, specific observations on the impacts made by recreational scuba and skin divers, recreational and commercial fishing, the lobster fishery, anchor drop impacts, debris and trash including lobster traps and line will be quantified. Nearshore reef impacts potentially produced by the increases of urban runoff and an increased sediment load will be made. Analysis of species composition and abundance, kelp distribution, unusual species accounts, and urchin barrens will also be made. Contract data collection will be aided by the Department’s Dive Team. The change in data sets will be used to make recommendations to the Department for continuance, denial, or modification of the above activities. The Department can then make recommendations to the Fish and Game Commission for the exclusion of certain activities as needed for better management of the subtidal ecosystem. Recommendations can also be made to the Marine Managed Areas steering committee for a potential upgrade in the status of this Underwater Preserve. No on-going subtidal or nearshore survey work is currently being conducted by the Department of Fish and Game (Dave Parker). The Regional Water Quality Control Board has been examining bacterial levels and runoff into this Underwater Preserve and ASBS, has delivered Cease and Desist Orders to nearby landowners, but is not conducting research per se in the subtidal area. The Irvine Company has contracted Dr. Ford of UCSD to examine epibiotic abundance in the nearshore benthos at the mouths of Los Trancos, Muddy and Emerald Canyons. In coordination with the Orange County Coastkeepers, STD Industries is transplanting giant kelp sporophytes at the 30’ profile offshore of Crystal Cove and Corona del Mar.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This continuing research project will use previously collected data to assess ecosystem changes over time. With similarly-collected data sets, management decisions can be made to
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 193 Draft Plan, October 2001 better manage and conserve the valuable resources designated as an Underwater Preserve and Area of Special Biological Significance. Analysis of the change of data will be passed on to both agency interests as well as folded into the local interpretive efforts provided by the park at Crystal Cove. This project is closely aligned with the CIAP Mission statement as well as Goals 1 and 3.
Budget and Cost Estimate:
Although this project has a requested amount of $35,000, the Department will use existing State Parks Dive Team and their equipment: photography and video, underwater communications, underwater scooters, rescue boats, tanks and dive materials, as well as their trained employees to assist the contractor in collecting the necessary data. Use of this team and associated dive equipment for the number of dives necessary to collect data for two seasons in each of two years is estimated at $24,000. Spending will include the following:
· Dive equipment $8,000 · Underwater video 4,000 · Transect tapes, stakes, line, quadrants 400 · Software 550 · Computer equipment 2,000 · Field equipment 1,500 · Travel 500 · Salary and wage for collection, analysis, report 18,050
TOTAL $35,000
Timeline for Project:
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC YR1 Reestablish Reef Transects Sample Transects Data- YR2 Analysis Sample Transects Data Analysis Sample Transects Data- YR3 Analysis Sample Transects Data Analysis/Final Report
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 194 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Patricia Wolf, Regional Manager Phone number: (562) 342-7108 Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Fisheries Monitoring Infrastructure Project location: Los Alamitos Total cost: $300,000 Funding request: $355,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 195 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Purpose The purpose of this project is twofold. First, this project will evaluate the current method of collecting commercial fisheries landing data in California; review systems used by other state, federal, and Canadian fisheries agencies; and develop a new system for California commercial fisheries. This project would include a feasibility study that would satisfy State requirements for major modifications to data processing systems. Second, this project will evaluate and develop a system of monitoring recreational catches in the private (non-charter) recreational fishery segment in a comprehensive, timely and accurate manner.
Background and Problem Statement Data on commercial landings of fish and shellfish are a major, and sometimes the only, source of information on trends in fisheries and marine life populations. It is the primary information source the Department relies on to manage many fisheries.
The usefulness of the data currently being recorded is undermined by an antiquated data collection system. The existing system was developed when fisheries were typically located in specific ports, were relatively large volume and involved single species. Today California has several important fisheries that are widespread and often not associated with a particular port, that are smaller volume, and include multiple species. For example, in some fisheries, such as the nearshore fishery, landings are not made at established sites and are therefore difficult to track and to sample. In many cases, such as rockfish, the current system often does not record species specific information, which limits its usefulness for management. The current system is also based on geographic areas that are large and lack the detail and resolution needed for many management decisions. This results in a high degree of uncertainty about the accuracy of the data, which results in a loss of public confidence in the Department’s ability to manage fisheries for sustainability. Data are not readily available to the public; with increased constituent involvement, there is a heightened interest in the information that is used to make management decisions.
Accurate and timely data on recreational fisheries is also critical for effective management. The decline of several key fisheries has intensified commercial and recreational fishing for many species in California, and the need for reliable and timely information to track and control catches has increased as a result. The current system relies on a federal program that is seriously deficient in providing reliable, timely and accurate data, especially for the non-charter boat sectors of the recreational fishery. As in the commercial fishery, the uncertainty about the accuracy of the data results in a loss of public confidence in the state’s ability to manage its fisheries. Also, the Department and Commission have had to impose greater restrictions than otherwise might be necessary because this uncertainty results in a more cautious approach to management. This funding is aimed at developing a system to improve recreational catch reporting, just as proposed for reporting of commercial catches. It is focused on the private (non-charter) segment of the fishery because this is the segment that is most poorly monitored by existing federal programs, particularly in southern California which has a large private boat fleet. In addition, the Department has experience in monitoring charter boat fisheries and is in the process of evaluating how to augment federal sampling of the charter boat fishery segment.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 196 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Description:
Part 1, Commercial Fisheries Data ($230,000): Use a contract to collect the necessary background information on California’s existing data collection program, including problems, issues, limitations, and needs. Conduct a review of programs for monitoring commercial landings information operated by other states, federal agencies, and Canada to identify options, pros and cons of other programs, and elements that could be adapted to California’s commercial monitoring infrastructure. Evaluate alternative and improved technology for capturing and processing data, and options for storing and retrieving information. Make recommendations for changes to California’s commercial fisheries data collection program.
Part 2: Recreational Fisheries Data ($70,000): Use a contract to collect the necessary information on California’s existing sampling and data collection program (primarily the existing federal program) for private (non-charter) recreational fisheries, including problems, issues, limitations, and needs. Conduct a review of programs for monitoring recreational catches that are operated by other states and federal agencies, and Canada, to identify alternatives, options, pros and cons of other programs, and elements that could be adapted to California’s recreational fisheries monitoring program. Evaluate alternative and improved technology for capturing and processing data, including sampling design requirements for sampling the private (non-charter) recreational catch. Make recommendations for augmenting or replacing the current recreational fisheries sampling programs.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: This project enhances the information available for management decisions by improving fisheries monitoring and data collection. This results in more comprehensive, coordinated and timely management and improves our ability to conserve marine resources and manage fisheries in a sustainable manner.
Goal 1: Stewardship. Accurate and timely information is critical for assessing, conserving and managing ocean resources. These fishery monitoring projects will update and enhance the fisheries related information that is necessary for effective management. It addresses both commercial and recreational fisheries information.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability: Improving the data available from commercial and recreational fisheries will enhance the state’s ability to manage those activities so they are sustainable and economically viable. Recreational and commercial fisheries represent major economic opportunities and constitute a major contribution to California’s economy.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. Updating the data collection system for the commercial fisheries and improving monitoring capabilities for recreational fisheries will require the use of current technologies and will help address future resource needs. More accurate data from California’s fisheries will improve our ability to provide educational about these important activities.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 197 Draft Plan, October 2001 Timeline:
Fall 2001 Develop contract proposals specifications for commercial and recreational data systems evaluation and recommendations. Contact academic, government agencies concerning ability to implement project. Ensure that Feasibility Study Report requirements are met. If bid process is required, contract proposal process will require 60 additional days.
Jan 2002 Develop statement of work, budget, and deliverables; issue contract
Feb-Mar Contractor(s) collect information on state, federal, other state agencies and 2002 Canada to identify alternatives, options, pros and cons of other programs, and elements to adapt to this system
Jun-Jul Contractor(s) evaluate alternative and improved technology for 2002 capturing and processing data, including sampling design, and make recommendations for modifying existing fisheries data sampling and processing programs.
Aug Contractor to produce final report and present findings to Department. 2002 Project should be completed in time to address recommendations in the 2003- 2004 budget cycle.
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Contract for Commercial Fisheries Data $230,000 Contract for Recreational Fisheries Data 70,000
TOTAL $300,000
Non CIAP Funds: DFG contract management, scientific and system analysis support, based on 6 months staff time $55,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 198 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Richard Klingbeil, Program Manager Phone number: (562) 342-7108 Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Infrastructure of a Marine Life Management Act Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program (NEAP) Project location: Monterey Total cost: $700,000 Funding request: $700,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 199 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project would provide basic infrastructure and baseline information for initiating the Marine Life Management Act Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program (NEAP) operated by the Marine Region of the Department of Fish and Game. This approach to nearshore monitoring is an outgrowth of the success of pioneering pilot studies conducted by Marine Region staff over the past decade. The program would be the core of the Marine Region’s nearshore ecosystem management science and would accomplish several important objectives:
• Be a major step toward the ecosystem approach to monitoring and integrated management of the nearshore resources as mandated by the Marine Life Management Act (FGC sections 7050(b)(1) and 99.5). • Provide coastwide monitoring of the health of nearshore marine life resources, beginning with rocky reef and kelp habitat communities. The NEAP would map and monitor habitat condition as well as ecologically and economically important fish and invertebrate species. • Provide the information necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of nearshore marine life and fisheries management. • Provide the information necessary to adapt management to changing conditions. • Be a practical and cost-effective approach to providing the information needed to manage an extremely complex marine environment. • Provide the ideal means for collaborations between the Marine Region and such important non-agency nearshore ecosystem projects as PISCO (University of California, Santa Barbara; University of California, Santa Cruz; Stanford University and Oregon State University).
Components of the Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program
1) Reference Marine Protected Areas (MPA) The program will identify 4-6 existing, fully protected marine areas. SCUBA and remotely operated vehicle (ROV) surveys of ecologically and economically important rocky reef and kelp habitat species in these small, no-take areas would provide baseline information on the health of the nearshore environment and naturally occurring changes in that environment. Information from each reference MPA site will provide comparisons with other areas in the same general region of the coast where commercial and recreational use is not prohibited.
2) Survey areas outside each Reference Site Systematic surveys outside each reference MPA site will provide comparisons with the unfished sites. Comparative indices of fish and invertebrate abundance, as well as other key ecosystem features, would provide the basis for evaluating effects of fishing and for adapting management to changing conditions.
3) Program Staff Each set of study sites would have dedicated staff for science, interpretive, volunteer and outreach programs. Staffing will be accomplished through a combination of utilizing existing positions, volunteers and contracts with University of California and California State University marine academic programs. Marine Region biologists, in collaboration with biologists from several marine science institutions, will conduct the various surveys of site sets using SCUBA and ROV equipment. Program staff will also be responsible for coordination and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 200 Draft Plan, October 2001 coastwide data management and analysis. At some sites, volunteer-based docent programs will be a valuable tool for public education and Marine Region outreach.
Enforcement is critical in such a system, since poaching can easily reduce the reliability of data from MPA sites. Existing enforcement staff will be redirected to provide enforcement for these MPA sites. In addition, wherever possible, collaborative enforcement efforts will be developed with other agencies, including National Park Service and Department of Parks and Recreation.
4) Site Volunteer Programs The Marine Region will establish a volunteer coordination program to recruit and organize training for science and interpretive volunteers, working with fishermen, sport divers, and others.
5) Partnerships/Collaboration: Various researchers from the University of California; California State University/Moss Landing Marine Labs; Stanford University; Oregon State University; Boston University and the National Marine Fisheries Service are engaged in and/or planning nearshore ecosystem research that can be linked to this program. Recent discussions among various researchers has elicited significant interest in the Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program. Collaborative efforts will likely be an important outgrowth of this project and have the potential to greatly expand the scope of this program.
NEAP Elements for Which CIAP Funding Is Requested
Project funding would provide essential support and equipment for the initial nearshore ecosystem assessment program and contract services for baseline information. These elements are:
1. Nearshore habitat survey and stock density assessments This one-time SCUBA and ROV survey of the nearshore system will provide baseline information on habitat condition and stock density assessments of ecologically and economically important fish and invertebrate in rocky reef and kelp habitats.
2. SCUBA gear for Marine Region staff Department staff will participate in dive surveys of site sets.
3. ROV capability Marine Region has one existing ROV for that can be used for these surveys.
5. Enforcement Overtime Redirection of existing enforcement can be accomplished most effectively with additional funds for overtime. Enforcement of marine protected areas requires the ability to patrol and respond around the clock. In addition, on water patrol requires two officers for safety and effectiveness. In addition to cooperative enforcement efforts with other agencies, overtime funds will allow for extended patrol activity
6. Enforcement/survey vessels The Marine Region has enforcement and scientific vessels that can be used at some sites, and cooperating agencies and institutions will provide vessels at other sites.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 201 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals
Mission: The intended result of the Nearshore Ecosystem Assessment Program (NEAP) is “comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation, and enhancement of California’s” nearshore marine life resources “for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.” That language, from the Ocean Agenda, is mirrored in the Department’s mandate from the Marine Life Management Act (FGC Section 7050, etc.). The project is consistent with goals 1, 2, and 3.
Goal 1: Stewardship. The NEAP is planned to be the Marine Region’s principal science tool for assessing, conserving, and managing the nearshore ecosystem along the entire California coast, beginning with the extraordinarily important and vulnerable rocky reef and kelp habitats. The system also represents a major first step away from single-species management and toward the more ecosystem-based approach mandated in FGC Section 7050.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. Managing fisheries for sustainability, as mandated by the Marine Life Management Act (FGC sections 7056 and 99.5), is complex even with adequate information on changing oceanographic conditions, fish and shellfish populations, fishing patterns, and markets for California’s commercial fishing industry. In the nearshore environment, there is not adequate information, and there is evidence that fisheries for some species are not sustainable at recent levels of fishing effort. In the face of great uncertainty, management is constrained to be cautious to reduce the risk of long-term harm to marine life resources, and that conservative management has a great impact on recreational and commercial fishing. The NEAP is the cost effective means to provide much of the essential fishery information (FGC Section 93) needed to ensure the long-term viability of nearshore fisheries, the long-term health of the nearshore ecosystem, and long-term benefits to the non- consumptive uses of nearshore resources, including sport divers and coastal and ocean recreation and tourism.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. The NEAP, particularly the use of existing no-take reference sites, will be an ecosystem-based approach to management science that is new in marine life management in California and has been applied to marine life management in few places in the world. The approach is more familiar in terrestrial environments, and the Marine Region has field tested the basic methodology at the Big Creek reserve on the Big Sur coast. The approach represents a significant advance in applying modern natural resource science to California’s nearshore marine life resources. The NEAP offers an excellent opportunity for both the public and nearshore marine life resources to benefit from associated education and outreach programs and a volunteer research assistant program involving sport divers, fishermen, and others.
Timeline:
Fall 2001 Collaborative study design and development of methodologies; develop contracts for baseline habitat surveys and stock density assessments.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 202 Draft Plan, October 2001 January-February Order SCUBA equipment. 2002
March-July 2002 Final selection of NEAP references sites based on implementation of reserves through the Marine Life Protection Act.
August 2002 thru Conduct coastwide nearshore baseline surveys of habitat and stock November 2003 density assessments and analyze data.
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Contract Nearshore habitat survey and stock density assessments $600,000
Overtime Enforcement Overtime $50,000
Equipment Scuba gear for Marine Region Staff $50,000
TOTAL $700,000
Non-CIAP Resources:
DFG staff (various sources of funding) 4 Senior Marine Biologists (50%) 6 Associate Marine Biologist (50% to 100%) 8 Marine Biologists (100%) 12 permanent intermittent positions (100%) 1 GIS Specialist (80%)
DFG Vessels: 1 80' research vessel (Fish & Game Preservation Fund/Sportfish Restoration Act) 1 46' research vessel (FGPF) 4 18-24/” research vessels (various funding sources) 5 54' enforcement vessels (1 funded from FGPF, 4 from general fund monies) 3 24' rigid-hull enforcement/research vessels (2 funded by Monterey Bay Sanctuary; 3 funded by general fund)
Scientists, divers and office space provided by partners will account for some unknown level of additional support.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 203 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Patricia Wolf, Regional Manager Phone number: (562) 342-7108 Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Marine Life Protection Act Implementation Project location: Monterey Total cost: $372,000 Funding request: $372,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 204 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Purpose The purpose of this project is to enable the Department of Fish and Game to meet the requirements of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) by providing support for the Master Plan Team; facilitating public involvement in the development of recommendations for a preferred alternative network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs); writing, producing and distributing the draft Master Plan; developing regulations for implementation of the plan; and coordinating integration of the resulting MPAs with ongoing fisheries management. The Department requires contract funds for scientific consultation, facilitation, support, meeting facilities, and map and document production.
Background and Problem Statement The purpose of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) is to improve the array of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in California waters through the development of a comprehensive Master Plan that will guide the adoption and implementation of the Marine Life Protection program established by the act. The goals of the MLPA are to help sustain, conserve and protect marine populations and ecosystems; to help rebuild depleted marine populations; to improve recreational, educational and study opportunities; and to ensure that California’s MPAs have clearly defined objectives, effective management measures, adequate enforcement, and are based on sound scientific principles. To achieve these goals, the Department is required to conduct an evaluation of MPAs as a major tool for managing marine ecosystems and providing baseline protection for some fisheries. This includes a review of existing MPAs, recommendations for modifications to existing MPAs, and recommendations for a preferred alternative network of MPAs, including existing and newly proposed MPAs. These MPAs are to be designed and managed according to clear, conservation-based goals and guidelines that take full advantage of the multiple benefits that can be derived from marine reserves. The recommended MPA network will use a new classification system for MPAs established by the Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act.
A team of scientists and agency representatives are currently developing draft recommendations for reserves in four regions for California state waters. A series of public workshops is being planned for July and a second series of workshops with constituents representatives is planned for September to ensure public input on siting scenarios. The draft Master Plan is due to the Fish and Game Commission in January 2002, and a final plan is due to the Commission by April 2002. Adoption of the Master Plan will produce a need for regulations through the Commission. In addition, the MLPA requires the Department and Fish and Game to review all MPAs every three years and make management adjustments consistent with identified goals and objectives. Currently, the Department is meeting MLPA mandates with redirected positions and funds. Preparation of the Master Plan and implementation of the MLPA will require additional resources.
Marine reserves are rapidly gaining world-wide support as a tool to protect marine ecosystem biodiversity and to contribute to sustainable fisheries. A focused process to develop a recommendation for marine reserves around the Channel Islands is underway and expected to
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 205 Draft Plan, October 2001 be incorporated into the MLPA Master Plan. The Pacific Fishery Management Council has adopted marine reserves as a fishery management tool and will proceed with siting alternative for marine reserves for groundfish in federal waters. A national Marine Protected Area Center has been established in Santa Crus pursuant to the President’s Executive Order that encourages the use of MPAs for marine resources protection and conservation and fisheries management. In addition, MPAs are being included in the Nearshore Fishery Management Plan currently in preparation by the Department.
Project Description:
Contract funds will be used to provide scientific consultation; professional facilitation of public and constituent meetings; support for the Master Plan Team and process for Master Plan development; and costs for Master Plan Team travel, meeting rooms, postage for public mailings, and printing of maps and documents.
Scientific Consultant: A full-time scientific consultant is needed to provide technical support to the Master Plan Team and attend monthly meetings; plan and coordinate statewide meetings with the public and meeting with constituent representatives; conduct data analyses for the Master Plan Team, including socioeconomic and environmental impacts of various alternatives; coordinate and prepare the Master Plan; confer with various state and federal agencies and other experts; conduct mass mailings to obtain and disseminate relevant information; develop regulations for the Commission to implement the Master Plan recommendations for a network of MPAs; coordinate the integration of MPAs with ongoing fisheries management; and prepare for periodic review of established MPAs. This consultant will require funds for travel; a computer capable of processing maps and spatial data; a vehicle; and office furniture.
Facilitation: Professional facilitation is needed to conduct a series of public meetings and a subsequent series of representative constituent meetings to provide for meaningful advice to the Master Plan and MPLA process by commercial and recreational fishermen, divers, scientists, local communities, other interested parties and the public. This will include developing an approach for representative constituent meetings, assisting with the establishment of small constituent groups in the planning regions, and training constituent groups in building consensus recommendations.
Support: Funds are needed for a part-time support position (retired annuitant, permanent intermittent, or contract position) to arrange for meeting rooms, assist with meetings, provide logistic support to the Master Plan Team and scientific consultant, prepare documents, process mailings, and respond to inquiries.
Other costs: Funds are needed for meeting rooms (about 10 public meetings are planned for the first series, and several small constituent group meetings are planned for the second step); postage and reproduction for public mailings; printing, publication and reproduction of reports and maps; and travel for the Master Plan Team for Team meetings and participation in public and constituent meetings.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 206 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: Effective implementation of the MLPA will ensure comprehensive and coordinated development of marine protected areas (MPAs) in California waters. Under the guidance of the Master Plan, MPAs will be designed to conserve and enhance California’s ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value, and to insure the persistence of healthy ecosystems for future generations, and to manage for sustainable fisheries.
Goal 1: Stewardship. MPAs help conserve ocean and coastal resources by maintaining ecosystem integrity and conserving biodiversity. They can provide insurance against uncertainty in marine management by protecting some resources from harvest. The MLPA requires broad public involvement in the development of siting alternatives, which will foster support for reserves and ocean stewardship.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability: MPAs contribute to sustainable and economically beneficial fisheries by protecting habitat, enhancing spawning populations, increasing numbers and size of species inside reserves, and providing for spillover to fished areas.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology: MPAs advance research and education by providing areas for study that are not subject to harvest or use, which allows for a better understanding of the effects of environmental changes and the effects of fishing.
Timeline for Implementation:
NRDC is pursuing legislation to extend the timeline for implementation of the MLPA by approximately three to six months. If approved (which is expected), this would extend the deadline for the submittal of the draft Master Plan to the Commission and would allow additional time for development of MPA alternatives and public input. This would most likely affect the following timeline after the July public meetings by extending the timeline for second series of constituent meetings and other implementation steps three to six months.
May-June 2001 Small constituent group meetings on MPLA process
June 2001 Draft alternatives by Master Plan Team available for public review
July 2001 First series of about 10 facilitated public workshops along the coast.
August 2001 Master Plan Team revises network alternatives based on public input; scientific consultant analyses data. Facilitator plans second series of small group constituent meetings; develops groups, conducts training. Public mailings to disseminate information and solicit additional input.
September 2001 Second series of small constituent group meetings for review of network alternatives.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 207 Draft Plan, October 2001 October-November Development of Draft Master Plan and preliminary draft regulations. 2001
January 1, 2002 Draft Master Plan must be submitted to Fish and Game Commission (to meet this deadline, the plan will be submitted to the Commission at its December 2001 meeting).
January – March Commission regulations developed. Commission hearings, additional public comment, and appropriate modifications to Master Plan 2002
January - March Commission regulations developed. Commission hearings, 2002 additional public comment, and appropriate modifications to Master Plan.
April 1, 2002 Submit Proposed Final Master Plan to Commission. Additional plan modifications and public input as required.
July 1, 2002 Commission adopts final Master Plan and a Marine Life Protection Program based on the plan. Commission submits Master Plan and program description to the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture.
September 2002 Potential recommendations from Joint Committee on Master Plan submitted to Commission 60 days after receipt of report. Scientific consultant develops plans for periodic review of MPA
July 2002 - Scientific consultant develops plans for periodic review of MPA July 2003 network; coordinates with other Department staff on integration of MPAs with ongoing fisheries management; coordinates with PFMC on reserve development and siting for groundfish plan.
Budget and Cost Estimates:
Scientific consultant Contract - 2 years $190,000 (Base salary $65,000 per year, plus benefits and general expenses)
Facilitation (for public meetings and constituent meetings, based on $55,000 $170/hour, plus travel)
Part time Staff Services Analyst - over 2 years $40,000 (Based salary $48,000 per year, plus benefits and general expenses)
Master Plan Team Travel $12,000
Equipment (vehicle, computers, office furniture) $39,000
Meeting Rooms $20,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 208 Draft Plan, October 2001 Postage $6,000
Printing and reproduction $10,000
TOTAL $372,000
Other Non-CIAP Funding National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Funds for Scientific Consultant $70,000 and Facilitation 2001-2002 FY
DFG Contract management, staff support (part-time Senior Marine Biologist, Marine Biologist) $35,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 209 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Coastal Commission, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Prepared by: William J. Douros, Superintendent and Holly J. Price, Resource Protection Coordinator Phone number: (831) 647-4201 Address: 299 Foam Street Monterey, CA 93940 E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] Title of project: Marine Resource Surveys Related to CalTrans/Highway 1 Project location: Big Sur coast, within the MBNMS Total cost: $190,000 Funding request: $150,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 210 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and the California Coastal Commission are working closely with the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) to develop a Corridor Managment Plan along the Big Sur Coast, an important, nationally-recognized highway. Highway 1 in Big Sur is often subject to delays and closures due to storms, washouts, and rockslides, and its repair has generated controversy from business leaders, environmental groups, government agencies and local residents. The purpose of the Big Sur Coast Highway Management Plan (CHMP) is to develop sustainable strategies that ensure the safe and efficient operation of the highway while protecting the unique qualities and sensitive terrestrial and marine resources of this remarkable coastline.
CalTrans has received a grant to develop most of the management plan, however it lacks adequate funds for an essential component of the plan – a survey of marine resources along typical landslide areas and sites where CalTrans may seek to dispose of rock and soil debris onto the shoreline and into the ocean. Highway management and repair strategies, even with objectives to minimize earthwork impacts and overall disturbances, will continue to require suitable locations for depositing excess material. The handling of material at a landslide site or exporting to a suitable disposal site continues to raise concern about the potential for impacts to shoreline habitats. Evaluating shoreline habitats for sensitivity to these activities will be an essential component to determining the effects of landslide material being deposited or redistributed on or near the shoreline.
This proposal, if funded, would allow the Sanctuary, in collaboration with the Coastal Commission and Caltrans, to survey the intertidal, nearshore subtidal and sea bird and marine mammal haulout areas along the Big Sur coast. The survey would focus on those areas of coastline known or with the greatest potential to be affected by highway repairs from landslides or other storm-related events. In some places, limited data exists and would be utilized, but in other places new field work would be conducted. Data collected will include species lists, population densities, and presence of economically important, particularly sensitive and/or endangered species. The results would be produced in multiple GIS-data layers and maps for resource managers and the public. Critical, valuable areas could then be avoided in the future, and areas with low resource value that may be suitable for ocean disposal could be identified. The Sanctuary and the Coastal Commission will almost certainly be called upon to allow ocean disposal of rock and soil by CalTrans in the future, and without this essential marine resource survey, decisions would be made in a vacuum of information.
The scope of work to be conducted under this proposal is outlined below. Work would be conducted at existing active slide regions, including areas with chronic slides and areas with potential problems, and other areas where Caltrans is most likely to make disposal requests, drawing on Caltrans, State Department of Mines and Geology, and USGS to identify existing and likely future slide locations. Work would also be conducted in representative key culvert areas which are associated with slides. At the various sites, sampling would be conducted over two seasons during a one year period.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 211 Draft Plan, October 2001 1. Identify, gather, review and synthesize existing biological monitoring, substrate analyses and nearshore physical oceanographic information and research studies in the project area. 2. Identify and summarize gaps and information needs. 3. Outline criteria for selecting specific sites for shoreline assessment, based on identified data needs and Caltrans likely disposal needs. 4. Characterize and map geological substrate types at selected sites according to 5-10 categories, such as granite, boulder, sand, etc., 5. Identify and map physical factors at selected sites which may affect the sensitivity of marine biota to disposal activities, such as wave energy, relative exposure and aspect, presence of protective offshore rocks, etc., and qualitatively rank each site by physical exposure categories which could affect disposed material. 6. Within each category of representative substrate and exposure types, utilize existing limited information and new transects to characterize and map biological assemblages and patterns at selected sites in the intertidal and subtidal zones, noting abundance and diversity of algae and invertebrates. Identify and note the abundance of those species which may be particularly susceptible to disposal activities, such as the sea palm, owl limpet, etc. Field work would be conducted at low tide and from boats with SCUBA diving to survey nearshore subtidal habitats like kelp forests. 7. Characterize and map haulout sites for marine mammals and seabird nesting areas. 8. Identify and map rare and endangered species and associated habitats. 9. Rank critical and/or disposal-sensitive habitat using indices such as location, size, and quality in order of most critical to least critical; consider species and assemblages’ degree of tolerance to sediment disposal and physical factors. Display rankings on maps and in matrix form. 10. Provide marine biological site characterization in GIS format (ArcInfo/ArcView) to aid regional decision-making both in advance of and after individual slides, and make information accessible to agency partners in the Coast Highway Management Plan process.
Wherever possible, data collected under this proposal will also be coordinated and pooled with data collected at other Big Sur locations under the Sanctuary’s separate proposal to CIAP to update the oil spill sensitivity maps throughout the Sanctuary region.
This project related to coastal landslides and highway repair efforts is linked to countless other resource management agencies – in addition to the Coastal Commission and the Sanctuary who need this information, the National Marine Fisheries Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, Army Corps of Engineers, the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Game, State Parks and Recreation and County of Monterey will benefit from and rely upon this data. Moreover, the current funding for the Big Sur CHMP is also supporting technical work being performed by the US Geological Survey and UC Santa Cruz to assess landslide deposition. Staff time and ancillary support from both the Coastal Commission, Sanctuary, and Caltrans is currently extensive in evaluating disposal options, overseeing studies, and analyzing results, and this existing staff time and coordination will be continued to oversee the marine biological assessment proposed here.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 212 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals of CIAP:
This project coordinates closely with nearly a half dozen of the State of California’s largest and highest profile state agencies. As noted above, this project has at its heart extensive collaboration and partnerships involving local, State and federal agencies, local businesses and environmental groups, and is part of a much larger comprehensive highway management plan. It involves the ensured preservation of its most spectacular coastline – Big Sur, –its most popular and internationally-recognized roadway – Highway 1, and a nationally treasured ocean habitat, the Monterey Bay Sanctuary. This project will meet the CIAP’s overall mission and Goals 1, 2 and 3, by ensuring conservation and proper management of the coastal ecosystem that Highway 1 bisects along the Big Sur coastline. It will allow for proper research as to the resources and specific habitats most at risk from regular landslides and state road repair strategies. It will contribute to economic sustainability by helping agencies identify environmentally sound material disposal locations and activities so that the highway can remain open for the many businesses and residents which rely on its use. It will also ensure, by identifying the most prudent road repair and disposal strategies, that the environment, which is critical to all Big Sur area and Monterey area tourist businesses, will not be adversely affected by road repair and material disposal decisions made without adequate information on biological impacts.
Timeline:
Evaluation of existing data: 3 months
Planning and conducting field surveys over two seasons: 1 year
Data analysis, mapping and project report: 6 months
Total time: 18 months
Budget:
Contracts for literature review, boat time, field work, data analysis, $175,000 GIS mapping, report preparation, etc.
Travel for field team and consultants $5,000
Equipment and supplies $8,000
Phone, copying, etc. $2,000
Total project budget: $190,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 213 Draft Plan, October 2001 Direct Sanctuary matching funds to cover portions of bird/mammal $40,000 surveys and staff time contributed from Sanctuary, CCC and Caltrans to coordinate and oversee project
Total requested from CIAP funds: $150,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 214 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Fish and Game Prepared by: Patricia Wolf, Regional Manager Phone number: (562) 342-7108 Address: 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite C Los Alamitos, CA 90720 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project Market Squid Research Project location: La Jolla/San Diego Total cost: $75,000 Funding request: $75,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 215 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Purpose The purpose of this project is to complete research necessary for managing California’s market squid fishery. Additional research would be accomplished to develop and evaluate an escapement model for squid management. Collections of non-spawning squid, that are not available from the fishery, are necessary. Additional population modeling is required to evaluate this management approach using existing information about squid biology, population dynamics, and fishery behavior.
Background and Problem Statement Over the last decade, the market squid fishery has grown into the State’s most valuable fishery and accounts for the highest volume of landings. In the 1999-2000 season, squid landings totaled 125,000 tons (the highest on record) and about $30 million in ex-vessel value to fishermen.
However, little is known about key aspects of squid biology that are important for insuring that overfishing is avoided, ecosystem needs are addressed and the productivity of the fishery is maintained. To address these needs, the Legislature established in 1998 a moratorium on squid permits, a $2,500 fee for squid permits to fund research and management development, two advisory committees to assist the Department in squid management, and a requirement for a report to the Legislature on management recommendations by April 1, 2001. The Department has developed a fishery sampling program and a squid aging program, conducted fishery independent surveys to assess spawning habitat and squid distribution, and established contracts with universities on squid reproduction, population modeling, genetic stock structure, early life information, and egg deposition and hatching. The Fish and Game Commission has adopted interim regulations establishing weekend closures to provide uninterrupted spawning and regulations requiring shields and reduced wattage for squid lights to minimize interactions with seabirds. In consultation with the Squid Fishery Advisory Committee and the Squid Research Scientific Committee, and after several public meetings, the Department has prepared a report on management recommendations, including a restricted access program, for the squid fishery that will be presented to the Legislature as required. Beginning in April, 2001 the squid permit fee will be reduced to $400, which will not cover ongoing management costs, and cannot fund additional research.
This period of squid research and management development has occurred during a period of large changes in environmental conditions, including a major El Nino event. Squid are short- lived (less than a year), highly responsive to environmental conditions, and vary widely in availability and possible abundance. As a result of this variability, squid were largely unavailable to the fishery and researchers during a major portion of the study period. In addition, traditional fishery management models, such as biomass assessments and quotas, are generally not applicable to squid and alternative approaches are being explored and developed. Although major accomplishments have been made in the improvement of our understanding of squid biology and management needs, additional research is required to fully develop a sound management approach. Because additional research is needed, current management recommendations do not include a formal management strategy and instead
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 216 Draft Plan, October 2001 focus on keeping the fishery at current levels until this management approach can be completed.
Recent findings have estimated the potential and realized fecundity (number of eggs as an estimate of reproductive capacity) of the squid stock and the fecundity of squid in the commercial catch. Recent research has also identify escapement fecundity as a new and promising method for monitoring and managing squid. In this management approach, the fecundity of squid in the catch would be routinely estimated using measurements made by biologists sampling the catch. The Department would be able to adjust fishing effort to ensure that escapement meets the target. Additional biological information, together with population modeling and analysis, is needed to develop and test an escapement model to establish an appropriate escapement target and determine if it will be effective for managing squid in a sustainable manner.
Project description This research will be accomplished through a one-year interagency contract with the National Marine Fisheries Service and UC San Diego. It will be a cooperative project using Department of Fish and Game staff and research vessels, primarily to collect non-spawning squid from trawl surveys to complete fecundity estimates. Together with existing information from squid in the catch, additional analysis and monitoring would be done to improve precision and evaluate the method for potential bias. The first part of the effort will be focused on field collections and sample processing. The second part of the contract will be focused on data analysis, modeling, and evaluation of management for escapement.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: This research will enable the Department to fully develop an effective, longterm comprehensive management approach for market squid that is based on sound science and can ensure conservation of the important squid resource for the future.
Goal 1: Stewardship. A fully developed management strategy will allow the Department to manage squid effectively. Squid are an important forage species, and effective management will ensure that ecosystem needs are addressed.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability: Under current management, which lacks a science-based management model, the fishery will likely be capped at a recent high level to account for uncertainty about the status of the squid population and protect against overfishing. A fully developed management approach, such as an escapement model, would allow the fishery to operate at an optimal level.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. This is a research proposal that will advance our understanding of squid biology and implications for the most effective management approach to ensure sustainability of the squid resource and fishery.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 217 Draft Plan, October 2001 Timeline:
Fall 2001 Develop contract specifications for developing squid escapement model.
December - Conduct field collections and laboratory processing of samples. April 2002
May - Oct Develop modeling approach and evaluate spawning escapement 2002 management approach for squid.
Cost Estimate:
Contract $75,000
Non-CIAP Funds:
DFG staff will participate on the cruises and DFG vessels will be used to support the field collections. Funds from squid permit fees may be available, depending on the outcome of pending legislation that may affect and increase permit fees.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 218 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Steve Chase Phone number: (805) 568-2522 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Amortization Ordinance or Consolidation LCP Amendment Project location: Santa Barbara County’s South Coast Region Total cost: $390,000 Funding request: $90,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 258 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The County amended its Local Coastal Program in 1987 to consolidate onshore processing of offshore oil and gas production to two sites. Consolidation mitigates many impacts to local communities due to offshore oil and gas development. Among other things, it minimizes industrialization of the County’s south coast, which is predominately rural and offers pristine coastal views when not interrupted by large processing facilities. Consolidation also minimizes impacts to public safety and many coastal resources.
This consolidation amendment applied to all offshore oil and gas processed on the County’s south coast, but recognized the vested rights of companies that operated other existing processing facilities in this region to continue their operations within the parameters of current permits.
The County further amended its Local Coastal Program in 1991 to rezone seven non- consolidated processing sites to non-industrial uses, thereby converting the existing facilities to legal non-conforming uses. Such action is a common tool for discouraging long-term continuance of certain land uses.
Since then, all but one of the seven non-consolidated processing facilities have ceased operations and either have undergone or are currently undergoing abandonment. The sole remaining active, non-consolidated and non-conforming processing facility is situated in Ellwood, along with a marine terminal that also operates as a legal non-conforming use. This processing facility is also situated in an urbanizing area and, due to the hazardous materials inherent to such processing operations, conflicts with surrounding land uses, including a nearby resort hotel and golf course.
The County Board of Supervisors recently authorized an economic study into amortizing this facility. Essentially, the process of amortization in land-use law determines at what point the permittee has received a fair return on its investment into a legal non-conforming land use, after which the local land-use authority can terminate the use.
Since these LCP amendments took effect, demand for onshore processing capacity by offshore producers has been much lower than anticipated. One of the two consolidated processing facilities, Gaviota, has been idled since1998 with no plans to reactivate it. Accordingly, the Planning Commission took action in 2000 to initiate the removal of the consolidated processing status for that facility.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 259 Draft Plan, October 2001 Given this background, the County seeks $90,000 in Coastal Impact Assistance to undertake one of two optional projects:
(1) Draft an Amortization Ordinance, including environmental review; or (2) Amend the LCP consolidation policies to require that all new or expanded production processed in the South Coast region occurs at one consolidated site.
We have provided two alternative projects at this time because the Ellwood processing facility is located in an area subject to a pending city-hood proposal. The County would no longer have land-use authority over the Ellwood facility, should the voters of this area approve the proposed city-hood in this November’s election. In this case, the Board of Supervisors may elect to pursue option 2.
Both options described under this project qualify as authorized uses pursuant to section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548, which states: “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.” Both amortization of an aging processing facility located in an urbanizing area and updating the County’s consolidation policies to reflect current demand for processing capacity avoid and mitigate impacts of offshore oil and gas production.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project meets Goal No. 2, Economic Sustainability, by reducing the coastal lands devoted to major industrial processing facilities while still meeting the needs for onshore processing capacity to handle foreseeable offshore production.
Estimated Project Budget for Option 1 – Amortization Ordinance:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $ 35,700 Contractor (economic study) 165,000 Contractor (environmental impact report) 160,000 Noticing/Publications 1,300 Reproduction 1,000 Workshops and Hearings 5,000 County Counsel 20,000 Travel (Coastal Commission certification hearing) 2,000
TOTAL $390,000
The County has secured $300,000 from its General Fund. The economic study will be completed soon. The requested CIAP funding augments the drafting, environmental review, and hearing of the ordinance.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 260 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget for Option 2 – LCP Consolidation Amendment:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $64,400 Reproduction 1,000 Noticing/Publications 2,600 Workshops and Hearings 5,000 County Counsel 15,000 Travel (Coastal Commission certification hearing) 2,000
TOTAL $90,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last no more than 2 years upon receipt of CIAP funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 261 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Lisa Plowman Phone number: (805) 568-2025 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Carpinteria Valley Greehouse Program Project location: Carpinteria Valley Total cost: $25,000 Funding request: $20,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 262 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Carpinteria Valley is a unique rural agricultural valley along the southeast coast of Santa Barbara County. The greenhouse industry in the Carpinteria Valley has expanded significantly over the last decade, increasing nearly 22% since 1985 to approximately 15.5 million square feet. New “clusters” of greenhouses have been approved in areas of this coastal valley historically used for open field agriculture and orchards. Greenhouse development now occupies approximately 22% of the valley’s 3,400 acres of flat agricultural land.
The continued health and reasonable expansion of the greenhouse industry is a major economic asset to the Carpinteria Valley and the County. However, with the growth of the greenhouse industry, increased impacts on coastal resources have resulted. Unlike open field or orchard operations, greenhouse agriculture requires the construction of permanent structures and a substantial amount of paving and accessory structures. As the greenhouse industry has expanded, this development has resulted in a significant visual change in the rural coastal character of the valley and has raised issues related to increased traffic, flooding potential and impacts to the Carpinteria Salt Marsh. To address these concerns, the Planning and Development Department began the Carpinteria Valley Greenhouse Program in 1998 with funding through a Coastal Resources Grant.
The project is located entirely within the coastal zone and involves completing the final phase of the Carpinteria Valley Greenhouse Program. The Program will provide regulatory methods to minimize impacts to coastal resources through creation of two new agricultural zone districts and new development standards. Once complete, the Program will help to establish a reasonable balance between future greenhouse expansion, preservation of large blocks of contiguous open field agriculture, and the protection of other valuable coastal resources, including the water quality of the Carpinteria Salt Marsh, coastal streams, the ocean and local beaches, and aesthetics.
The Comprehensive Planning Division is seeking $20,000 in CIAP funding to complete staff processing of the Carpinteria Valley Greenhouse Program through the Coastal Commission adoption hearings and completion of the program, thus satisfying an implementation measure (Policy 8-5) of the county’s certified Local Coastal Program. These funds will also be used to implement the Program, by working cooperatively with the community to initiate: • funding mechanisms for a watershed management plan that will ensure improvement in surface water quality and provide for the long-term protection of the ecological functions of the Carpinteria Salt Marsh and its coastal stream tributaries; and • a monitoring program to ensure long-term coastal resource protection; and • review of mechanisms to preserve open field coastal agricultural lands in the Carpinteria Valley.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project is consistent with the stated mission by creating specific zone districts and development standards that address the impacts created by additional greenhouse development in the Carpinteria Valley. Limiting the location of future greenhouse development
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 263 Draft Plan, October 2001 to specific areas and developing a long-term management plan and monitoring program will allow for the coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of this coastal valley’s unique coastal resources. The Program is consistent with CIAP Goals 1 (Stewardship) and 2 (Economic Sustainability).
Goal 1: The Program will facilitate the County’s ability to act as steward for the significant coastal resources of the Carpinteria Valley (Carpinteria Salt Marsh, coastal streams, prime agricultural lands, coastal water quality).
Goal 2: The Program will continue to allow existing and new greenhouse development in the Valley while preserving the large tracts of agricultural land necessary for economically viable open field agricultural production.
Estimated Project Budget:
Requested CIAP Funds – Labor 1. Coastal Commission Adoption Hearings and final program publication $15,000 2. Implementation Program $ 5,000 Total Requested Funds $20,000
Planning and Development Contribution Administration $5,000
Total Budget $25,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
Commencing as soon as possible:
Staff processing through Board of Supervisor and Coastal Commission adoption hearings - 7 months
Implementation Program - 6 months
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 264 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Development Review Prepared by: Michael Draze Phone number: (805) 934-6250 Address: 624 W. Foster Road, Suite C Santa Maria, CA 93455-3623 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Thresholds Update Project location: Countywide Coastal Zone Total cost: $20,000 Funding request: $20,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 265 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Development Review Divisions (North and South) are the two primary permitting divisions within Santa Barbara County Department of Planning and Development. As such, these divisions are charged with reviewing all discretionary projects against the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the County’s general plan, local ordinances, and state law. In order to assist in the review of these projects, particularly against the requirements of CEQA, the County has established thresholds for many of the resources found in the County. Native Grasslands are discussed in the Biological Resources guidelines section of The County's Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual. These biological resource guidelines have not been updated since 1994.
Native Grasslands occur throughout Santa Barbara County, and are becoming increasingly rare in coastal areas of the south coast. They are typically dominated by stands of purple needlegrass, but other series have been described and are documented on the south coast. They include creeping ryegrass, foothill needlegrass, nodding needlegrass, purple needlegrass, and saltgrass series. All of these native grasses occur on the coastal areas of the County and some are often found in conjunction with wetlands and vernal pools, habitats that are considered environmentally sensitive habitats in the coastal plan.
The County's current threshold defines native grassland as "an area where native grassland species comprise 10 percent or more of the total relative cover." However, native grasslands that are dominated by perennial bunch grasses tend to be patchy, (i.e., the individual plants and groups of plants tend to be distributed in patches) and mapping of grasslands has proved difficult based on the existing guidelines. The County's consulting biologists have used a variety of means to estimate cover, to measure cover, and to map native grasslands. In addition, the County's significance threshold indicates that removal or severe disturbance to an isolated patch or patches of native grasses that are less than one-quarter acre in size and not part of a larger ecosystem would be considered insignificant.
There is a growing need to establish a more consistent guideline for assessing native grasslands so that conservation and protection of these areas in the coastal zone can be more effective. The County proposes to use CIAP funds to review measures that are being used by other local agencies, consult with biologists regarding appropriate mapping techniques, and revise outdated impact assessment guidelines. The desired outcome would be a better- coordinated planning process that preserves rare coastal resources.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project meets Goal No. 1, Stewardship, by better defining how the County will identify and preserve the native grasslands ecosystem that is critical to the long term health of the ocean and coastal resources. In addition, these tasks meet at least four authorized uses of CIAP funds: b) conservation of habitats; e) assessment, research, mapping and monitoring of coastal habitats; i) assistance with assessing the impacts of growth and development on coastal habitats; and, indirectly, k) conservation of wetlands.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 266 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $11,000 Contractor (Specific botanical expertise) 4,500 Reproduction/Communications 1,000 Workshops and Hearings 3,500
TOTAL $20,000
In addition to CIAP funding, the County will provide in-kind staffing and seek funding from other grants that support native grassland retention such as the Coastal Resources Grant Program administered by the California Resources Agency.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
The County estimates that this project will last approximately fifteen months including the public hearing process, beginning in the spring of 2002.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 267 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Building and Safety Division Prepared by: Kimberly McCarthy Phone number: (805) 568-2005 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Coastal Area Compliance and Enforcement Project location: South Coast Region of Santa Barbara County Total cost: $30,000 Funding request: $30,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 268 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Among other things, Santa Barbara County’s Building and Safety Division has responsibility to enforce compliance with provisions Santa Barbara County Code Chapter 35, Coastal Zoning Ordinance (Article II) throughout the county’s south coast. The Article II Zoning Ordinance is part of the California Coastal Management Plan and serves as the local regulatory vehicle to implement the requirements of the California Coastal Act.
The Building and Safety Division seeks $30,000 from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program to augment efforts in responding to reported instances of non-compliance with requirements of the Coastal Zoning Ordinance (Article II) and Coastal Development Permits with a particular emphasis on threats to water quality. Past examples of such non-compliance include unpermitted grading and/or vegetation removal within or in close proximity to riparian corridors, watercourses or wetlands, unapproved drainage systems, improper drainage termination, etc. The Division typically deals with 10 to 12 such cases annually.
The Division also plans to use this $30,000 for responding to reported instances of unpermitted construction with a particular emphasis on illegal seawalls and revetments. The Division typically deals with 2 to 3 such cases annually. The additional revenue will facilitate more timely responses to correct such unpermitted construction that adversely impacts natural coastal resources and habitats and promotes undesirable erosion.
Lastly, the Division plans to use this $30,000 to augment efforts for enforcing requirements for public access to the coast. The Division encounters an average of 2 to 3 cases each year that fall into this category.
This project qualifies under the section (e)(1) of the legislatively authorized uses of H.R. 5548, which includes activities that support the CZMA, protect coastal water quality, protect coastal habitats, monitors coastal resources, and protects/restores natural coastline protective features, including control of coastline erosion. It also assists the County with managing impacts of growth and development on coastal habitats and natural resources since such development invariably results in violations to protective regulations and permits designed to mitigate such impacts.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Responding in a timely manner to unpermitted construction of seawalls and revetments, and to non-compliance with the Coastal Zoning Ordinance and coastal development permits with a focus on coastal erosion, coastal water quality, and coastal access helps to ensure the mission of managing coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations. This project meets Goal No. 1: Stewardship.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 269 Draft Plan, October 2001 Salaries $22,500 Motor Pool 3,000 County Counsel 4,500
Total $30,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project will take three years to complete, commencing as soon as we can begin incurring CIAP expenses.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 270 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Mendocino County Department: Department of Planning and Building Services Prepared by: Ray Hall Phone number: (707) 463-4281 Address: 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1440 Ukiah CA 95482 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Comprehensive Update to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Mendocino County General Plan Project location: Mendocino County Total cost: $28,984 Funding request: $28,984
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 271 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The project is to prepare a comprehensive update to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Mendocino County General Plan. The current Element was adopted by the County Board of Supervisors in 1974 with minor revisions in 1981 to achieve consistency with the other elements (i.e., Land Use, Housing, Circulation, Safety, etc.) of the County General Plan. Changes over the past two to three decades in our society and the environment dictate that the County update its Open Space and Conservation Element.
The Open Space and Conservation Element provides policy direction regarding the preservation, conservation, development and utilization of natural resources and open space. The comprehensive update will address:
· Preservation of natural resources including, but not limited to:
(a) Areas required for the preservation of plant and animal life including habitat for fish and wildlife; and (b) Areas required for ecological and other scientific study such as rivers, streams, estuaries and wathersheds.
· Managed production of resources including but not limited to:
(a) Forest lands, range lands and agricultural lands; (b) Areas required for recharge of ground water basins; (c) Estuaries, marshes, rivers and streams which are important for the management of commercial fisheries; and (d) Areas containing major mineral deposits, including those in short supply.
· Outdoor recreation including, but not limited to:
(a) Areas of outstanding scenic, historic and cultural value; (b) Areas particularly suited for park and recreation purposes, including access to lake shores, beaches, and rivers and streams; and (c) Areas which serve as links between major recreation and open space reservations, including utility easements, banks of rivers and streams, trails and scenic highway corridors.
· Public health and safety including, but not limited to:
(a) Areas that require special management or regulation because of hazardous or special conditions such as earthquake fault zones, unstable soil areas, floodplaints, watersheds, areas presenting high fire risks, areas required for the protection of water quality and water reservoirs and areas required for the protection and enhancement of air quality; (b) Open space areas designed for fuel break and fuel reduction zones, helispots, and fire access; and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 272 Draft Plan, October 2001 (c) Location of historic natural hazards boundaries such as, inundation areas, landslide paths, debris flows, past wildfires, and earthquake faults.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 273 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed project will be a multi-year update that will be coordinated with and integrated into the County’s comprehensive effort to update the General Plan. The issues to be addressed in the Open Space and Conservation Element update will include the preservation, conservation and utilization of the County’s natural resources thereby conserving and enhancing California’s ocean and coastal resources in a comprehensive fashion.
Goal Number 1: Upon adoption by the County Board of Supervisors, the comprehensive update will provide policy direction in conserving and managing our natural resources for the next 20+ years.
Goal Number 2: The Open Space and Conservation Element will include goals, policies and implementation measures that address environmentally sound, sustainable and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal Number 3: The Update is anticipated to include an assessment of the current state of the natural/coastal resources in the County as well as public workshops and educational forums. The goals, policies and implementation measures to be included in the Update will provide the policy direction for future research, educational programs and technology developments.
In closing, funding under the CIAP will, with County funds, provide for the update of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan thereby establishing a long range, community-based and comprehensive program for the management, conservation and enhancement of our coastal resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 274 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Lisa Plowman Phone number: (805) 568-2025 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Ellwood Beach – Santa Barbara Shores Specific Plan Amendments Project location: Goleta Valley Coastline Total cost: $408,500 Funding request: $200,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 275 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The 255-acre Ellwood Beach-Santa Barbara Shores Specific Plan area is located on Ellwood Mesa, one of only two remaining undeveloped coastal terraces within the unincorporated community of Goleta, California. This coastal bluff comprises a major portion of the Devereux Creek watershed approximately _ mile upstream of Devereux Slough, and supports a diverse ecosystem of vernal pools, freshwater wetlands and riparian habitat, native grasslands, and one of the three largest Monarch butterfly over-wintering sites west of the Rockies. The area includes three properties: the Santa Barbara Shores County Park (119 acres), the privately owned Monarch Point (135 acres), and the one acre Doty property. Under the current 1995 Specific Plan, the proposed single family residential development on the Monarch Point property has the potential to alter and fragment this important coastal ecosystem.
Santa Barbara County Planning and Development is seeking $200,000 in CIAP funds to assist in the planning for and management of potential development impacts on the unique coastal resources on the Ellwood Mesa (see Attachment 1). The overall goal of the project is the conservation, preservation and restoration of significant natural resources on the Devereux Creek watershed, which is a part of the larger Devereux Slough Ecological System. The amendments include designing the park master plan on the County property, assessing the feasibility of transferring proposed development from the private Monarch Point property to the least sensitive portion of the County property, conducting environmental review, and processing of the amendments through public hearings of the County Board of Supervisors and certification by the California Coastal Commission. The Specific Plan Amendments also include a restoration planning and implementation program to identify and remove invasive non-native plant species from the vernal pool complex and riparian habitats.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The Study is consistent with the CIAP Mission and Goals. Specifically, the Study is consistent with Goal 1, Stewardship. The Specific Plan Amendments will facilitate the County’s ability to plan for the conservation and management of the Ellwood Mesa coastal resources within the coastal watershed of Devereux Slough.
Estimated Project Budget and Anticipated Project Schedule:
Project Tasks Schedule County CREF LCP Coastal Goleta Valley CIAP Total General Grant Grant Resources Land Trust REQUESTED Fund Grant Grant FUNDS (all commit- ted) Phase 1: Sp/Sum. Resource Studies 2000 Consultant 4,200 12,300 25,000 41,500 Report Costs County Staff 20,000 2,600 3,000 1,400 27,000 Review/Process Costs
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 276 Draft Plan, October 2001 Administrative 300 50 350 Costs Sub Total 24,500 14,950 3,000 26,400 68,850 Phase 2: Master Win./Sp. Park Plan 2001 Consultant 30,000 10,000 35,000 75,000 Costs County Staff 14,500 5,000 8,000 27,500 Review/Process Costs Administrative 1,000 2,000 3,000 Costs Sub Total 15,500 32,000 15,000 43,000 105,500 Phase 3: Sum./Wint Environmental er 2001 Review Consultant Cost 3,050 5,600 25,000 45,000 75,600 Consultant 4,000 10,000 14,000 T.D.R. Alternative Cost* Alternative Housing 25,000 25,000 Scenarios County Staff 2,000 31,500 33,500 Review & process costs County 5,000 5,000 Administration Costs Sub Total 3,050 6,000 5,600 116,500 153,100 Phase 4: Permit Win. '01 to Process Fall '02 Co. Staff 21,000 reports, wkshops/hearings Cost Consultant 2,000 Costs County 5,000 Administrative Costs Sub Total 28,000 28,000 Phase 5: Restoration Program County Fall 2001 12,000 Restoration Plan Cost County Staff Win. '01 to 8,000 Permit Process Sp. '02 Habitat Sp. '02 & 30,000 Restoration Sp.'03 Implementation Cost Sub Total 50,000 50,000
TOTAL: 40,000 50,000 24,000 75,000 25,000 194,500 408,500
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 277 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Steve Chase Phone number: (805) 568-2522 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Energy Conservation and Distributed Generation Project location: Santa Barbara County’s South Coast Region Total cost: $106,000 Funding request: $106,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 278 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The County requests $106,000 to enhance analysis, policy-making, flow of information, and public outreach on the nature and role of coastal energy resources offshore Santa Barbara County, relative to California’s utility problems. In doing so, the Energy Division will serve as a public information clearinghouse and coordinator on co-generation, fossil-fuel alternatives, conservation measures, and renewable energy sources. The Energy Division will also serve a coordinating, public-outreach role regarding residential and light commercial energy conservation, distributed electrical generation, transmission, and market issues.
This project qualifies as an authorized use of H.R. 5548; specifically uses prescribed in (e)(5), which includes assistance to local communities to assess, plan for and manage the impacts of growth and development on coastal or marine habitats and natural resources. The project addresses the supply-demand balance for electricity through distributed generation such as co-generation and photo-voltaic generation, and means of curbing future demand through more efficient use of energy.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project satisfies the stated mission of the State of California by identifying and promoting alternative sources of energy that do not adversely effect the intrinsic value of coastal resources. In particular, this project helps to lead the way to greater economic sustainability (Goal No. 2) by encouraging environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial sources of energy that do not adversely effect oceanic and coastal resources. Without such efforts, these coastal and oceanic resources will face a growing amount of impacts if future demand for electricity will only be solved by conventional practices, including more and more offshore oil and gas development and coastal power plants.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $19,000 Contractor on Payroll 79,417 Travel 5,000 Office Expense 2,583
TOTAL $106,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 279 Draft Plan, October 2001 Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last 1.5 years, commencing upon receipt of Coastal Impacts Assistance funds or authorization to commence the project, whichever occurs sooner.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 280 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Lisa Plowman Phone number: (805) 568-2025 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Gaviota Coast Resources Study Project location: Gaviota Coast Total cost: $50,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 281 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Gaviota Coast, a 35-mile stretch of coastline in Santa Barbara County, includes only 15% of the total Southern California coast, but about 50% of the area's remaining rural coastline. Santa Barbara County, charged with managing and permitting certain uses along the coastline, has recently initiated the Gaviota Coast Resource Study. The Study will serve as a planning tool for the public, decision-makers, and County staff as they face difficult development decisions for this unique coastal area.
The 120,000-acre Project Area stretches from Point Conception to the west to the Urban Boundary Line near Goleta on the east. While the region is largely open-space, 78% of the Project Area is in private ownership and subject to intense development pressure.
The Study assesses inventories and maps the many resources and habitats located on the Gaviota Coast to assist in both the long-term planning effort for the area and decisions on pending developments. The Study describes important resources found on the Gaviota Coast, existing land use regulations, plans and policies applicable to the area. The Study also outlines existing and potential land preservation and planning tools and reviews their potential effectiveness. An initial Geographic Information System (GIS) for the Gaviota Coast has been created to graphically depict the resource information and identify areas of high resource sensitivity.
The results of the Study will assist local citizens and the County, State and Federal Governments to plan for and manage the impacts of growth and development on coastal habitats and natural resources along the Gaviota Coast. The Comprehensive Planning Division is seeking $50,000 in CIAP funding to complete the Study and implement resource protection measures on the Gaviota Coast. The project will be completed in two phases.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The Study is consistent with the CIAP Mission and Goals. Specifically, the Study is consistent with Goal 1, Stewardship, and Goal 3, Research, Education and Technology.
Goal I: The Study will facilitate the County’s ability to function as a steward for the Gaviota Coast. The Study will assess and aid conservation and management of the region’s coastal resources and ecosystems.
Goal 3: The Study will advance the County’s research efforts by assessing and inventorying the coastal resources present on the Gaviota Coast through the development of a comprehensive GIS.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 282 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
Phase 1 Staff to complete the final draft of the Study and conduct community workshops.
Line Item Estimated Expense Labor Project Administration/staff final production $ 5,000
Services and Supplies Printing & document production $ 5,000
Phase 2 Staff to study and implement resource protection measures that may include a range of policy and ordinance amendments; public/private partnerships for resource acquisition; conservation tools; public outreach and education
Labor Project Administration and analysis $ 40,000
Total $ 50,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
Commencing upon availability of CIAP funding:
Phase 1 6 months
Public Document Release Resource Study Public Workshop(s)
Phase 2 12 months
Conservation Options - Work program development Public Outreach Conservation Models for Public/Private Partnerships Policy and Ordinance (LCP) Amendments
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 283 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Community Development Services Prepared by: Tom Hofweber Phone number: (707)268-3738 Address: 3015 H Street Eureka, CA 95501 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Humboldt Coastal Management Project location: Humboldt County Coastal Zone Total cost: $151,157 Funding request: $151,157
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 284 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The Humboldt Coastal Management Project is proposed to consist of 5 elements to conserve, restore, and protect Humboldt coastal resources:
1. Beach Management Element: $50,000
The beach and dune areas of Humboldt County contain numerous sensitive resource areas and species, including 3 State and federally listed species (Western snowy plover, beach layia, and Humboldt (menzies) wallflower). This element would assist in managing public use to ensure conservation and protection of sensitive coastal resources by the following means:
· management and maintenance of coastal parks and accessways, including: repair and maintenance of fencing, signing, and accessways; park management personnel and sheriff beach patrol; and, trash receptacles and removal. 3) educational signing and printed materials to promote conservation of coastal resources. 2) coordination of volunteer coastal stewardship programs.
2. Coastal Planning Element: $40,000
This element would provide funding for:
· for review and update of the County’s Local Coastal Program (or, matching funding if available through Coastal Commission LCP grant program). 4) participation in Humboldt Bay Interagency management planning groups. 5) coastal permitting assistance for resource management projects including wetland restoration projects, weed and vegetation management, and accessway improvements.
3. Coastal Monitoring & Mapping Element: $26,157
This element would be coordinated with local, state, and federal agencies to:
5) conduct aerial photo survey and coastal land use and habitat mapping. 6) participate in coordinated snowy plover monitoring program lead by US FWS. 7) Humboldt Bay and tributary water quality monitoring.
4. Humboldt Bay Harbor Facilities Feasibility Study: $25,000
The Humboldt Bay harbor has recently been deepened and the Harbor District has requested County participation in a study to assess the most appropriate harbor facility improvements.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 285 Draft Plan, October 2001 5. Watershed Management and Restoration Matching Funding: $10,000
Several watershed and restoration programs require matching funds. This element would provide the required local match.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Each of the proposed project elements is consistent with the State of California's established mission and one or more of the established goals. In addition, project activities will be carried out in compliance with the Coastal Impact Assistance Program Administration and Plan Development Guidance document and the authorized uses of the legislation.
1) Beach Management Element is consistent with Goal 1 Stewardship by implementing programs that conserve and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources and Goal 3 Research, Education, and Technology by carrying out education program activities on the uses of coastal and ocean resources.
2) Coastal Planning Element is consistent with Goal 1 Stewardship and Goal 2 Economic Sustainability by developing a local coastal program which is consistent with the State certified coastal zone management program which conserves and manages California's coastal resources and encourages environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial coastal resource development activities.
3) Coastal Monitoring & Mapping Element is consistent with Goals 1 & 3 by assessing and managing sensitive habitats through aerial and field surveys and monitoring.
4) Humboldt Bay Harbor Facilities Feasibility Study is consistent with Goal 2 by conducting a study that encourages environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial coastal resource development activities.
5) Watershed Management and Restoration Matching Funding is consistent which Goals 1 & 4 by supporting programs that promote watershed management and restoration such as Fish & Game SB 271 and Federal Clean Water Nonpoint Source Programs.
Timeline:
All projects will be completed within 18 months of project start.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 286 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County San Luis Obispo County Department: Department of Planning and Building Prepared by: John Hofschroer, Senior Planner Phone number: (805) 781-5980 Address: County Government Center, Rm. 310 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408-2040 E-mail: [email protected] Title of Project: Local Coastal Program Implementation Project location: San Luis Obispo County Coastal Communities Total cost: $154,510 Funding request: $154,510
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 287 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The County of San Luis Obispo - Department of Planning and Building is proposing several projects that will implement the Local Coastal Program:
1. LCP Periodic Review Tasks: Development and adoption of new policies and standards. $47,000 to prepare a comprehensive series of Local Coastal Plan amendments and environmental studies. The California Coastal Commission is currently conducting a periodic review of the county’s Local Coastal Program. The amendments may include improvements in development review procedures and adoption of additional standards for the protection of coastal resources. Topics will include public access, recreation, avoidance of coastal hazards, protection of environmentally sensitive habitats, water quality, and visual and scenic protection.
2. Update of the 4 Coastal Area Plans of the Local Coastal Program. $47,000 to help fund the effort to periodically update coastal area plans. The current LCP was adopted in 1988 and is in need of update. The focus will be on preparation of planning and environmental documents leading to public review and adoption. The county is in the process of updating the North Coast and Estero Area Plans, and developing community plans for Avila Beach and Oceano.
3. LCP Implementation Projects. The following are representative examples of specific additional projects from the existing and draft Local Coastal Program elements:
A. Cambria Open Space District feasibility. $15,000 to help explore the public acceptance and financing options of formation of a special district in the community of Cambria. The purpose of the district would be to acquire many of the substandard parcels for open areas, drainage ways, public access, habitat preservation, and pocket parks. A key component will be an opinion survey conducted by a professional consultant that will evaluate public acceptance of such an idea prior to scheduling the matter for a vote of the community. The effort also would help save the Monterey Pine Forest from being displaced by development, while reducing the potential service demands for scarce resources like domestic water.
B. The Coastal Trail. $15,510 to assess the feasibility of a Coastal Trail stretching the entire length of the county coastline. The county will work with agencies and property owners to conduct an initial feasibility study.
The purpose of the Coastal Trail is to eventually provide one continuous trail along the entire coast of the State of California. The segment in San Luis Obispo County could provide a spectacular recreational opportunity not currently available. The goal is to integrate the trail with existing trails, bikeways, parks, and potential support facilities. The trail would primarily serve hikers, bikers, and equestrians.
The Coastal Trail will require considerable cooperation and commitment from a variety of stakeholders. With general support and potential funding for the concept, a solid feasibility study and more precise plans will be necessary.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 288 Draft Plan, October 2001 C. County Coastal Access Implementation Plan. $15,000 for the county to prepare Phase II of the Coastal Access Implementation Plan. To date, the County Department of General Services has 134 lateral accessways, and approximately 30 vertical accessways. Of the County’s 30 vertical accessway, roughly 25 of these are developed for public use.
The county is currently preparing Phase I of the Coastal Access Master Plan. This plan will: (a) map existing vertical and lateral accessways owned by the County, the State, and other public agencies, (b) identify street ends that may provide coastal access, (c) review existing accessway development by site, (d) address accessways that should be maintained for habitat protection, (e) determine community/tourist needs, (f) review options for new accessways based on need, and (g) provide accessway development standards.
Phase II will develop a list of prioritized purchase and construction projects. The project would augment the Phase I Access Plan by preparing more specific studies and plans for the proposed accessways. Phase II will provide site prioritization, cost estimates, environmental studies, time lines for purchase and construction, and include seeking more funding sources. The goal is to develop these new or improved accessways on a priority basis as funding is secured. The communities affected are San Simeon, Cambria, Cayucos, Los Osos, Avila Beach, and Oceano.
D. Oceano Park Needs Assessment. $15,000 for the County Parks to develop a park and recreation needs assessment within the community of Oceano. This plan would: (a) map existing park and open space lands as well as public and quasi-public lands within the community, (b) assess community park needs (neighborhood, community, and regional) based on countywide standards, (c) review and map vacant parcels within the community for potential park/recreation sites, (d) work with other public and quasi- public land owners to determine potential public recreation/park opportunities, (e) conduct public workshops, and (f) prepare maps and final recommendations for park and recreation sites within the community of Oceano.
Consistency with Mission:
Comprehensive and Coordinated Management. San Luis Obispo County has actively pursued updating the various elements of the Certified Local Coastal Program (LCP). In addition, the California Coastal Commission recently initiated a Periodic Review of the county’s LCP. Both tasks are on-going and have required considerable coordination between the county, state, and other stakeholders such as community groups and property owners.
According to the Coastal Commission’s recent periodic review, San Luis Obispo County has been one of the most aggressive counties in accepting and developing coastal accessways. The 4 proposed projects are intended to help meet the Public Access and Recreation requirements found in the California Coastal Act and county’s LCP Policy Document, and are part of an overall coordinated plan.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 289 Draft Plan, October 2001 Conservation and enhancement of California’s Ocean and Coastal Resources for their Intrinsic Value. The California Coastal Act and the County’s LCP emphasize the need to provide coastal resource protection and public access to coastal areas. The plan update processes are essential in responding to changing environmental and community needs. The four public access, recreation, and open space projects would conserve local resources by preserving habitat. The coastal communities are home to many natural areas, forests, and wetlands where development and recreation are presently occurring. These projects provide habitat enhancement while maintaining open areas and low cost recreation.
Benefit of Current and Future Generations. San Luis Obispo County’s coastline includes some of the most sensitive resource sites in the State as well as areas that support a high tourist population. As coastal areas experience more population growth and energy development, it becomes more important that the county continue to pursue comprehensive planning. It is estimated the County’s local beaches, Montana de Oro, and Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument attract over 1.5 million visitors per year. Morro Bay Estuary provides tourism and recreation, furnishing fishing, boating, kayaking, golfing and tourist attractions. Providing open space, parks, and coastal access also benefits existing and future populations by providing recreation opportunities and potentially increasing property values.
Consistency with Goals:
Goal 1 - Stewardship. The county has committed to long range planning and environmental protection through development and adoption of many programs and plans. A major goal of the Local Coastal Program is preservation of coastal resources. In the area of public access and recreation, the County Parks Division manages over 13,000 acres of parkland and natural areas, and over 100 miles of trails. To protect sensitive species and habitat, the County uses specialists to prevent and correct problems, and to help prepare management plans. To augment maintenance and upkeep of the County’s facilities, additional monitoring is provided by adjacent neighbors through Adopt-A-Park agreements or neighborhood watch programs.
Goal 2 - Economic Sustainability. Long range planning promotes wise use of resources, healthy communities, environmental protection, and economic stability. Sound planning also promotes compact communities, preserves agriculture, and provides stable land prices. Public recreation and use in some areas are adversely affecting adjacent neighbors and existing sensitive resources. Upgrading these facilities will not only improve coastal access and local habitats, but will also increase local property values, the community’s aesthetics, and better serve the area’s tourist population.
Goal 3 - Research, Education and Technology. The proposed planning projects will help preserve opportunities for locating land suitable for development while avoiding sensitive areas such as wetlands and pine forests. The purpose of the public access and recreation projects is to provide for current needs while protecting resources.
Goal 4 - Jurisdiction and Ownership. The County of San Luis Obispo is responsible for long- range planning, resource protection, permitting, and enforcement. The county is also
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 290 Draft Plan, October 2001 responsible for development and maintenance of parks and coastal access facilities. The county has made a long-term commitment to planning and park development.
Project Completion Schedule and Cost Estimate Quarterly Expenditure Plan:
LCP Grant Project Grant Mar- July- Oct- Jan-Mar Mar- July- Amount June Sept Dec 2003 June Sept 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 1 Periodic $47,000 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 Review 2 LCP $47,000 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 $7,833 Updates 3 LCP Start- Develop Develo Public Final Adopt Projects up p Rev Plan A Cambria $15,000 $3,750 $3,750 $3,750 $3,750 Open Space B Coastal $15,510 $2,585 $2,585 $2,585 $2,585 $2,585 $2,585 Trail C Access $15,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 Plan II D Oceano $15,000 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 Parks Total $154,510
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 291 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Rosie Dyste Phone number: (805) 568-3532 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Increased Regional Planning Project location: Countywide Total cost: $50,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 292 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s 110 miles of coastline is well known for its beauty and, as a result of its topography, climate and land use patterns, exhibits a wealth and diversity of habitats including coastal wetlands, streams, nearshore reefs, native pristine plant communities, sandy beaches, bluffs, rocky headlands and sand dunes. Varied land uses along portions of the coast are also markedly prevalent including dense urban development, institutional services, industrial facilities, rural agricultural and parks and open space. As such, regional land use planning along the Santa Barbara County coastal zone is controversial involving balancing natural resource protection and urban growth issues as the coastal area of the County is an especially desirable place to live. Further complexities to the regional planning process involve public infrastructure and private property vulnerabilities to natural processes such as cliff erosion, flooding and heavy wave action that can lead to loss of valuable coastal property. In addition, protection of sensitive species habitat coupled with public access to the beach is an ongoing issue in the County, as beach areas provide critical habitat for sensitive species and receive extensive use by local residents and visitors.
This diversity of issues facing the County creates significant challenges regarding regional growth and policy development affecting coastal resources and communities. To address these challenges, Planning and Development is seeking $50,000 in CIAP funds for enhanced regional planning efforts along the coast. Specifically, the funds would be used to coordinate with other agencies on policy development affecting coastal resources and communities and to conduct interagency review of high-profile projects. Among the projects to be addressed is the long-range development plan revisions for the University of California Santa Barbara.
In particular, the funds will be used for review of coastal resource issues surrounding the implementation and buildout of the University's 1990 Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) and preliminary development efforts for a new LRDP. The University's campus straddles three major coastal estuaries and over two miles of public beach. County-University coordination on coastal resources protection, beach access, and area circulation is essential for development of the area in an ecologically sound and economically sustainable manner.
The funds would also be used for consultation with the Coastal Commission, the Coastal Conservancy, and non-governmental organizations on regional growth strategies and for solutions to protecting coastal resources that recognize existing property rights and the realities of limited funds for public acquisitions.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The Regional Planning project will ensure coordinated and comprehensive regional planning of coastal resources. By promoting interagency review and coordination on specific projects, as well as County-wide coastal policy development and resource protection measures, coastal resources will be managed comprehensively as consistent with the stated mission.
Further, the project is consistent with CIAP Goal 1, Stewardship and Goal 2, Economic Sustainability, as it will promote management of coastal resources and development activities
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 293 Draft Plan, October 2001 with the objective of achieving environmentally sound and sustainable projects for the benefit of current and future generations.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expenses Staff salaries $49,500 Travel 500 Total $50,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
Project is scheduled for implementation during calendar years 2002 – 2004.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 294 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Jeff Lindgren Phone number: (805) 568-2069 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2709 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Summerland Community Plan Implementation Project location: Southern Santa Barbara County Total cost: $20,000 Funding request: $20,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 295 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The unincorporated community of Summerland is a recreation destination for thousands of visitors each year. This rural community, located completely within the coastal zone, retains many of the characteristics of California coastal communities at the turn of the century along with fine sandy beaches and acres of sensitive habitats. The continued economic viability of the Summerland community is a major economic asset to the Santa Barbara County South Coast. However, with the popularity of the Summerland area, increased impacts on coastal resources have resulted. Unlike most coastal communities, Summerland has neither adequate parking nor adequate access to coastal recreational opportunities. To address these concerns, the Planning & Development Department and the Public Works Department have worked extensively with Summerland community members to produce a concept plan for multi- modal and aesthetic downtown improvements particularly including improved access to the California Coastal Trail, Summerland Beach and the adjacent foothills.
To provide the seed money toward implementing this concept plan and further protection of sensitive coastal resources, Planning and Development is seeking $20,000 in CIAP funds to begin designing the coastal access and recreation elements of the plan, coordinate with community leaders and Caltrans, and prepare funding applications to leverage larger capital funding sources.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project is consistent with the stated CIAP Mission and Goals by managing and improving public access to coastal resources. The project will coordinate the expansion of public access to coastal recreation. Specifically, the project is consistent with Goal 1, by facilitating the County’s ability to manage access to significant coastal resources of the Summerland area. The project is consistent with Goal 2, by continuing to allow for existing and new economic activities while preserving visual and coastal resources.
Estimated Project Budget:
The overall estimated cost for planning and capital improvements is approximately $2.5 million. The $20,000 in CIAP funding would cover staff salaries.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
Commence upon availability of CIAP funds with efforts carrying out three years to completion.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 296 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Comprehensive Planning Division Prepared by: Lisa Plowman Phone number: (805) 568-2025 Address: 123 E. Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2058 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Toro Canyon Plan Adoption and Implementation Project location: Southern Santa Barbara County Total cost: $20,000 Funding request: $20,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 297 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Comprehensive Planning Division is charged with developing, implementing, and updating the county’s General Plan and Local Coastal Program (LCP). The Toro Canyon Plan (Plan) has been prepared as a comprehensive update to both the LCP and the inland area’s General Plan for the 5950± acre unincorporated area bounded on the south by the Pacific Ocean, on the west by the areas covered by the Summerland and Montecito Community Plans, on the north by the federally-owned lands of the Los Padres National Forest, and on the east by the City of Carpinteria. The Plan has finished public hearing review by the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission and will be considered by the Board of Supervisors for final adoption at public hearings beginning in June 2001. Certification review by the California Coastal Commission, as an amendment to the county’s certified LCP, will follow the Board’s final action later in 2001 and possibly extending into 2002.
The Plan encompasses part or all of the watersheds of several coastal streams that drain from the southern slopes of the Santa Ynez Mountains, including Picay, Toro, Garrapata, Arroyo Paredon, and Santa Monica Creeks. The Plan includes new zoning designations, policies, and development standards that are designed to protect and enhance significant coastal resources in the area, including but not limited to biological habitat, agricultural uses, recreational opportunities, visual resources, and watershed values including water quality.
The Comprehensive Planning Division is seeking $20,000 in CIAP funds to assist in the final adoption and early implementation of the Plan. Specifically, the funds would be used to augment county General Fund costs in the coastal portions of Plan adoption, including preparing and disseminating Plan documents and related information to the public and affected public agencies. The funds would be used to cover county costs associated with the Coastal Commission’s certification review, final publication, and preparation of implementation and training materials and activities for both county staff and the public.
The Plan guides and regulates new development in a manner intended to preserve and enhance coastal resources, including development in watershed areas outside the State Coastal Zone that drain into terrestrial Coastal Zone and marine ecosystems. This encompasses many of the authorized uses identified in H.R. 5548.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The adoption and implementation of the Toro Canyon Plan promotes the stated mission by providing better guidance and regulation of development that affects coastal resources and ecosystems. This promotes Goals 1 (Stewardship), 2 (Economic Sustainability), and 3 (Research, Education and Technology).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 298 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages & benefits) $15,000 Noticing expenses (postage & advertising) 2,000 Reprographics 2,000 Travel to Coastal Commission hearing(s) 1,000 TOTAL $20,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
The Coastal Commission hearing(s) is expected to take place in Fall/Winter 2001/2002. Staff training on Plan implementation will take place between November 2001 and June 2002. Final document preparation and dissemination will take place from March to June 2002.
Activity Schedule Final Draft Document Publication September - November 2001 Coastal Commission Hearing(s) November - March 2001/2002 Staff Training on Plan Implementation November - June 2001/2002 Final Document preparation and March - June 2002 dissemination
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 299 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Prepared by: Will Travis, Executive Director Phone number: (415) 352-3653 Address: 50 California Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94111 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Regulatory Assistance and Bay Management Partnerships Project location: San Francisco Bay Region Total cost: $200,000 Funding request: $200,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 241 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) requests $300,000 in Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) funding to be used for: (1) consultant and professional services needed by BCDC to carry out its enforcement and permit responsibilities; (2) consultant and professional services needed to participate in management partnerships that address critical issues facing the Bay; and (3) associated administrative overhead costs. This proposal would be fully consistent with the mission established by the Resources Agency for the use of CIAP funds in California and would achieve the Agency’s goals by: (1) promoting environmental stewardship through effective management, conservation and assessment of projects and their environmental impacts; (2) advancing economic sustainability by providing the analysis needed to support the approval of projects that are consistent with the Commission’s laws and policies; (3) providing financial resources to support more thorough research and analysis to provide the Commission, public and other organizations with the knowledge necessary to make informed decisions; (4) and maximizing the application of BCDC’s management policies through the formulation of partnerships with other organization that share the Commission’s policies objectives. Overall, the proposal would result in better decisions, a faster regulatory process, and improved environmental management consistent with the CIAP mission of ensuring comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations. Each of the two principal components of the proposal is described in greater detail below. Regulatory Assistance Increased professional assistance would be beneficial in two components of BCDC’s regulatory program: permit processing and enforcement. Both of these functions typically require extensive professional analysis, evaluation and investigation. Over the past two decades there has been an increase in the amount of exceedingly complex regulatory and planning issues in the Bay region. The economic prosperity and rise in large development projects and public works has resulted in a number of new controversial projects. Many of these projects have highly complex components, such as wetland restoration; habitat improvements; greater adverse impacts related to Bay fill; potential impacts of public access on wildlife; difficult public policy decisions involving the balancing of economic benefits against environment losses; and increasingly higher legal standards that must be met. Some of these issues can be addressed by expertise provided by the Commission’s existing staff. However, other issues require expertise beyond the staff’s knowledge and the amount of this work presently exceeds staff resources. A few examples of these types of complex cases include the restoration of wetlands at Charleston Slough in Mountain View; a complex enforcement case in Santa Clara County; the re-establishment of subtidal habitat as part of a dredging project at the Port of Oakland; and establishing appropriate mitigation for the loss of wetlands as a result of the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge reconstruction project in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties. To provide the technical expertise needed in these cases, existing permit and enforcement resources had to
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 242 Draft Plan, October 2001 be redirected from other areas. In other cases, the staff was unable to adequately evaluate the projects and they went forward, ultimately raising unanticipated problems because of inadequate peer review and analysis. Additional special scientific expertise in the fields of biol- ogy, hydrology, and coastal engineering is needed to deal with other such cases like these. Additional expertise in engineering, marine repair and salvage, and aerial surveys are needed for BCDC to properly carry out its regulatory responsibilities. The Commission’s laws and policies require extensive analyses of the structural integrity of structures placed on fill, of the design and effectiveness of shoreline protection measures, the size and scope of Bay fill projects, and the prevention of flooding and impacts to water quality. Though the staff has some knowledge in these areas, typically the issues could be better evaluated by engineers with structural, civil, environmental, coastal, and/or geotechnical expertise. The specific need within enforcement to have services provided for marine repair and salvage, and aerial surveys relates to issues such as documenting, tracking and solving vessel violations. Bay Management Partnerships BCDC has found great success in effectively addressing critical Bay management issues through creating partnerships with other organizations. Its responsibility to comprehensively manage the protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline, BCDC collaborates with other agencies who are involved in the management of the Bay environment. The Commission’s experience in, and comfort with accommodating diverse perspectives in the process of developing resource management strategies has resulted in BCDC becoming much more proactive in forging partnerships with other interests. Over the past several years, the Commission has joined with other organizations to deal with resource management issues over which BCDC shares authority or responsibility. The Commission’s many successes with partnerships led BCDC to establish a special task force in 1999 charged with developing a long-term strategy for maximizing the use of collaborative partnerships. In December 1999, the Commission considered the rec- ommendations of this special task force and adopted a Regional Collaboration Strategy from which the following conclusions about the importance of partnerships are drawn: “Collaboration is essential and effective. Acting alone, the Commission cannot fulfill its mission. BCDC’s legal authority is quite limited within its jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction extends over only a small part of the watershed that drains into the Bay. Other agencies play key roles in the management of the Bay. The programs of these other agencies and what happens in the vast watershed upland of the Bay can either help or hinder BCDC in accomplishing its mission. Therefore, it is essential that the Commission carry out its activities in full coordination and cooperation with the agencies and organizations with which BCDC shares common interests.“ “Collaborative partnerships inevitably require a significant investment of staff and Commission time to initiate and implement. But the rewards of these partnerships can be substantial and produce better environmental protection, a more prosperous economy and improved service to the public. On the other hand, lack of early collaboration between BCDC and other agencies has occasionally resulted in actions taken at cross purposes. Effective collaboration between BCDC and the other Bay Area agencies can build on previous successes and prevent unnecessary disagreements. By entering into partnerships with other agencies and organizations, the Commission can leverage its limited financial
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 243 Draft Plan, October 2001 and staff resources and help provide more effective delivery of government services to the public. Therefore, the Commission generally supports any initiative that involves cooperating with another entity that shares one or more of the Commission's objectives. The Commission and its staff should keep this objective in mind when dealing with individual issues and projects and should promote specific measures that will achieve better coordination on every activity in which the Commission is involved.” Thus, intergovernmental partnerships have proven to be highly effective in dealing with complex Bay management issues; BCDC has gained national recognition for its proven track record of initiating and participating in innovative partnerships; BCDC has demonstrated that it has placed high priority on engaging in more such partnerships by developing and adopting a Regional Collaboration Strategy; and other organizations have indicated their enthusiasm for working with BCDC. BCDC has already proven its success in building such partnerships, even with its limited resources. Foremost among the partnerships in which BCDC has been most active and has achieved most success include the pioneering Long Term Management Strategy (LTMS) and Dredged Material Management Office (DMMO); the Bay Bridge Design Task Force; the reconfiguration of runways at San Francisco International Airport and development of a Regional Airport System Plan; and the development of a San Francisco Waterfront Plan. In all of these cases, BCDC has worked hard to achieve consensus on the issues, while still maintaining its commitment to achieving its mission, and the goals and objectives outlined in its strategic plan. BCDC has continually confirmed its ability to negotiate and communicate with other agencies, vested interests and the general public in efforts to solve Bay issues. This proposal would respond to the documented need for BCDC to have resources to invest in participating in the development and operation of management partnerships made up of representatives from BCDC and other organizations that can address the planning, permitting and implementation of critical issues facing the Bay.
Budget and Timeline Regulatory Assistance $150,000 would be used for retainer contracts with consultants in the fields of hydrology, biology, coastal engineering, wetland science, marsh restoration, marine repair and salvage, and aerial surveys to provide the specialized technical and professional assistance needed in the Commission’s regulatory program. A limited amount of the funding would be used to pay for the staff costs administering the contracts. The contracts would be for a three-year period. Bay Management Partnerships $50,000 would be used for specialized consulting, meeting facilitation, document production and other services that are essential to the implementation of effective Bay management partnerships. A limited amount of the funding would be used to pay for the staff costs administering the contracts. The issues that can be addressed by Bay management partnerships will change over time based on the criticality of the issues, the willingness of other potential interests to participate in the management partnerships, and the commitment of BCDC resources to other partnerships.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 244 Draft Plan, October 2001 The highest current priority is to support BCDC’s participation in the Regional Agencies Smart Growth Strategy Project. This effort is a partnership of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Association of Bay Area Governments, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and BCDC, in cooperation with the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable Development, a coalition of business, labor, community, environmental and government organizations. The overall goals of this effort are to promote the region’s economic prosperity, protect environmental resources, and provide equitable opportunities for all of the richly diverse elements in the region’s society so they can share in this economic prosperity and enjoy the region’s natural resources. The other partners have already contributed far in excess of $100,000 each to this project. Therefore, BCDC’s staff will recommend that the Commission allocate the entire $50,000 to this partnership for use over a two-year period.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 245 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department California Coastal Commission Prepared by: Susan M. Hansch, Chief Deputy Director and Rebecca K. Roth, Federal Programs Manager Phone number: (415) 904-5200 Address: 45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94105 E-mail: [email protected] Title of Project Santa Barbara County LCP Update Project location: Santa Barbara County Total cost: $866,000 Funding request: $400,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 246 Draft Plan, October 2001 Overview:
Santa Barbara County is one of thirteen jurisdictions identified in 2000 by the Coastal Commission as a high priority for a review of the LCP’s effectiveness in protecting coastal resources and public access. Additionally, the County was formally adopted for priority review by the Coastal Commission in December 1998 for the following reasons: the County has a high level of post-certification permit and appeals activity; the County contains critical coastal resource management issues; the County is faced with high growth and development pressures; the County has experienced a high number of project-driven LCP amendments; and, the County it has LCP policies and standards that are out of date.
Santa Barbara County completed its local coastal program and assumed permit issuing authority in September 1982. Although the County has made numerous amendments to the LCP since 1982, there has not been a comprehensive policy review or update. The LCP for this key energy producing county must be reviewed and updated to protect coastal resources and address energy issues. As explained below, this project would allow a thorough review and update to the Santa Barbara County LCP.
Project Summary:
The Coastal Commission proposes to evaluate with consultation or co-operation with Santa Barbara County the coastal management and the cumulative impacts of development that have occurred as a result of implementing the Santa Barbara County Local Coastal Program (LCP). The methodology to perform such reviews has been created and refined under previous work funded by the Coastal Zone Management grant program and is identified as the Regional Cumulative Assessment Project (ReCAP). Upon completion of the ReCAP, also referred to as a periodic review, the Coastal Commission proposes to work co-operatively with Santa Barbara County implement recommended changes.
In conjunction with the ReCAP analysis, the Coastal Commission plans review the coastal development permits issued by the County and input these permits into a permit tracking system. This would involve data entry pertaining to older coastal development permits and would help to facilitate the local government/state agency partnerships.
The project work program will be completed over a two year period. First staff will complete a draft study of cumulative impacts in Santa Barbara County using the ReCAP methodology. The Coastal Commission staff will perform the following tasks: 1) analyze energy-related and industrial and energy development issues as well as other issue areas including, but not limited to, public access, environmentally-sensitive habitats, agricultural land, scenic resources, water quality, new development, fishing and boating, shoreline hazards, archaeological resources and LCP procedures. Working with the County, the Coastal Commission’s ReCAP team will create a permit database and accompanying GIS to develop an overview of cumulative and secondary impacts that have occurred since 1982. A draft report, based on analysis of the data and maps, will be prepared suggesting alternatives that may strengthen the LCP as the county continues to respond to ongoing and new coastal
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 247 Draft Plan, October 2001 resource management challenges. Finally, the recommendations of the Santa Barbara County ReCAP will be implemented, resulting in changes to LCP policies and procedures as well as in coastal development permit procedures.
Why Complete This Review:
California continues to evidence significant population growth like that experienced in recent decades. Forecasters predict that the population will likely continue to balloon well into the future. New estimates from the state Department of Finance indicate that by 2010, the population in California will grow by more than five million people, reaching 39 million. By 2040, forecasters expect the state’s population to hit 60 million. Coinciding with the increased population is an increase in urbanization and other development pressures on resources.
Much of the California coast, including Santa Barbara County, has sensitive areas susceptible to cumulative impacts. Examples of cumulative impacts identified through Regional Cumulative Assessment Projects (ReCAP)/Periodic Reviews conducted in the Monterey Bay, the Malibu/Santa Monica Mountains (Los Angeles County) and San Luis Obispo County include:
· loss of public access opportunities through incremental armoring of the coast; · hardening of wetland edges; · impacts to wetland hydrology and water quality; · cumulative impacts to public access through increases in use; · impacts to sensitive resources through increased use near access areas; · drainage of polluted runoff into coastal waterways; and, · adequate service (roads, water, etc.) capacity to serve planned development.
There are many reasons why a ReCAP is the appropriate tool for the Coastal Commission and Santa Barbara County to evaluate how the certified LCP has addressed the cumulative impacts of the region’s development.
First, the ReCAP will serve to identify areas where the Coastal Commission and local governments need to make procedural improvements in order to better manage coastal resources. Second, the ReCAP review will result in recommendations for suggested modifications to the County LCP. Third, the ReCAP will result in modifications to local government or Commission-issued coastal development permits through development and implementation of conditions placed on permit approval. Fourth, the ReCAP may help for improve interagency coordination by developing of new regional procedures or new regional mechanisms to address the recommendations of the regional periodic review.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed project is consistent with and supports the mission and all four of the major goals of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. A large portion of California’s coastal
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 248 Draft Plan, October 2001 onshore and offshore oil and gas production and processing is located in Santa Barbara County. Coastal offshore and onshore energy facilities have had a significant influence on land-use decisions in Santa Barbara County. The proposed project will provide funds for the Coastal Commission to work with Santa Barbara County to analyze the decades-old land use plan and zoning ordinances, to review and address existing conditions, and to more effectively address oil and gas issues. The Coastal Commission has placed Santa Barbara County in the highest priority category for review and update because of its high growth rate and associated development pressures, critical coastal resources, the number of energy facilities, and the fact that its LCP is so out of date.
Work Program:
Task 1 Identify priority issues and problems that include Offshore and Onshore Energy Facilities to focus on in review. This task involves collecting and analyzing information in order to define the initial coastal management problems that have resulted from LCP implementation or from changed conditions and new resource information. In addition to offshore and onshore oil and gas issues, priority issues and problems may be identified by obtaining input on observed or documented resource trends, staff experience and consultation with the local government’s staff, technical experts and other resource agencies, analysis of Commission findings on key appeals of local permits and general literature research. The task will help to determine the focus of the review on the key coastal management problems that will be evaluated in depth in the review. Parts of Task 1 will include the following: a. Conduct district issue scoping Area office staff members observe changes to coastal resources on a daily basis through field work, coordination with local government staffs, permit and planning reviews, and their monitoring of development activities in the region. As such, they are a primary source of information in the preliminary issue development stage. Based on their experience and their contact with local governments, staff planners will identify the major resource issues affecting the LCP area. b. Conduct public outreach Obtain public input on key issues through surveys or workshops. c. Analysis of key appeals Review Commission action on appeals for which a substantial issue was determined regarding conformance of the project with the certified LCP. d. Conduct initial issue research Conduct literature research and research preliminary permit data.
Products: Public Outreach Workshops Report to the Commission on Issue Identification Duration: Months 1-2
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 249 Draft Plan, October 2001 Task 2 Perform Data Entry and Begin Building the GIS database This task involves inputting input past permit data, development of baseline technical data necessary to build the County database, GIS mapping to correspond to onshore and offshore energy facility and key LCP issue areas. The Commission anticipates the majority of this work will be contracted out to the County.1
Products: Santa Barbara County Database GIS maps Duration: Months 1-20
Task 3 Conduct Assessment and LCP Review This task involves the major analytic work of the review. The ReCAP team will assess the current condition of the resources. The specific nature of the problems and the likely cause or factors contributing to the problems will be identified. The team will analyze the data to determine whether the LCP is being implemented consistent with policies of the Coastal Act. The analysis needs to be fully documented and adequate to support findings concerning consistency with the Coastal Act. Findings based on the analysis will serve to develop recommendations for corrective actions to address the problem. . Work under this task includes the following:
a. Identify implementation problems for analysis. The process of defining specific analytic problems is iterative. Based on the Issue Identification task 1.0 specific problems will be evaluated. b. Conduct analysis of local actions and other implementing actions to determine how LCP is being implemented. c. Develop policy, procedural and other recommendations to address implementation problems. This task is the preparation of the written report. Draft analysis and findings on whether the LCP is being carried out consistent with Coastal Act policies and whether cumulative impacts are being adequately addressed. Develop preliminary recommendation for corrective actions. d. Conduct public outreach and comment on preliminary report. Provide the community and local government the opportunity to review the preliminary analysis, findings and recommendations. e. Conduct Commission public hearing(s).
Products: Draft Preliminary Report Public Hearings Duration: Months 2-12
1 Upon receiving the grant award, the Coastal Commission would further discuss the County’s interest in actively participating and consider awarding Local Coastal Program Assistance Grant program money to the County providing funds were included in the Commission’s budget.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 250 Draft Plan, October 2001 Task 4 Complete final report findings and recommendations
This task will result in a final report for transmittal to local government. All comments and information, including new information or corrections to analysis, findings or recommendations that resulted from the public review will be incorporated into a final report. Work under this task includes the following:
a. Revise Preliminary Report for Commission Adoption b. Transmittal of Commission Adopted Recommendations to local government
Products: Commission Adopted Findings and Recommendations Duration: Months 12-18
Task 5 Implementation of Priority Action Items of the Santa Barbara County ReCAP
Description: The major vehicle for implementing recommended program changes is through modifications to the LCPs. This task involves implementing key recommendations of the ReCAP through the review of the County’s Area Plan Updates and other submitted amendments. As the County prepares to revise LCP Area Plans and ordinances, staff will review and comment in order to assure that recommended corrective actions are carried out through the LCP Amendments, where appropriate.
a. Review Draft Reports and prepare comments. b. Participate in local workshops and hearings c. Coordinate with County on development of LCP Amendment submittals d. Review Submittal e. Prepare Staff Report and Recommendations to Commission
Products: LCP Amendments as acted on the CCC Duration: Months 18-24
Budget:
As calculated below, the amount suggested by the Resources Agency of $500,000 is not enough to complete this project. There are several funding possibilities that could be available to offset the cost of this project. First, since the intent of the project is to partner with Santa Barbara County, the Coastal Commission envisions the Local Assistance Grant funds as a potential source of money to augment the County’s cost for participating. The Commission notes that at the time of submitting this grant application, the Coastal Commission has not discussed the specifics of this with the County. Second, the Commission, has requested a budget augmentation to fund new staff members to perform periodic reviews for areas of high priority such as Santa Barbara County. Should this money be available, new staff could assist with this project. Third, the Coastal Commission could request additional funds from the federal government to offset the cost. Over the past nine years, the federal government has
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 251 Draft Plan, October 2001 provided the Coastal Commission with Coastal Zone Management Act money to fund three ReCAP efforts,
YEAR 1 Year 2 Personal Services* 3.0 PY CPA II Salary 185,500 185,500 .75 Coastal Program Manager 62000 62000 1.0 Environmental Services Intern 24000 24000 .25 Staff Counsel 24500 24500 .5 Office Technician 20000 20000
Subtotal Personal Services $316,000 $316,000
Local Assistance Contract Grant**: $80,000 $80,000 Data Entry, Build GIS database, local workshops
OE &E+ $37,000 $37,000
Annual Totals $433,000 $433,000
TWO YEAR PROJECT TOTAL $866,000
*Personnel benefits included **Should the Coastal Commission’s budget contain the Local Assistance Grant funds, the County of Santa Barbara would be eligible to receive funding pursuant to the criteria awarding grant funds. At the time of submitting this grant application, the Coastal Commission has not discussed the specifics of this with the County. +OE&E includes travel, printing, postage, data processing, facilities operation, and equipment.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 252 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Resources Agency, Office of the Secretary Prepared by: Melissa Miller-Henson Phone number: (916) 654-2506 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: California and the World Ocean '02 Conference: Updating California's Ocean Agenda Project location: Entire California Coast Total cost: $171,000 Funding request: $100,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 253 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Background. The State of California has dealt with specific ocean and coastal resource issues from its earliest days as a state. Comprehensive management efforts began almost 40 years ago with a state-sponsored Conference on California and the World Ocean in 1964. While important advances in ocean and coastal management had occurred, no comprehensive program had been successfully developed to assemble data, coordinate programs, and identify a clear mission and goals for the State of California until the 1990s. In 1991, amendments to the California Ocean Resources Management Act transferred responsibility for all non-statutory marine and coastal resource management programs to the Secretary for Resources and created the California Ocean Resources Management Program (Ocean Program) within the Resources Agency.
In March 1997 the State of California released its first-ever overview of California’s ocean ecosystem and its relationship to state and federal laws, economics, jurisdictional designations, and complex array of reserves, refuges, sanctuaries and other marine managed areas that exist to protect and manage this critical resource. The strategy, California’s Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future, also explicitly laid out a set of mission and goals for the Ocean Program that could be achieved through a mix of government, private sector, and public/private partnership arrangements. In addition, ocean and coastal resource management issues were identified (such as shoreline erosion, water quality, and tourism) with specific recommendations for addressing them.
That same year, the California and the World Ocean ‘97 (CWO 97) conference was held to review and add to the Ocean Agenda. Through plenary sessions, panels and paper presentations, the experience, views and innovative ideas of the international community were brought to bear on the most pressing issues to help implement and improve ocean and coastal resource management in California. Some of the issues addressed included marine protected areas, resource economics and values, water quality, coastal tourism and recreation, fisheries; invasive species, offshore oil and gas, and shoreline erosion.
Proposal. California and the World Ocean '02 Conference: Updating California's Ocean Agenda. The Secretary for Resources proposes to fund a California and the World Ocean '02 (CWO 02) Conference to look back over the previous five years and assess the relative success in achieving the mission and goals of the Ocean Program as well as implementing the recommendations made in the Ocean Agenda. CWO '02 will again seek the views and innovative ideas of the international community in addressing current ocean and coastal resource management issues in California. Methods for obtaining this information will include short courses and field trips, conjunctive meetings and events, poster sessions (including photo and video media, electronic databases, books, maps and art works), social events, plenary sessions, commercial and not-for-profit exhibits, and paper presentations.
Short courses and field trips will offer conference attendees and their guests an opportunity to update their education and see first-hand how some of the resource issues being discussed at the conference are currently managed (or not, as may be the case). Conjunctive meetings and events will offer conference attendees an opportunity to participate in policy level discussions, while social events afford a more relaxing environment for dialogue and exchange of ideas.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 254 Draft Plan, October 2001 Presentations and plenary sessions will cover a broad spectrum of ocean and coastal issues that are of interest to a multi-disciplinary and international audience, with particular interest in policy development. These presentations will identify or offer solutions to problems, utilize case studies, identify knowledge gaps or collaboration opportunities, and discuss broader applications and implications of material presented. Papers will be published in the CWO 02 Conference Proceedings, to be made available approximately 120 days after the conference. Other publications may also result from this conference in an effort to further information and idea sharing among ocean and coastal resource managers around the world.
Consistency with Mission and One or More Goals:
CWO 02 is consistent with not only the identified mission, but also three of the four goals in support of that mission. CWO 02 will bring together some of the most eminent professionals in their respective fields to look back over the previous five years and assess the relative success in achieving the mission and goals of the Ocean Program as well as implementing the recommendations made in the Ocean Agenda. Where success has been lacking, these professionals will be able to offers ideas and suggestions for improving California's stewardship of ocean and coastal resources, encouragement of environmentally sound and sustainable resource development activities, and advancement of research, educational programs and technology developments. Their suggestions, with the presence of many of California's decision-makers and policy-makers, will help ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of the state's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
Project Budget: Income Proposed CIAP Funds $100,000 Sponsorships 40,000 Registration Fees (400 @ $60 each) 24,000 Registration Fees (50 @ 30 each) 1,500 Field Trips and Workshops 500 Exhibit Booth Rentals 2,500 Proceedings Sales (50 @ $50 each) 2,500 Total Income $71,000
Expenses Management Fee - Professional Conference Coordinator $20,000 Clerical Fees 25,000 Printing - Preliminary Program and Announcement 20,000 Printing - Final Program and Book of Abstracts 15,000 Printing - Proceedings 30,000 Printing - Other 20,000 Conference Facility Rental Fees 2,000 Conference Equipment Rental Fees 5,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 255 Draft Plan, October 2001 Conference Food/Entertainment 20,000 Conference Security 1,500 Conference Exhibitors/Exhibit Space 4,000 Conference Field Trips and Workshops 500 Conference Gifts/Awards 1,000 Supplies and Equipment 1,000 Travel 3,500 Telephone 500 Postage and Mail Service 2,500 Total Expenses $171,000
Net income $0
Project Timeline:
Hire professional conference coordinator October 2001 Contact potential sponsors November 2001 Contract with hotel property November 2001 Appoint abstract review committee December 2001 Mail call for papers/conference announcement January 2, 2002 Contact potential exhibitors February 2002 Abstract and biography submission deadline April 2002 Acceptance for paper presentation notification May/June 2002 Schedule workshops, tours and concurrent meetings June 2002 Send out preliminary program/registration materials July 2002 Camera-ready detailed abstract and biography due August/September 2002 Final program and abstract book printed October 2002 Conference dates October 14-17, 2002 Camera-ready final paper with bibliography due November 2002
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 256 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Change of Owner, Operator, Guarantor Ordinance Project location: Countywide Total cost: $70,000 Funding request: $20,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 310 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, California Department of Fish and Game, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The Energy Division seeks $20,000 in coastal impact assistance to augment efforts in completing a new local ordinance that sets forth requirements, procedures, review and approval processes, and findings. Both the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Minerals Management Service and the California State Lands Commission have procedures that they follow to oversee the change of owner, operator, and other third-party guarantors of offshore facilities used to development oil and gas. The County of Santa Barbara proposes to develop similar codified procedures to oversee changes in owner, operator, and other guarantors for the onshore facilities that support offshore oil and gas development. Key issues include continued safe operations of such facilities, sufficient financial guarantees for abandonment of these facilities upon their termination, sufficient financial guarantees to cover onshore oil spills and other types of accidents that cause environmental damage, and continued compliance with all County laws and permit requirements.
The requested $20,000 in augments a current grant from the California Coastal Resources Grant Program to develop such procedures. A draft ordinance has been developed and initially heard by the County’s Planning Commission. The $20,000 will fund additional refinements to the ordinance and additional hearings for adoption. Additional efforts will be devoted to determining the amount of financial responsibility necessary for these onshore facilities and the best instruments for guaranteeing financial responsibility.
This project meets the authorized use described in section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548, “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.”
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project assists the County and other regulatory agencies involved in the environmental review process of oil development offshore Santa Barbara County in managing oceanic and coastal resources in a comprehensive and coordinated fashion. We place it under Goal 2: Economic Sustainability.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 311 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $13,000 Contractor 1,000 Noticing/Publications 500 Workshops and Hearings 500 County Counsel 5,000
TOTAL $20,000
The County has secured a $45,000 grant from the California Resources Agency’s Coastal Resource Grant Program and $5,000 from the County’s General Fund. The requested CIAP funding augments this effort.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last no more than two years upon receipt of CIAP funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 312 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Oil and Gas Legislation, Rulemaking, and Intergovernmental Coordination Project location: Countywide Total cost: $50,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 313 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
One of the Energy Division’s essential roles is tracking and commenting on legislation and rulemaking that affect offshore oil and gas development and its onshore supporting infrastructure (e.g., tracking of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act). The Division also works with federal and state governmental agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, California Coastal Commission and California State Lands Commission, to review and comment on program, plans and permits that they prepare for offshore oil and gas development (e.g., MMS 5-year leasing program and renewal of Exploration Plans). All these legislative, rulemaking, and intergovernmental activities are not fee reimbursed.
The Division seeks $50,000 to augment the efforts described above. This project directly meets the authorized use of funds described in section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548; specifically, “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.” The ability to track and comment on pending legislation, rulemaking, and intergovernmental programs, plans and permits ensure that the federal and state governments hear from affected local communities in a timely and comprehensive manner prior to making decisions.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project primarily falls under Goal No. 1: Stewardship.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $44,000 Travel* 6,000 TOTAL $50,000 * Ranges from motor pool expenses to attend regional meetings to air, hotel, and per diem costs for travel to Sacramento and Washington, D.C.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 314 Draft Plan, October 2001 Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last three years, commencing upon receipt of Coastal Impacts Assistance funds or authorization to commence the project, whichever occurs sooner.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 315 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Oil Transportation Policies Project location: Countywide Total cost: $100,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 316 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The Energy Division seeks $50,000 in coastal impact assistance to augment efforts in updating policies of its General Plan and Local Coastal Program regarding transportation of offshore oil and gas. The mode by which offshore oil is transported from the County to refining centers has long been controversial. Several studies conclude that shipment via pipeline is the environmentally superior mode of transportation compared to marine tanker or barge, rail, or highway. Existing policies were formulated in the early 1980s when marine tankers were the prevalent and industry-preferred mode of transportation. Since then, several changes have occurred to the transportation systems, including construction of significant pipeline capacity, new safety requirements (Oil Pollution Act of 1990) that change the economics of marine transportation, and improved pipeline technology. The County proposes to amend its Oil Transportation Policies to reflect these changes as well as update projections on transportation needs of oil produced from inactive leases. The requested funds would augment an existing grant received from the California Coastal Resource Grant Program.
Improving policies that promote transportation of locally produced offshore oil via the environmentally superior mode of transportation meets the authorized use described in section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548, “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.”
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project promotes the stated mission by seeking LCP policies that promote the environmentally superior mode of transporting offshore oil, via pipeline, from point of production and processing to refining centers. We place it under Goal 2: Economic Sustainability.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $ 85,200 Contractor 10,000 Noticing/Publications 1,300 Workshops and Hearings 2,500 County Counsel 2,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 317 Draft Plan, October 2001 TOTAL $100,000
The County has secured the additional $50,000 necessary to complete this project, including funds from its Oil Transportation trust and funds from a Coastal Resource Grant Program, awarded by the Resources Agency. The project is ongoing and the requested CIAP funding augments this effort.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last no more than one year upon receipt of CIAP funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 318 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Oil Spill Environmental Thresholds Project location: Countywide Total cost: $50,000 Funding request: $15,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 319 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The Energy Division seeks $15,000 in coastal impact assistance to augment efforts in drafting new oil spill thresholds. These thresholds are essential tools to determine the significance of impacts to marine and terrestrial water quality and biology, recreation and tourism as a result of an offshore or onshore oil spill. These thresholds would be applied during environmental review of offshore oil and gas development, including onshore infrastructure that supports such development. Previous thresholds are outdated and inadequate. Being based solely on the probability and size of potential spills, previous thresholds lack a spatial element. Consequently, all spills of equivalent or similar size are treated equally, even if one is located next to a highly sensitive wetland and the other is located miles seaward of the coast. Additionally, the previous thresholds lack a direct calculation for determining the extent of impact to specific coastal or inland resources, including coastal recreation, coastal tourism, marine, coastal, or inland biology. Lastly, they are not designed to address many situations of oil spills in coastal areas.
This project meets the authorized use described in section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548, “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.”
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project assists the County and other regulatory agencies involved in the environmental review process of oil development offshore Santa Barbara County in managing oceanic and coastal resources in a comprehensive and coordinated fashion. Updated environmental thresholds are essential to determining significant adverse effects to the environment, resulting from offshore oil development, as well as for examining the viability of alternatives to proposed projects and effective mitigation. We place it under Goal 2: Economic Sustainability.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 320 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated Project Budget:
The County has secured a $30,000 grant from the California Resources Agency’s Coastal Resource Grant Program and $5,000 from the County’s General Fund. The requested CIAP funding augments this effort.
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) (CIAP) $35,900 Contractor 7,500 Noticing/Publications 1,300 Supplies 800 Workshops and Hearings 2,500 County Counsel 2,000
TOTAL $50,000
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last no more than one year upon receipt of CIAP funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 321 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Planning and Development, Energy Division Prepared by: Doug Anthony Phone number: (805) 568-2046 Address: 30 E. Figueroa Street, Second Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2522 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Offshore Oil and Gas Public Information and Website Project location: Countywide Total cost: $32,000 Funding request: $15,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 322 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Santa Barbara County’s Energy Division is the lead local agency charged with regulating those aspects of offshore oil and gas development that fall under County jurisdiction, such as onshore processing, storage, and transportation systems. Additionally, the Division routinely interacts with other regulatory agencies, including the Minerals Management Service, California Coastal Commission, and California State Lands Commission to promote sound management of coastal and oceanic resources affected by offshore oil and gas leasing and development off the County’s coast.
The Energy Division recently received a $15,000 grant from the California Coastal Resources Grant Program to construct a website for disseminating information about offshore oil and gas development to the affected public. This website will be used to inform the public about upcoming events such as hearings. Additionally, this website will provide several fact sheets and information papers about offshore oil/gas development and its relation to the County’s economy and environment. Some examples include:
· Schedule of upcoming hearings, workshops, federal or state legislation and rulemaking, and other intergovernmental activities concerning offshore oil and gas leasing and development. · History of oil and gas development in and offshore Santa Barbara County, including text, photos, graphs and maps. · Historic and projected rates of oil and gas production in and offshore Santa Barbara County since 1923, presented in graphic form that identifies historic events that led to major increases or decreases in those rates. · Summaries of each offshore oil and gas project. · Description of the permitting process for offshore oil and gas projects and related onshore systems. · Description of mitigation programs associated with oil and gas development, including the Coastal Resources Enhancement Fund, Fisheries Enhancement Fund, and Local Fishermen’s Contingency Fund. This hyper-link will also provide readers with an on-line application to apply for funding from these programs, thereby enhancing mitigation of impacts from offshore oil and gas development. · Description of the effect of offshore oil and gas development on Santa Barbara County property taxes and employment. This fact sheet will clarify an issue that has been subject to misinformation on several occasions. · Comparison of the effects of natural oil seeps to those of man-made oil spills, which has also been a topic subject to misinformation on several occasions. · Information on the generation and distribution of offshore oil and gas royalties. · A review of key market factors that affect oil and gas development offshore California, and its affect on onshore producers. · Description of risk factors associated with offshore oil and gas development · A historic review of technological developments associated with oil and gas development in the County.
We are requesting an additional $15,000 in Coastal Impact Assistance Funds to augment this effort, including funds to develop information not readily available. Providing salient information
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 323 Draft Plan, October 2001 to the public about oil and gas development offshore Santa Barbara County meets the authorized use described in section (e)(6) of H.R. 5548: “mitigating impacts of Outer Continental Shelf activities through funding of … (B) other public service needs intended to mitigate the environmental effects of Outer Continental Shelf activities.”
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project promotes that stated mission by providing current information about the development of oil and gas reserves in state and federal waters offshore Santa Barbara County. Public outreach lies at the core of comprehensive and coordinated management of ocean and coastal resources, including offshore oil and gas resources and the environment affected by developing these resources. Among other things, this project helps to educate interested parties about offshore oil and gas development and its affect on the environment, and through such education, promotes public input into the management of California’s oceanic and coastal resources. As such, this project meets all four goals; however, we place it under Goal 1: Stewardship.
Estimated Project Budget:
Line Item Estimated Expense Staff salaries (wages + fringe benefits) $27,000 General Services Dept. 5,000
TOTAL $32,000
The County has secured a $15,000 grant from the California Resources Agency’s Coastal Resource Grant Program and $2,000 from the County’s General Fund. The requested CIAP funding augments this effort.
Anticipated Project Schedule:
We anticipate this project to last no more than one year upon receipt of CIAP funds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 324 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Coastal Commission, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Prepared by: Jaime C. Kooser, Deputy Director and Alison J. Dettmer, Manager, Energy and Ocean Resources Unit Phone number: (415) 904-5200 Address: 45 Fremont Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94105 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Review of OCS Oil and Gas Lease Suspension, Exploration and Development Plan and other Energy and Ocean Resource Projects Project location: San Francisco, Coastal Commission offices Total cost: $300,000 Funding request: $300,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 301 Draft Plan, October 2001 Overview:
In California v. Norton the district court ordered the Minerals Management Service (“MMS”) to provide to the California Coastal Commission a determination pursuant to section 307(c)(1) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) and its implementing regulations (15 CFR Part 930, Subpart C) that the MMS’s grant of suspensions of 36 oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”) off the coast of California is consistent with California’s Coastal Management Program (“CCMP”). These lease suspensions extend the primary term of the leases, which would have otherwise expired.
To comply with the court order, the MMS has stated it will submit to the Commission 10 separate consistency determinations (“CDs”) to address proposed suspensions of the subject 36 leases. Upon submittal of a complete CD, the Commission has only 60 days (and the possibility of a 15-day extension) to take action.
Further, if the Commission concurs in a CD for a lease suspension, the lessee must then submit forthwith (as an MMS requirement of lease suspension approval) to the MMS and the Commission an exploration plan (“EP”) or development and production plan (“DPP”)2 to either explore or develop the lease area. The lease suspensions, EPs and DPPs raise many significant issues under the Coastal Act and therefore require complex, time-consuming technical analyses.
In addition, during the same time frame, the Commission anticipates the submittal of other large, complex energy and ocean resource-related projects. Five important categories of expected submittals are: (1) power plant projects; (2) proposals to develop state tideland oil and gas reserves from existing federal platforms; (3) review of energy elements of amended local coastal programs (“LCPs”); (4) fiber optic cables; and (e) proposals for desalination facilities. Submittal of the CDs, EPs and DPPs, in combination with the other large projects noted above, will double the annual workload of the Commission’s Energy and Ocean Resources Unit. Workload for the Commission’s Oil Spill Program, Water Quality Program, Technical Unit staff, legal staff and support staff will also increase. The Commission may also need assistance from technical consultants.
Project Summary:
The Coastal Commission requests $300,000 to be used for temporary help (personnel services of three Coastal Program Analyst II positions) to review energy and ocean resource- related projects and to backfill for experienced coastal analysts needed to carry out the OCS lease suspensions, and exploration and development plan reviews. Each analyst will be assigned to one or more of the tasks described below.
2 A lessee will submit a DPP after exploration of the lease area is completed and commercial quantities of oil and gas exist.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 302 Draft Plan, October 2001 Why Complete This Review:
In Norton v. California the district court ordered the MMS to provide to the Coastal Commission a determination pursuant to section 307(c)(1) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (“CZMA”) that the MMS’s grant of suspensions of the 36 OCS leases is consistent with California’s Coastal Management Program. The MMS is submitting to the Coastal Commission 10 separate consistency determinations to comply with the court order. Upon submittal of a complete consistency determination, the Coastal Commission has only 60 days (and the possibility of a 15-day extension) to take action.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The proposed request to hire staff to review energy and ocean resource-related projects and to backfill for experienced coastal analysts needed to carry out the reviews of OCS lease suspensions, exploration plans and development and production plans is consistent with the Coastal Impact Assistance Program goals. As described herein, additional Coastal Commission staff will ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations. Specifically, the proposed work will further coast and ocean stewardship (Goal 1) by assessing, conserving, and managing California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. Next, the proposed project will result in economic sustainability (Goal 2) by encouraging environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities. Finally, the Coastal Commission’s proposal is consistent with the jurisdiction and ownership goal (Goal 4) because the work program will maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Work Program:
Task 1 -- Review of 10 Lease Suspension Consistency Determinations (“CDs”)
The review of a complex consistency determination (“CD”) includes the following key elements:
· Internal meeting to identify all coastal issues to be evaluated in a CD submittal for a lease suspension. · Draft letter to MMS identifying those coastal issues that must be analyzed as part of the MMS’s CD to the Coastal Commission. · Review historic Commission records on the subject lease sales including, but not necessarily limited to, all environmental information prepared in support of the lease sale (e.g., an EIS prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act). · Review the CD for completeness under 15 CFR 930.39. · If necessary, draft incompleteness letter to MMS. · Review for completeness any additional information submitted by the MMS in support of the CD.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 303 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Review and evaluate the CD for adequacy of environmental information. This includes review by the Commission’s technical staff. · If necessary, draft letter to MMS detailing additional information the Commission needs in order to review the lease suspensions against the standards of the CCMP. · Coordinate and meet with non-governmental organizations (“NGOs”), interested members of the public, and other local, state and federal agencies with jurisdiction or interest in the lease suspensions. · Meet with MMS after the Commission staff reviews the submittal for its adequacy. · Prepare a written a staff recommendation for the Commission’s consideration of the CD at a regularly scheduled Commission hearing. · Staff recommendation reviewed by Attorney General’s Office. · Meeting with MMS following release of the staff recommendation and prior to Commission hearing. · Review all comment letters from other agencies, NGOs, and other interested parties on the staff recommendation. Meet with commenters. · If necessary, prepare an addendum on the staff recommendation. Prepare a staff presentation for the public hearing. · Commission public hearing(s) on the CD. · Possible revised findings and/or second public hearing.
Task 2 -- Federal Consistency Review of OCS Exploration Plans (“EPs”) and Development and Production Plans (“DPPs”)
Following or concurrent with the review of the consistency determinations for the 36 OCS lease suspensions, each operator is to submit to the MMS either a plan to explore (an “EP”) or a plan to develop (a “DPP”) each lease area. Each EP and DPP requires federal consistency review by the Coastal Commission pursuant to 15 CFR Part 940, Subpart E. The proposed EPs and DPPs also raise significant issues under the Coastal Act and require complex and time-consuming technical analyses.
The Coastal Commission is aware of three projects in the near future that will require the Coastal Commission’s review: (a) a proposed EP for the Cavern Point Unit; (b) revisions to the DPPs for existing Platforms Hermosa, Harvest and Hidalgo for the development of the Rocky Point Unit; and (c) review and comment on an environmental impact statement (“EIS”) prepared by the MMS to use a mobile semisubmersible drilling vessel to drill 4-5 delineation wells (a type of exploratory well) at lease areas offshore of northern Santa Barbara County. Concurrent with the review of the EIS, the lessees will be preparing either new EPs, or revisions to existing EPs, to carry out the proposed delineation drilling using a mobile drilling vessel.
The review of EPs and DPPs involve the same elements as described above under Task 1.
Task 3 -- Power Plant Project Reviews
The Coastal Commission is currently reviewing, and will continue to review over the next year, proposed upgrades to power plants located in the coastal zone. The Coastal Commission does not have coastal permit jurisdiction over power plant projects 50 megawatts or greater;
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 304 Draft Plan, October 2001 instead, the California Energy Commission has sole licensing and permitting authority. However, Coastal Act § 30413(d) requires the Coastal Commission to submit to the California Energy Commission a report that analyzes the project’s conformity with the policies of the Coastal Act and certified local coastal program.
The Coastal Commission anticipates reviewing several power plant projects larger than 50 megawatts over the next year pursuant to § 30413(d). In addition, there may be several proposals of less than 50 megawatts that would undergo the normal review process for a coastal development permit. A review of a power plant project under Coastal Act § 30413(d) includes the following key elements:
· Review and comment on the Application for Certification (“AFC”) submitted to the Energy Commission. · Evaluate the adequacy of data provided with the AFC and developing requests for additional data or studies, if necessary. · Review and comment on Energy Commission Preliminary Staff Assessments and Final Staff Assessments. · Attend workshops and public hearings on aspects of the proposals affecting coastal resources. · Produce a report on the proposal’s conformity with the Coastal Act for submittal to the Energy Commission to consider as part of its evidentiary hearings. · Projects approved by the Energy Commission may also require ongoing Coastal Commission staff involvement such as site visits, review and comment on the adequacy of study designs, assessing data collected pursuant to monitoring requirements, evaluating the success of mitigation measures, and other activities.
Task 4 -- Review Proposals to Use Federal Platforms to Access Oil and Gas Underlying State Tidelands
Torch Operating Company and Carone Oil Company each proposes to use an existing federal platform to access California State tideland oil and gas reserves. Torch Operating Company proposes to use extended reach drilling technology at Platform Irene to drill into Tranquillon Ridge, an oil and gas accumulation underlying federal and state waters. Carone Oil Company proposes to use extended reach drilling at Platform Hogan to access oil and gas underlying State Lease PRC-3133.
Each project will require federal consistency review by the Coastal Commission and submittals of a coastal development permit application. Elements of a federal consistency review are described under Task 1. The review of a coastal development permit application typically includes the following key elements:
· Meet with applicant to discuss proposed project (a pre-application meeting).
· Review coastal development permit application and supporting materials within 30 days of receipt.
· If necessary, write to the applicant an application incompleteness letter.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 305 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Review for completeness additional material submitted in support of an application.
· Review and comment on an environmental document prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act for the proposed project.
· Coordinate and meet with NGOs, interested members of the public, and other local, state and federal agencies with jurisdiction or interest in the project. · Prepare a written staff recommendation for the Commission’s consideration of the permit application. · Legal review of the staff recommendation. · Meet with applicant following release of the staff recommendation and prior to Commission hearing. · Review all comment letters from other agencies, NGOs, and other interested parties on the staff recommendation. Meet with commenters. · If necessary, prepare an addendum on the staff recommendation. Prepare a staff presentation for the public hearing. · Prepare presentation to the Coastal Commission. · Commission public hearing(s) on the permit application (to be scheduled within 49 days of a complete permit application). · Possible revised findings and/or second public hearing. · Monitor condition compliance.
Task 5 – Review Energy Elements of Amended Local Coastal Programs (“LCPs”)
A number of local governments, including Monterey County, the City of Carpinteria and Santa Barbara County, are in the process of updating their certified local coastal programs (“LCPs”). Each update will be submitted to the Coastal Commission in the form of an LCP amendment. The Coastal Commission’s Energy and Ocean Resources Unit will review any proposed changes to the energy element of each LCP amendment. We anticipate Santa Barbara County’s LCP amendment to contain significant oil and gas policy revisions.
The review of an LCP amendment includes the following key elements:
· Review local government action and proposed amended energy elements for completeness. · Write completeness letter within 10 working days of submittal. · Review and analyze each LUP provision against the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. · Review and analyze each IP component for conformance with the LUP. · Coordinate with other relevant agencies. · Coordinate with Commission district office staff. · Meet with local government staff to negotiate any resolution of conflicts. · Prepare energy section of staff report for Commission action, including suggested modifications. · Respond to comments from interested parties. · Prepare addendum to staff report, if necessary.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 306 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Prepare presentation to Commission. · Commission hearing on LCP amendment (to be scheduled within 90 days of complete LCP submittal (with possibility of 1-year extension)). · Transmit Commission action to local government.
Task 6 -- Review Fiber Optic Cables
Tycom is proposing to land two offshore fiber optic cables at the City of Hermosa Beach. That project will require a coastal development permit from the Coastal Commission. The City of Hermosa Beach is currently preparing an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the proposed project. The project raises significant Coastal Act issues and concerns, including potential adverse impacts to hard bottom, the commercial fishing industry, and beach users. This application will be submitted to the Commission in late 2001.
The tasks required in reviewing a coastal development permit are described in Task 4.
Task 7 – Review Desalination Facilities
The Coastal Commission anticipates processing several coastal development permit applications over the next year for desalination facilities. We are aware of at least a dozen proposals ranging from relatively small facilities serving a single business or small community to facilities proposing to produce up to 50 million gallons per day of potable water. Staff review of these facilities will require evaluation of various technical elements, such as the impacts associated with the siting of the facility and its intake and outfall locations, the effects of brine discharges on marine resources, and an assessment of the growth-inducing impacts of such facilities.
The tasks required in reviewing a coastal development permit are described in Task 4.
Budget:
Work Program to be completed over a three-year period.
Personnel Services* Cost Temporary 3.0 PY CPA II Salary $185,500 1.0 Environmental Technical Services $24,000 Intern 0.25 Staff Counsel $24,500 0.5 Office Technician $20,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 307 Draft Plan, October 2001 Subtotal Personnel Services $254,000
OE &E+ $37,000 Travel $9,000
PROJECT TOTAL $300,000
*Personnel benefits included. MONEY ALLOCATED TO PERSONNEL SERVICES COULD ALSO BE USED TO PAY FOR SPECIAL TECHNICAL CONTRACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE REVIEW OF OCS LEASE SUSPENSIONS, EXPLORATION PLANS, DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION PLANS AND OTHER ENERGY AND OCEAN RESOURCE-RELATED PROJECTS.
+OE&E include printing, postage, data processing, facilities operation, and equipment.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 308 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Resources Agency Prepared by: Brian Baird, Ocean Program Manager Phone number: (916) 654-2506 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: California Ocean Resources Stewardship Implementation Project location: Entire California Coast Total cost: $850,000 Funding request: $850,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 326 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Background. The Pacific Ocean off California provides substantial environmental, economic, aesthetic, recreational, educational, and scientific benefits to the people of California and the nation. Much of the quality of life and economic vibrancy supported by the state’s ocean resources depends on successful management of those resources, and successful management depends on an adequate understanding of the natural, ecological, oceanographic, and coastal processes and their interactions with varied human activities. The state is working to maintain and increase the benefits of its ocean resources. In order to achieve these benefits California must apply sound management approaches based on a practical understanding of the state’s ocean and coastal resources and issues impacting them.
The California Ocean Resources Stewardship Act (CORSA) and the California Ocean Resources Management Act found that state and federal agencies often lack basic information for decision making. A major reason for this is that management issues are often broader than individual agency mandates and information is often dispersed throughout the system or simply does not exist. CORSA requires the Secretary for Resources to report on actions taken by September 1, 2002 to ensure adequate coordination of science initiatives by ocean resource management agencies at the federal, state, and local level and with marine science institutions. The bill authorizes the Secretary to enter into an agreement with an existing nonprofit corporation to create the California Ocean Trust help achieve coordinated approaches to funding and implementing scientific research regarding California’s ocean and coastal resources.
Proposal: Establish and Fund the California Ocean Trust. The Secretary for Resources proposes to establish the California Ocean Trust with $900.000 for seed money for project funding. In addition, this proposal includes $100.000 to support 50% of a Sea Grant Extension position for two years to provide technical support to the Trust. The California Sea Grant Program at the University of California will provide the remaining 50% funding for this position. This advisor will provide a critical role as a technical liaison between the members of the Trust and the research community.
CORSA specifies that the purpose of the California Ocean Trust shall be all of the following:
· To seek funds for California ocean resource science projects, emphasizing the development of new funding sources. · To fund California ocean resource science projects that help fulfill the missions of the state’s ocean resource management agencies. · To encourage coordinated, multi-agency, multi-institution, approaches to ocean resource science. · To encourage graduate education programs in management-oriented ocean resource science in public and private universities and colleges in California. · To encourage new technologies that reduce the cost, increase the amount, or improve the quality of ocean resource management information. · To promote more effective coordination of California ocean resource science useful to management agencies.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 327 Draft Plan, October 2001 The California Ocean Trust will be made up of 10 trustees. Eight trustees shall be appointed by the Secretary including: one member from the Resources Agency; three members jointly nominated by the University of California and the California State University; two public members who have experience as trustees or directors of for-profit or nonprofit corporations; and two members nominated by coast and ocean interest groups. The Secretary for Environmental Affairs shall nominate one trustee who shall have broad knowledge of water quality as it relates to the coast and ocean. The Director of Finance shall appoint one trustee, who shall serve at the pleasure of the director.
Ocean Trust – Key Challenges. Examples of existing challenges for ocean and coastal managers include depressed populations of many marine species, pollution that results in beach and fishery closures, dredging and dredge disposal needs of the ports, and coastal erosion that threatens structures and reduces the quality of beaches. Several state initiatives are currently underway to address these concerns. The California Ocean Trust can play a key role in helping to coordinate and fund scientific research aimed at assisting with management needs such as the ongoing management efforts listed below:
· Marine Life Management Act: Developing an ecologically sound approach to managing marine life including the state’s commercial and recreational fisheries; · Marine Managed Areas Improvement Act: Overhauling the state marine managed area classifications to create a more logical system; · Marine Life Protection Act. Creating a master plan to improve California’s system of marine life reserves; · Public Beach Restoration Act. Studying erosion problems and funding projects to help protect California’s beaches; and · California Polluted Runoff Control Plan. Implementing California’s federally approved plan to reduce polluted runoff.
Consistency with Mission and Goals
Mission: The California Ocean Resources Stewardship Act (CORSA) was written specifically to address the mission and goals established for the California Ocean Resources Management Program which form the basis for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. In fact, the provisions of CORSA were added the Public Resources Code as a new chapter of the California Ocean Resources Management Act code provisions specifically for this purpose. The establishment of the California Ocean Trust will help ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources.
Goal 1 Stewardship: This proposal addresses stewardship of ocean and coastal resources by seeking to arm ocean and coastal managers with the scientific information that they need for effective management. This approach will help ensure the most effective and efficient approaches are used to develop the most valid scientific information for management purposes.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 328 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 2 Economic Sustainability: The document California’s Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future states that ocean dependent industries contributed $17. billion to the state economy in 1992, creating over 370,000 jobs that year. That economy is largely based on the existence of clean coastal waters for swimming, healthy marine resources, sustainable fisheries, and the existence of beaches that are safe from erosion. This proposal requests a minimal amount of money to create a trust to help support the science necessary to manage this critical sector of California’s economy. As the sixth largest economy in the world, California’s management efforts have national implications for both the environment and the economy.
Goal 3 Research, Education, and Technology Development: The legislatively imposed purposes of CORSA specifically encourage the provision of sound scientific research, new graduate education programs aimed at ocean and coastal management, and new technologies that reduce the cost, increase the amount, or improve the quality of ocean resource management information. In fact, the goals of CORSA were patterned after the goals of the Ocean Resources Management Program which form the basis of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
Goal 4 Jurisdiction and Ownership: This proposal is intended to increase coordination between all agencies of jurisdiction in their pursuit of marine science for decision making. California’s ocean ecosystem extends from the inland watershed zone, to the enclosed coastal waters zone (bays, estuaries, and coastal lagoons), the nearshore ocean zone, and the offshore ocean zone). It is clearly in the state and national interest to improve coordination between all levels of government, academia, the private sector, and the public that relate to the protection of watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Project Budget:
· Establish Initial Research Fund - California Ocean Trust $750,000 · Sea Grant Advisor – 50% funding for two years $100,000
Project Timeline:
The Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Finance, and the California Sea Grant Program will work together on the appointment process for trustees, the selection process for the Sea Grant Extension Agent for technical support, and the preparation of draft funding criteria and procedures for the California Ocean Trust. This timeline assumes that the first meeting of the trust will take place in January of 2002.
Appointment Process · Solicit nominations for trustees August 2001 · Nominations due October 2001 · Appointments made December 2001
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 329 Draft Plan, October 2001 Sea Grant Extension Agent Appointment · Issue position availability and work statement August 2001 · Application deadline October 2001 · Interviews November 2001 · Hire new position December 2001
Develop Draft Funding Criteria and Procedures · Begin funding criteria and Trust procedures August 2001 · Solicit comments on draft materials October 2001 · Complete final draft for review of trustees November 2001
Establish California Ocean Trust · Hold first meeting of California Ocean Trust January 2002
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 330 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) Prepared by: Todd E. Hopkins Phone number: (415) 338-3703 Address: San Francisco Bay NERR – San Francisco State University Romberg Tiburon Center 3152 Paradise Drive Tiburon, CA 94920-0855 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: San Francisco Bay NERR Headquarters Bay Water Delivery System Project location: Marin County Total cost: $335,000 Funding $100,000 request:
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 331 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
We propose to construct an energy-efficient bay water delivery system to provide the NERR and SF State University – Romberg Tiburon Center facilities with a constant and controllable source of bay water to be used for animal care, aquaculture, educational displays, wet- classroom, and experimental purposes. This system will be configured to allow future modification for bay water to circulate throughout the entire building providing an alternate form of energy efficient heating and cooling (HVAC) and fire suppression for the facility (Note: the HVAC and fire suppression engineering/installation option is not part of this request as it requires an additional $158K). The proposed bay water delivery system will allow control of the salinity, temperature, turbidity, and flows, enabling replication of actual conditions found in various SF Bay environments. Awards from the National Science Foundation and SF State University have provided the bay intake and piping to bring bay water to the building. Funds from the National Institute of Health have been awarded for outfitting the aquaculture lab in our Research Laboratory. We are requesting funds for the portion of this system that will connect the intake line with our laboratory facility. To complete this bay water delivery system, we are require $100,000 for the pumps, piping, filtration system, and the associated engineering and construction costs necessary for installation. Permits from federal, state and local agencies for the 300 ft intake line in the bay are already in place. The design specifications for the intake have also been approved by federal and state agencies.
Project Description:
The Romberg Tiburon Center (RTC) is a marine laboratory operated by San Francisco State University (SFSU), a minority serving institution providing undergraduate and graduate (MA) degrees. RTC is also the headquarters for the proposed San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. RTC is located 30 minutes north of San Francisco on the Tiburon Peninsula and is the only academic research facility situated on San Francisco Bay. RTC's mission is to perform basic scientific research and to educate and train the next generation of scientists. RTC provides its students with graduate (MA) and undergraduate level courses as well as practical experience gained through research conducted in the laboratories of RTC scientists. The outdoor portion of this project starts with an intake structure and intake line that will extend 300 ft into San Francisco Bay (already funded, see budget detail). A 200 GPM pump situated in a bayside pump-house will deliver water to land. Once ashore the water can be routed to many locations. One line will carry ambient bay water to our waterfront aquaculture facility and a second line takes water to one of four 5,000-gallon reservoir tanks behind the research laboratory. A third line will carry bay water to a filtration system for clarification. Filtered water will then be pumped to the second of the four reservoir tanks. The third and fourth reservoir tanks will hold freshwater and seawater, respectively. Water from the holding tanks can then be precisely mixed to provide experimental and holding conditions over a broad range of naturally occurring salinities. In this manner the full range of ambient estuarine conditions can be recreated. Water will be delivered in two ways to create a range of experimental environments: 1) gravity fed for on-demand ambient water, and 2) re-circulated water will be pumped in temperature controlled systems allowing the maintenance of heated and chilled
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 332 Draft Plan, October 2001 water. In addition to these holding tanks, we propose to place two 1,000 gallon tanks and four 100 gallon tanks in our aquaculture facility for use in experimental work with large invertebrates, fishes, and plankton communities. Four water tables will also be placed in the outdoor unit for incubating phytoplankton samples and to hold smaller aquaria for experiments, culture of small species, and display.
The indoor unit will consist of eight, 250-gallon tanks and four water tables to hold small aquaria for experiments, aquaculture studies and holding/display. These tanks and tables will be placed in the existing 700 ft2 animal care and experimental aquaculture laboratory. The salinity, temperature, turbidity and flow rate of the water entering these tanks and water tables will be controlled by a system of computers, controllers, and software funded from other sources (see budget detail).
Temperature control will be achieved through active chilling and cogeneration. Utilizing SF Bay water to cool a cold water chiller (20 tons chilling/min) provides a source of energy efficient heated water for environmental control in the sea water system in the following way: 1) the water being discharged from the outdoor and indoor laboratories flows through a cistern that feeds two titanium plates and 2) frame heat exchangers and pumps creating pressurized loops servicing water source heat pumps. If modified in the future, these heat pumps can also provide heat to laboratory and office areas. The water leaving the cistern is cooled as a result of the heat pumped back to the laboratories and thus the cistern water is chilled for another source of energy efficient chilling. The cistern water thus chilled can be used for cold water environments or to mix with warmer water to create a range of temperatures. This combination of heating and cooling systems is the most efficient way to provide a range of aquatic environmental conditions. RTC’s location in a cool climate adjacent to ambient water with ideal heat recapture properties provides options for research while concurrently reducing the expense of processing a significant volume of water. The system we propose for $100K creates the base for a future “green” HVAC which requires an additional $158K to complete. The “green” design of this cogeneration system is beneficial to RTC’s budget and instills appropriate values to students in the environmental sciences.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal directly addresses issues listed in Goal 2: Economic Sustainability and in Goal 3: Research, Education & Technology. The proposed bay water delivery system, will provide a controlled source of salinated water for animal care, research and teaching laboratories, aquaculture facilities, and aquatic displays (SF State University is a minority serving institution). The technological and energy-saving innovations (HVAC/fire suppression) which will be built into this system (but not funded by this request) are examples of environmentally sound and sustainable engineering. Lastly, this proposal is consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Act and supports the mission of the proposed San Francisco Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve as described in the Authorized Use of Funds, Jan 23, 2001, (Section IV: 1A, 1E & 1J).
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 333 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget and Funding Sources:
Funding Source and Amounts (in thousands) Item CIAP NSF NIH SFSU* RTC* Intake System Intake line from bay 99.0 9.0 Fish screens 4.0
Delivery System Pumps 8.0 Chillers 22.0 Filtration system 20.0 Piping 10.0 Cistern 9.0 Holding & Aquaculture tanks 32.0 Electrical service 10.0 Pump-house 10.0 Design costs 3.0 Construction costs 10.0 10.0
Culture Laboratory Experimental tanks and wet tables 15.0 Controllers 45.0 Software 10.0 Computer (controller server) 4.0 Heat Exchanger 5.0 Total by Source: 100.0 99.0 29.0 25.0 82.0 Total: 335.0 * SFSU and RTC have separate operational budgets
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 334 Draft Plan, October 2001 Cost Estimate for Requested CIAP Funds:
CIAP Funds (in Item thousands) Pumps 8.0 Filtration system 20.0 Piping 10.0 Holding and aquaculture tanks 32.0 Electrical service 10.0 Pump-house 10.0 Construction costs 10.0 Total CIAP Funds: 100.0
Timeline for Implementation:
Timeframe Task (months) Delivery System (DS)/Design O-II DS/Pump, Filtration, Piping, Electrical Construction I-IV DS/Holding Tanks, Cistern, Chiller II-IX Culture Lab/Design O-II Culture Lab/Tank/Water Table Set-up III-IX Culture Lab/Controller, Software System Set-up IV-IX
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 335 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Boating and Waterways, Coastal Commission, and State Coastal Conservancy Prepared by: Kim Sterrett, Melanie Coyne, and Lesley Ewing Phone number: (916) 263 - 8157 / (510) 286-0754 / 415 904-5291 Address 2000 Evergreen Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95815-3888 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Title of project: California Master Plan for Comprehensive Coastal Sediment Management Project location: Entire California Coast Total cost: $800,000 Funding request: $800,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 337 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Problem National studies indicate our population’s strong desire to work, live and recreate along our nation’s coastline. California is no different; in fact, 85% of our population lives within 50 miles of the coast. Development that has benefited both the nation and the state has often come at a high price to our coastal environment. Expansive urbanization within our southern coastal watersheds has led to substantial natural resource degradation. Flood control and water supply projects have altered our streams, rivers and wetlands and impeded the natural flow of sediment to the coast. Furthermore, a variety of coastal structures have created imbalances in the distribution of existing sediment along the coast. We rely upon these sediments (sand) to feed our beaches to protect natural resources, provide recreational opportunities, and to create a buffer from the impacts of major storms. Our beaches and coastal wetlands constitute part of California’s natural resource and economic infrastructure and require attention if we expect to receive continued benefits.
We are now faced with the task of restoring our degraded watersheds, wetlands and coastal beaches. This requires an analysis of the system of sediment movement within coastal regions. Watersheds no longer provide a sufficient supply of sediment to beaches, wetland functionality is compromised due to too much sedimentation, and beaches often erode due to lack of sediment (sand). California needs a comprehensive statewide master plan that evaluates and prioritizes sediment management needs to maximize the ecological functioning of our coastal watersheds, wetlands, and beaches.
Solution Future strategies to restore and maintain California’s coastal watersheds, wetlands and beaches will require a comprehensive approach to the management and movement of coastal sediments. The applicant agencies have developed this Scope of Work in close consultation with the California Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup (CSMW), an intergovernmental group comprised of the Army Corps of Engineers, the U. S. Geological Survey, and the California Resources Agency and its sub-agencies that have jurisdiction over sediment-related activities in the coastal zone.
Scope of Work:
Interagency Coordination and Stakeholder Involvement ($50,000) · Conduct regional / local workshops to publicize the effort and identify the extent of sediment-related problems and opportunities in watersheds along the California coast.
· Develop a description of these problems and opportunities by location, severity, and current activities. Solutions to problems should reflect a multi-system approach to include interrelated coastal sediment management efforts that address the relationship between watersheds, wetlands, and beaches.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 338 Draft Plan, October 2001 Data Compilation ($350,000) · Characterize sediment systems in coastal watersheds and along the California coastline by cataloging prior reports and on-going studies for specific coastal sites / regions studied by the Corps, Universities, and Federal, State, regional and local agencies (e.g., the data gathering phase of the Corps’ “Coast of California” studies, LIDAR surveys by NOAA, USGS and the Corps). Investigation elements include: - sand sources (wetland restoration projects, coastal bluffs, opportunistic sand projects, port and harbor dredging, inland sources, offshore sites) - physical sediment characteristics - fluvial and estuarine barriers to sediment transport (dams, debris basins) - physical barriers (natural and artificial) - physical processes (fluvial and littoral) - coastal change analyses - coastal sediment budgets
· Characterize natural resources affected by sediment (nearshore, beach/dune, estuarine, riparian) by location, density, tolerance to sediment influences, and seasonal and annual persistence.
· Identify the federal, state and local laws, regulations and policies that govern sediment- related activities in California coastal watersheds and littoral cells.
· Identify the federal, state, regional and local governmental agencies and non- governmental organizations that have responsibility for or perform investigations in California coastal watersheds and littoral cells.
Development of an adaptive coastal watershed sediment management tool ($350,000) · For federal and state regulatory agencies and local governments to facilitate sediment management in coastal watersheds, including opportunistic sand projects, port and harbor dredging activities, wetland and beach restoration projects, and flood control activities
· Compile results of investigations in a GIS database for analysis of problems and opportunities for solutions.
· Identify priority locations and problem activities from a review of workshop input, prior reports and on-going studies, and evaluate opportunities for solutions based on economic, environmental, and cultural benefits and costs.
· Produce and prioritize regional and site-specific actions and applicable technologies based on results of qualitative evaluation (e.g. regional opportunistic sand programs)
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 339 Draft Plan, October 2001 Public Education and Information Dissemination ($50,000) · Develop a GIS-based Internet Map Server to ensure that all governmental agencies and public stakeholders will have access to the coastal watershed sediment management tool.
· Institutionalize the network of federal, state, regional and local governmental and non- governmental contacts to ensure the ongoing sharing of project information and identification of problems and opportunities.
· Create a web site and complementary brochures to educate governmental agencies and the public about coastal sediment systems and the need to plan sediment-related activities from a regional, rather than site-specific, perspective. Work with other groups, such as the Los Angeles Contaminated Sediments Task Force, the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the Surfrider Foundation, to supplement existing communication avenues and vehicles.
CIAP funding will maximize current efforts to produce a California Master Plan for coastal sediment management through direct coordination with the CSMW. Additionally, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will also invest $490,000 over the next three years to assist in the development of the Plan, with in-kind help from other CSMW partners. A statewide plan will, for the first time, identify, describe, evaluate and prioritize sediment management approaches to restore high priority coastal wetlands and beaches. The strategies produced by the Master Plan, along with the strong partnerships forged through the collaborative efforts of the Federal, State, regional and local stakeholders will create the framework required to effectively manage sediments in California’s coastal watersheds.
Schedule and Timeline:
November 2001 to February 2002: Enter into an Interagency Agreement with the CA Resources Agency. Develop detailed scope of work with assistance for the CA Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup (CSMW).
March 2002 to May 2002 Advertise and negotiate agreements with study consultants.
May 2002 to December 2003 Initiate and perform study with periodic review by the CSMW.
December 2003 to February 2004 Final study review by the CSMW.
February 2004 to March 2004 Peer Review
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 340 Draft Plan, October 2001 March 2004 to August 2004 Public review and comment.
August 2004 to December 2004 Public Education and Information Dissemination
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The Master Plan Study fulfills all goals and is consistent with the mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 341 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Boating and Waterways, State Coastal Conservancy, and California Coastal Commission Prepared by: Kim Sterrett, Melanie Coyne, and Lesley Ewing Phone number: (916) 263 - 8157 / (510) 286-0754 / 415 904-5291 Address: 2000 Evergreen Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95815-3888 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Title of project: Coastal Sediment Compatibility and Impact Study Project location: Entire California Coast Total cost: $400,000 Funding request: $400,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 342 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary and Consistency:
Problem Nearshore disposal of dredged materials is an activity undertaken by many public entities in the pursuit of coastal wetlands restoration, beach restoration, port and harbor maintenance, coastal highway maintenance, as well as the clearing of coastal debris basins, flood control channels and reservoirs. The beneficial reuse of these sediments on a beach or in the nearshore environment can improve the beach area, but may cause turbidity from the suspension of the fine-grained portion of the disposal sediment. Turbidity has been identified as a serious concern by the environmental community and coastal regulatory agencies due to its potential for adverse impacts on biological resources. A secondary concern is the fate of the coarse-grained fraction that generally remains close to shore. Regulatory agencies have long maintained a very cautionary approach to permitting aquatic disposal projects and typically impose strict seasonal and grain size restrictions on disposal activities, restrictions that are not always based on the natural fluctuations in turbidity and sedimentation experienced by nearshore resources on an annual basis. Many opportunities to restore habitats and recreational venues by replenishing narrowed beaches have been lost, at great financial and environmental cost, due to these uncertainties in the impacts on nearshore resources from aquatic sediment disposal.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to provide a scientific basis for regulators to establish technically-sound evaluation criteria for beach restoration using uncontaminated sediment dredged from coastal wetlands, ports and harbors, and cleared from coastal highway landslides, debris basins, flood control channels, and dams. Study efforts will include:
A. Investigating the fate of both naturally and artificially introduced sediments in the nearshore environment; B. Investigating the qualitative and quantitative impacts of naturally occurring turbidity, siltation and sediment migration on nearshore biological resources; and C. Evaluating the impacts associated with the disposal of uncontaminated sediment relative to the effects of natural shoreline processes on nearshore biological resources.
Scope of Work:
The applicants will assemble a Technical Advisory Committee comprised of representatives from regulatory agencies and universities to identify and discuss research areas that require further investigation, devise a plan to study the highest-priority areas, and resolve the major issues. The areas of investigation described below may be amended based on the interactions with the Technical Advisory Committee.
A. - Determine the terrestrial sediment load and grain size distribution in a watershed along the California coast.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 343 Draft Plan, October 2001 - Determine the fate of terrestrial sediments from this watershed in the ocean and the effects of waves, currents, dilution and mixing on the ultimate fate of these sediments. Investigative tools include: - Side-scan sonar and related technologies - Sediment surface samples and cores - Sediment tracer studies Budget: $125,000
B. - Determine the duration and effects of naturally occurring turbidity, siltation and sediment migration on nearshore biota. Investigative tools include: - Side-scan sonar and related technologies - optical remote sensing tools - Diver transects - Quantify and qualify impacts from naturally occurring sediment. Determine if there is correlation between level of impact and sediment loading, grain size distribution, peak flows, wave and current conditions, or other factors for which data are available. Budget: $150,000
C. - Evaluate the turbidity plumes associated with natural nearshore processes and conditions (e.g. river and harbor discharges, rip currents, seasonal storms) and compare with the turbidity conditions resulting from nearshore sediment disposal projects. Discuss the quantitative and qualitative differences, if any, between natural and introduced sediment and evaluate the significance of these differences. Investigative tools include: - Optical remote sensing technologies - Tripod systems, including video, optical backscatter, laser altimeters, current meters - Towed camera systems - Discuss other factors (e.g. water quality) that can affect the health and viability of nearshore biological resources and compare to the impacts from turbidity and siltation. . Budget: $125,000
The applicants plan to work with existing research efforts under way along the California coast to maximize both funds and capabilities. These include investigations by Moss Landing Research Laboratory, MBARI, Scripps, USGS, the Navy-funded Strataform program at the Eel River, and the Plumes and Blooms research group at UCSB. Recent results from some of these efforts have shown that the behavior of terrestrial sediments along the coastal margin is different in California from sediment behavior observed elsewhere in the world; the applicants plan to take advantage of this new research and emerging technologies that are being developed here to investigate the fate of terrestrial sediments in the nearshore and their impacts on biological resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 344 Draft Plan, October 2001 Schedule and Timeline:
November 2001 to January 2002: Enter into an Interagency Agreement with the CA Resources Agency. Develop detailed scope of work with Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). January 2002 to March 2002 Advertise and negotiate agreements with study consultants. March 2002 to September 2003 Initiate and perform study with periodic review by the TAC. September 2003 to November 2003 Final study review by the TAC. November 2003 to January 2004 Peer Review January 2004 March 2004 Public Comment
Consistency with Mission:
The Coastal Sediment Impact and Compatibility Study is consistent with all four goals and the mission of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. The study will provide scientific information to regulatory agencies for their assessments of the impacts of the beach nourishment activities proposed by other State Resources Agencies and local governments. The results of the study will be used in support of beach restoration and enhancement projects, which are important both for endangered/threatened species habitat enhancement and for recreational opportunities
Goal 1: The study will provide information that regulators need to properly assess impacts from beach nourishment projects, both to allow beach restoration to occur and to protect nearshore ecosystems.
Goal 2: Beach-based tourism contributes over $27 billion to the state’s economy; restoring degraded beaches and conserving existing beaches are vitally important to sustaining coastal tourism. The study will generate information not only to support beach nourishment efforts for recreation and tourism purposes, but also to assist harbors and ports in their attempts to beneficially reuse uncontaminated dredged materials for beach restoration purposes.
Goal 3: The information generated from this study will be used to evaluate current and future projects that focus on increasing the supply of sediment to the coast; it is the first study of its kind for the state.
Goal 4: Results from the study will be used to support state tideland enhancement through optimizing the volume of sediment that enters coastal waters to rebuild and enhance beaches while protecting nearshore habitat areas.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 345 Draft Plan, October 2001 As a result of this study, effective stewardship of state coastal waters, tidelands and watersheds will be increased by balancing beach or nearshore disposal opportunities with habitat protection through science-based regulation and management.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 346 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County Del Norte County Department: Community Development Department Prepared by: Ernest Perry, Director Phone number: (707) 464-7254 Address: 981 H Street, Suite 110 Crescent City, CA 95531 E-mail: [email protected] Title of Project: Lower Smith River Stream Channel Assessment Project location: Smith River from the Pacific Coast to Sultan Creek Total cost: $161,696 Funding request: $61,696
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 387 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary: The project is to prepare an assessment of river conditions within the Coastal Zone of the Smith River. The Smith River is well recognized nationally as a federally listed Wild and Scenic River. The Smith is world renown for its viable anadromous fishery and its excellent water quality. Locally the Smith is a source of pride and enjoyment, and also a source of water for domestic and agricultural use as well as aggregate material for construction purposes. The project would substantiate the historic and present conditions of the Smith and determine any appropriate mitigation or programmatic changes that should be implemented. An outline of project elements is as follows:
1. An historical assessment of river conditions. Specifically the time frames would be (1) prior to 1955, (2) 1955 to 1975 (Smith River Gravel Study), and 1975 to the present. 2. An assessment of the direct and indirect effects of aggregate mining on the Smith River for the study area* specifically addressing sediment transport, fish passage, bed elevation, bank erosion, riparian vegetation, and effect if any on infrastructure (bridges (one), roads, flood control devices). 3. A digital terrain modeling of the study area* using technology to map the existing riverbed for continued monitoring. 4. A botanical assessment (including digital mapping) of the study area* to determine baseline data for continued monitoring. 5. An assessment of stream channel conditions including habitat typing describing the pool, flatwater, and riffle habitat within the study area*. (This would also include mapping of large woody debris and other structures that currently exist.) 6. Update threatened and endangered species assessments of the Lower Smith River including any species that are formally proposed for listing. 7. Summary and recommendations report with consolidated data and findings.
*The focus of the study area is the Coastal Zone, below the 101-highway bridge. However, in order to assess impacts and conditions within the Coastal Zone it is necessary to look above the Coastal Zone (the 101 bridge) in order to understand hydraulic and sediment transport issues. Therefore the study area is beyond the Coastal Zone to Sultan Creek, approximately two miles upstream of the 101 bridge.
Consistency with Mission and Goals: Goal 1: Stewardship. The proposed project will provide baseline studies to manage the aggregate activities on the lower Smith River. The information generated will be beneficial to the property owners, the aggregate operators, the regulatory agencies, and the public.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. The aggregate activities on the lower Smith River are the primary sources of raw construction materials for private and public projects especially public infrastructure projects. The data generated will apply directly to the extraction amount and replenishment rates on each permitted extraction site. The project will assist in the environmentally balanced use of the lower Smith River by providing data and recommendations to apply to aggregate activities in a
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 388 Draft Plan, October 2001 manner, which will permit the continued use of the lower Smith River as an aggregate source with the least impact.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. As described above, this project has several research elements. The project also applies a relatively new technology, sonar surveying of the submerged surface of the river. This technology should be applicable to similar coastal streams.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. A substantial portion of the study area is the estuary of the Smith River. The project area includes the Coastal Zone, tidelands, extensions of the sea, and the conclusion of the watershed of the Smith River.
Project Cost Estimate: Line Item Object Estimated Expense Historical Assessment $15,000 Direct and Indirect Effects of Aggregate Mining $40,000 Digital Terrain Modeling First Year $40,000 Second Year $24,000 Botanical Assessment $ 5,000 Stream Channel Conditions $ 7,500 T/E Species Assessment $10,000 Summary/Recommendations Report $ 9,607 Staff Costs Jay Sarina, Planner @ $27.88 per hr. (120 hrs.) $ 3,345 Ernest Perry, Director @ $48.43 per hr. (24 hrs.) $ 1,163 Art Reeve, Co Engineer @ $25.49 per hr. (60 hours) $ 1,530 Clerical Staff @ $19.25 (24 hours) $ 462 Copying and Printings Costs $ 4,089 $161,696
Proposed Budget: Sources of Funding Coastal Resource Grant Program, Part B $100,000 Del Norte County's Coastal Impact Assistance $ 61,696 funds
Available Items of Value 13 Years of High Quality Aerial Photography of the Lower Smith $ 10,400* 13 Years of Cross Sectional Information $ 54,000* Total Value $226,096
*existing information
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 389 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County Monterey County Department: Monterey County Water Resources Agency and Monterey County Planning Department Prepared by: Curtis Weeks, General Manager Phone number: (831) 755-4860 Address: 893 Blanco Circle Salinas, CA 93901 E-mail: [email protected] Title of Project: Phase I Integration of Coastal Surface Water Quality Programs in Monterey County Project location: County-wide, Carmel River Lagoon and Salinas River Lagoon Total cost: $187,028 Funding request: $187,028
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 390 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Overview There are three major elements of this proposal. The first element will result in the development of a framework to allow the integration of up to ten Federal and State coastal water quality programs. The integration effort will focus on those components of federal/state programs that fall within the purview and responsibility of county government. Many of the programs to be integrated were expressly developed to comply with the both the Federal Clean Water Act and the Federal Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments. Highlights include programs such as: · Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary's WQPP Action Plan, Part IV · California Farm Bureau Federation's Non Point Source Initiative · California's Plan for Non Point Source Pollution Control Program.
The second element will result in the assessment of water quality parameters in two coastal lagoons. This will develop new data on fishery habitats and fish species. This will be completed in cooperation with the Coastal Conservancy, the Coastal Commission, the Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Currently Federal, State and local agencies can not assess the impacts of lagoon breaching activities on threatened fish species.
The third element will consist of developing a scope of work for Phase II; namely a Comprehensive Surface Water Quality Integration Plan.
Background and Discussion Currently there are over 20 federal/state agencies that are implementing dozens of coastal surface water quality programs within the Monterey County region. They run the spectrum from broad, regional water quality programs administered through NOAA (Sanctuary), to local, site-specific projects to protect individual threatened species.
At the Federal and State levels, progress has recently been made in integrating their own programs via the Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program and the State Water Resources Control Board's Non Point Source Pollution Control Program Plan. Both were expressly designed to comply with both the Federal Clean Water Act and the Federal Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments.
At the local level, private stakeholder groups are also making major strides in integrating water quality programs of their own. Most notably the California Farm Bureau Federation's Non Point Source Initiative is an excellent example of a voluntary/non-regulatory approach. This is notable because the Farm Bureau's Initiative is specifically designed to be consistent with the Sanctuary's WQPP and Tier I of the California's Plan for NPS Pollution Control, which are consistent with the Federal Acts listed above.
However at the County level, government's role in facilitating and implementing these various programs is frequently limited. More often County efforts are simply reactions to the short-term issues that arise as higher levels of government and stakeholder groups move forward with
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 391 Draft Plan, October 2001 their own programs. This is due to a variety of reasons, but the most acute is the lack of funding mechanisms to address county-wide and regional issues.
The CIAP funds now available through NOAA present a unique opportunity for the County to undertake coastal/regional planning and research efforts. No other funding sources (whether Federal, State or local) are currently available to be used for such broad-based planning. As can be seen in the three proposal elements below, for the first time the county will be able to tie together issues ranging from regional/coastal water quality programs to localized species assessment projects.
Proposal Elements The following three Elements were developed to allow the County to assume a leadership role by orchestrating interrelated water quality programs in a proactive way rather than reacting to regulatory mandates on a short-term, case-by-case basis (crisis-management).
1. Integration Element. A long term priority is to coordinate the wide variety of on-going federal, state and local coastal water quality programs within the purview of a County entity. The tasks necessary to accomplish this are: · Conduct a review of the coastal water quality programs from a wide variety of Federal/State agencies and initiatives of private interest groups, including: § Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary's WQPP Action Plan, Part IV § California Farm Bureau Federation's Non Point Source Initiative § California's Plan for Non Point Source Pollution Control Program, including; ü Tier I Implementation of the State Plan ü Tier I of the RWQCB's 2001 Watershed Management Initiative, ü TMDL development for sediments, nutrients and pesticides ü Phase II regional stormwater permitting requirements § Elkhorn Slough Foundation's volunteer Water Monitoring Program § Watershed management plans including; ü Pajaro River Watershed Water Quality Management Plan, June 1999 ü Carmel River Watershed Plan (pending) Carmel River Watershed Council ü Lower Salinas River Watershed Management Plan (pending) Monterey County/CSUMB · Identify roles and responsibilities of the County (both as a whole and as individual agencies/departments) amidst these Federal/State regulatory programs, · Establish any necessary staffing, consulting contracts and/or interagency teams to support this effort. · Identify the County's current capabilities and/or limits to implementing these various roles and responsibilities. · Identify any need for increased interdepartmental collaboration, staffing levels and funding needed to implement the resulting Implementation Plan. · Identify commonalities among the various Federal, state, county and non-profit programs, and prioritize efforts to build upon the commonalities and facilitate agreements to implement them. · Identify potential conflicts among the various federal, state, county and non-profit programs, and direct efforts to facilitate agreements on any conflicting issues.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 392 Draft Plan, October 2001 2. Lagoon Breaching/Assessment Element- Generation of New Data. For some issues integration is premature and can not be completed until basic data is gathered and analyzed. One such issue is the inability to quantify the linkage between water quality and the impact on fish and their habitats. Specifically, a number of federal/state agencies are concerned with the water quality impacts from lagoon breaching on federally listed fish species. However no agency (whether federal, state or local) has yet to quantify the breaching impacts on water quality parameters and tie those impacts to fish in the two major lagoons each winter. Therefore this element consists of an Alternative Breaching Scenario and Species Assessment Study. The tasks necessary to accomplish this are: · Assess the physical water quality of fish habitat in the Salinas and Carmel River lagoons and determine the lagoons' water quality profiles before, during and after coastal lagoon breaching, · Assess fish populations and life-cycles in the lagoons prior to breaching for steelhead trout. · Compare the impacts from alternative breaching scenarios (including unmanaged "natural" breaching) to put the current breaching practices in needed perspective. · Integrate the assessment with the California Coastal Commission requirements for coastal lagoon breaching permitting and support the effort to obtain 5 year breaching permits from the State, · Integrate the data gathered from the assessment with the ongoing implementation of the Carmel and Salinas River Lagoon Management and Enhancement Plans. · Integrate with the National Marine Fisheries Service guidelines for steelhead, · Integrate the assessment with FishNet 4-C Goals for Policies and Planning (funded via the California Coastal Conservancy)
3. Phase II Scope of Work Element. Following the completion of Elements 1 and 2 above, the third element will result in a scope of work for Phase II; namely a Comprehensive Surface Water Quality Integration Plan. Preliminary tasks for that future scope of work may include objectives such as: · Identifying jurisdictional limitations of the County hindering implementation of programs; and, screen and prioritize the resulting list based on feasibility and ability of a County entity to implement. · Compiling a list of common themes and compatible recommendations from the various Federal/State programs which can satisfy multiple objectives. · Compiling a list of incompatible recommendations from the various Federal/State programs which may hinder county agencies. Develop a list of needed agreements and interpretations to eliminate incompatibilities. · Identifying data gaps and need for additional assessments/studies. · Enabling/targeting future grant funding opportunities for coastal water quality. · Identifying need for new or modified County programs as necessary. · Identifying staffing needs and positions. · Listing feasible recommendations for immediate implementation. · Identifying written policies that need to be integrated into the ongoing General Plan Update process.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 393 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
SUMMARY Because its major thrust is to integrate up to ten Federal and State coastal water quality programs at the county level, this proposal is clearly consistent with the Mission statement namely, "To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations." More importantly five of the programs to be integrated were expressly developed to comply with the both the Federal Clean Water Act and the Federal Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments.
GOAL BY GOAL CONSISTENCY Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Element 2 will assess water quality impacts on two major coastal resources, namely fishery habitats (lagoons) and federally listed fish species. The resulting recommendations will be designed to better conserve and manage both the resources (fish and fishery habitats) and the ecosystem (lagoons). Therefore this proposal is consistent with Goal 1.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Because the underlying goals of the Sanctuary and State's Non-point Source Pollution Control Program are aimed at maintaining sustainability of coastal resources by improving water quality, and, because this proposal will enable implementation at the county level, this proposal is consistent.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Because this proposal will require the development of new information (research) via the biological assessments of fish and fishery habitat, and, because it will integrate the development of TMDLs via research being conducted by California State University at Monterey Bay, this proposal is consistent with Goal 3.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 394 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget and Timeline:
# ELEMENT AND TASKS TIMELINE BUDGET
1 INTEGRATION ELEMENT 1a Conduct a review of ten coastal water quality Months 1 to 6 $14,000 programs (federal, state, local and non-profit) 1b Identify roles and responsibilities of the County Months 1 to 6 $8,000 1c Establish any necessary staffing, consulting Months 1 to 3 $5,000 contracts and/or interagency teams 1d Identify the County's current capabilities and/or Months 1 to 6 $8,000 limits for implementation 1e Identify commonalities among the Federal, state, Months 6 to 12 $10,000 county and non-profit programs, and prioritize efforts to build upon the commonalities and facilitate agreements to implement 1f Identify potential conflicts among the federal, state, Months 6 to 18 $15,000 county and non-profit programs, and direct efforts to facilitate agreements on any conflicting issues. 1g Draft and revise Report- Framework for Integration Months 12 to 18 $17,028 and Recommendations Sub-Total 18 months $77,028
2 LAGOON BREACHING and FISHERY ASSESSMENT ELEMENT 2a Consulting Contract- Salinas River Lagoon: Assess First winter after $40,000 the physical water quality of fish habitat in the; fund availability determine the lagoons' water quality profiles before during and after coastal lagoon breaching; Assess fish populations and life-cycles in the lagoons prior to breaching for steelhead trout. 2b Consulting Contract- Carmel River Lagoon: Assess First winter after $40,000 the physical water quality of fish habitat in the; fund availability determine the lagoons' water quality profiles before during and after coastal lagoon breaching; Assess fish populations and life-cycles in the lagoons prior to breaching for steelhead trout 2c Compare the impacts from alternative breaching First winter after $4,000 scenarios (including unmanaged "natural" fund availability breaching) to put the current breaching practices in needed perspective. 2d Contract administration of both Salinas and Carmel Months 1 to 12 $12,000 River Lagoon assessments (15% overhead)
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 395 Draft Plan, October 2001 2e Integrate the assessment with the California Months 1 to 12 $5,000 Coastal Commission requirements for coastal lagoon breaching permitting and support the effort to obtain 5 year breaching permits from the State, 2f Integrate the data gathered from the assessment Months 8 to 12 $3,000 with the ongoing implementation of the Carmel and Salinas River Lagoon Management and Enhancement Plans, and with FishNet 4-C Goals Sub-Total Months 1 to 12 $104,000
3 PHASE II SCOPE OF WORK ELEMENT Develop scope of work for a Comprehensive $6,000 Surface Water Quality Integration Plan Sub-Total Months 12 to $6,000 18 TOTAL Months 0 to 18 $187,028
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 396 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County Marin County Department: Community Development Agency Prepared by: Alex Hinds, Community Development Agency Director Phone number: (415) 499-6278 Address: 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 308 San Rafael, CA 94903 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Preparation and Implementation of a Marin County Watershed Management Plan Project location: Marin County Total cost: $160,281 Funding request: $160,281
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 397 Draft Plan, October 2001 I. SUMMARY
Marin County is requesting $160,281 from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program to:
1) Prepare a comprehensive watershed management plan.
The purpose of the plan is to:
§ Prepare a comprehensive Marin County watershed management plan; § Identify best management practices for inclusion in the Marin Countywide Plan; § Prioritize restoration projects for funding; § Provide a framework for subsequent preparation of watershed management plans for each of Marin County’s watersheds.
Preparation of the plan will cost $60,281 and take two years.
2) Phased implementation
In order to implement the plan:
§ The recommended best management practices and restoration policies will be brought to the Marin County Board of Supervisors for prioritization and funding. § The County will allocate $100,000.00 to fund best management practices and restoration projects which are consistent with state and county goals.
II. CONSISTENCY WITH MISSION AND GOALS
Mission
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California’s ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
The County of Marin is proposing to prepare a comprehensive countywide watershed management plan to protect, restore, conserve and enhance our existing coastal and watershed resources. The objective is to develop a management strategy that addresses Marin’s resources such as: 1) the National, State and local parks and County open space areas; 2) diverse and abundant wildlife, including several federally and state threatened and endangered plant and animal species; and 3) recreational opportunities such as kayaking, hiking, and bicycling. This strategy would result in a series of goals, policies and programs to guide land use decisions for future generations, through:
§ Inclusion in the Marin Countywide Plan § Establishment of framework for future preparation of watershed-specific workbooks § Implementation of adopted policies through funding of best management practices and restoration projects.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 398 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Marin County is surrounded by water on three sides: the Pacific Ocean to the west, San Francisco Bay to the south and east, and San Pablo Bay to the east. Additionally, there are a variety of significant waterways that traverse our landscape, including Lagunitas Creek, Walker Creek, Novato Creek, Miller Creek and Corte Madera Creek. In addition to these water resources, there are many other benefits of living in such a unique environment, including our proximity to national, state and local parks, large open space and agricultural areas dominating the western part of the county, and a rich diversity of wildlife. Specifically, the existing ecosystem supports abundant and diverse wildlife including aquatic animals and shorebirds, as well as increasingly rare native plant communities. However, these same amenities also attract new homebuilders, tourists and weekend recreational visitors which impact local creeks, estuaries, wetlands and bays. A prime example is the impacts on Tomales Bay resulting from roads, tourism, agriculture, and small town settlements. This increase in human activity has resulted in reduced water quality due to increased sedimentation, high coliform counts, and excessive nutrient loading. The most recent reports reveal that Marin provides habitat for twelve plant and ten animal species that are designated as threatened and/or endangered by either Federal or State agencies. The increased human activity has been partially responsible for the loss of estuarine habitat and riparian corridors, ultimately causing a decrease in the numbers of many species including coho salmon, steelhead trout, red-legged frogs, and plant species such as Point Reyes Bird’s Beak, White-Rayed Pentachaeta, and Showy Indian Clover.
It is the goal of the County of Marin to work in cooperation with the many community watershed groups to facilitate partnerships and promote stewardship of our watersheds. To that end, the County is dedicated to preparing a comprehensive watershed management plan which includes best management practices, in compliance with existing federal, state and local regulations that would protect, enhance and restore our significant watershed areas and the plant and animal species that depend on them. The Watershed Management Plan is intended to guide existing and future activities that directly impact the watershed via Countywide Plan policies and programs. The County is proposing the following:
§ Identification, including geographic boundaries, of watersheds throughout the county; § Identification, assessment and prioritization of the natural, social and other resources in each watershed ecosystem; § Identification of stakeholders and community groups; § Prioritization of areas for protection, conservation and restoration, based on prioritized resources; § Development of best management practices, such as preventing the introduction of urban pollutants to protect downstream waters and mitigating effects of development using biofilters, detention/infiltration basins, pervious pavements, and other strategies for each individual watershed; § Implementation of long-term monitoring and enforcement programs to provide management feedback; and § Adoption of recommended policies from the comprehensive watershed management plan into the Marin Countywide Plan.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 399 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Activities within our watershed areas such as failing residential septic systems and agricultural waste on and near Tomales Bay, has increased sedimentation and coliform counts. These problems threaten to significantly impact the mariculture industry as well as surrounding dairy and cattle operations. The proposed watershed plan and implementation would directly address the economically beneficial ocean and coastal resources such as fishing, mariculture, tourism, and agriculture. The proposed plan would also identify existing water-related activities and discourage activities that negatively impact our watersheds, while promoting and encouraging environmentally sustainable and economically beneficial uses of these watersheds.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, education programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Through development of a comprehensive watershed plan, the County of Marin will adopt a systematic approach to better understand the specific resources, uses, opportunities and problems. Once a general inventory has been completed, the County, in cooperation with other applicable agencies and community groups will prepare recommended policies and programs that educate those who live, work and utilize our watershed resources for inclusion into the watershed plan and the Marin Countywide Plan. Adjunct research and educational activities will also be recommended in the plan.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California’s interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
The County of Marin will work closely with other state and regional agencies to maximize California’s interest in coastal watersheds and state tidelands.
III. Timeline
It is anticipated that the project will begin in September 2001. The Community Development Agency will be the coordinating Agency and will assign a staff person as the project manager for a period of two-years. This person will be responsible for providing management oversight, research, community outreach, contract management, budget and scheduling, and administrative services in accordance with the approved work plan.
The project manager will conduct regular watershed interagency staff meetings with appropriate stakeholders and work with the Natural Systems working group for the Countywide Plan from October 2001 through October 2002. A draft watershed plan workbook will be completed by October 2002 and draft language for inclusion in the Countywide Plan by April, 2003.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 400 Draft Plan, October 2001 IV. Financial Information
Based upon the Federal allocation of $160,281 for the County of Marin, $59,281 would fund preparation of the Countywide Watershed Plan by a team of consultants and staff. A maximum of $60,281 will be used to fund consultant and personnel costs and approximately $1,000 will be allocated to office supplies, copying, etc. The remaining $100,000 will be used for implementation of the adopted policies and programs contained in the Plan by funding projects which restore, protect and maintain the coastal resources identified in the plan.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 401 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Santa Barbara County Department: Public Works Prepared by: Cathleen Garnand Phone number: (805) 568-3561 Address: 123 E. Anapamu, Suite 18 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Project Clean Water Project location: Countywide Total cost: $100,000 Funding request: $100,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 402 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Project Clean Water is a program administered by the County of Santa Barbara to protect the public health and enhance environmental quality in County watersheds and at beaches. Among the program goals of protecting the health of recreational public and the environment, is an effort to foster public involvement and awareness. The County works closely with the cities and community organizations to accomplish common goals and promote an integrated, cohesive approach in protecting and improving water quality.
The total Project Clean Water program budget for FY 00-01 is approximately $2M. This includes money from grants as well as money from the County’s general fund and the County’s Tobacco Settlement Advisory Committee. There is no long-term funding source for this program. The proposed CIAP funds will replace a portion of the overall program budget.
The following program elements have been selected for budget support from the Coastal Impact Assistance Program, and are described in detail below.
· Media, information and outreach materials · Land use policy review – New development guidelines · Pollutant loading estimates – Storm drain inspections · Demonstration restoration projects
1. Media, Information and Outreach Materials
Budget: $10,000 for printing Schedule: Annually
Many community members are unaware of the ongoing creek and ocean water pollution problem in Santa Barbara. People need to be informed and educated in order to modify their personal behavior and take appropriate measures on an individual basis to alleviate the problem. An educated community is also more supportive of County (and City) efforts to enforce existing ordinances and/or new ordinances where needed, and willing to support future funding on an ongoing basis.
To achieve and maintain the required level of community awareness and support, an ongoing effort to communicate the messages developed by Project Clean Water’s media campaign is necessary. This effort includes costs associated with printing material. The budget of $10,000 will focus on print material distributed by Project Clean Water to the businesses and community members of Santa Barbara County.
This project is consistent with Goal 3 (Research, Education, and Technology) by advancing educational programs into the community to meet future needs and uses of coastal resources.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 403 Draft Plan, October 2001 2. Land Use Policy Review – New Development Guidelines
Budget: $30,000 Schedule: One year, commencing upon receipt of CIAP funds
As communities are built out, impervious surfaces replace natural topography, and storm water peak flows and volume increase, resulting in adverse changes to stream morphology and ability to sustain habitat. Also, urban areas add to the pollutant loads in runoff by creating new sources. In fact, with the progress made under the Clean Water Act over the past twenty-five years in controlling pollution from factories and other industrial point sources, the concentration of pollutants from non-point sources (urban runoff) is today responsible for over half the water quality problems in the United States3. With industrial development being minimal in Santa Barbara County, the water quality problems we experience are clearly from nonpoint sources, both urban and agriculture.
Controlling pollutants AFTER they have entered the storm drain system is far more complex and expensive than preventing or reducing the discharges at the source. Therefore, if areas proposed for development or redevelopment are planned, designed, and constructed in a manner that is sensitive to issues of urban runoff, then future pollutant loads and hydrologic impacts from these areas will be minimized.
The NPDES Phase II regulations require that Santa Barbara County implements and enforces a program to address storm water runoff from new development and redevelopment projects. Our objective is to reduce the discharge of pollutants into urban runoff from new development and redevelopment using a strategy that combines 1) reducing/eliminating sources, 2) managing site runoff volumes and flow rates so that they are similar to pre-construction levels, and 3) treating the runoff as close to the source as possible.
To achieve this, the County has begun a thorough review of policy and procedures used in the land use process. This includes project approval and conditioning for new development, as well as inspection and enforcement actions during construction activities. Consistent and effective measures must be applied by all County departments for projects conducted by County contractors as well as private development.
Areas of deficiency will be addressed and corrected. A guidebook of practices and procedures to protect water quality will be developed. Policy will be interpreted and clarified for planners and inspectors. Enforcement actions will be applied consistently. A stand- alone water quality ordinance will be developed with authority for the County to implement the NPDES Phase II regulations accordingly. The improved County program will be described as a permit condition in the NPDES permit (NOI submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board in March, 2003).
This project is consistent with Goal 2 (Economic Sustainability) by encouraging environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial coastal resource
3 U.S. EPA National Water Quality Inventory, Report to Congress 1994.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 404 Draft Plan, October 2001 development activities. This project is also consistent with Goal 1 (Stewardship) by helping to manage the County’s coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports these resources.
3. Pollutant Loading Estimate – Storm Drain Inspections
Budget: $21,000 for one year’s effort Schedule: Annual
The goal of the Pollutant Loading Estimate study ($6,000) is to estimate the pollutant emissions into the Santa Barbara Channel from the urbanized unincorporated areas so that catchments with the largest contribution of each pollutant can be identified and prioritized. The results will be interpreted and used to develop a monitoring and management program. The management program would involve applying Best Management Practices that are targeted toward those pollutants of concern.
Storm drain inspections will be included to ascertain the condition of the storm drains and determine locations of illicit (not storm water) connections ($15,000). Inspections of urban storm drain systems often show where improper or illegal plumbing connections are made. Because the storm drain and sanitary sewer systems develop cracks and leaks with age, and because these lines are often in close proximity, problems of infiltration from one system to the other are also common. There are also some areas in the County where septic systems are used. Those areas determined by the Environmental Health Division of the Public Health Department will be focused on during the inspections to determine whether infiltration could be occurring.
This project is consistent with Goal 1 (Stewardship) by assessing the County’s coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. It is also consistent with Goal 3 (Research, Education, and Technology) by advancing research to meet future needs and uses of coastal resources.
4. Demonstration Restoration Projects
Budget: $39,000 contributed toward EPA grant Schedule: one year’s funding as part of a three-year project effort
In March 2000, the Santa Barbara County Water Agency received a grant of $250,000 to initiate and carry out a three-year Project Clean Water program. The project include develop a draft Guidebook for reference-based assessment of riverine wetland functions in southern Santa Barbara County. The Guidebook developed in step 'a' above will then be used to design, implement, and monitor the success of three demonstration restoration projects on south coast creeks.
To date, the Guidebook has been developed and field-tested; a final draft is expected in May 2001. The CIAP funding will be used for the demonstration restoration projects that are part of the original proposal. The three sites, described below, were chosen based on historical impacts to the area and the potential for water quality improvements due to
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 405 Draft Plan, October 2001 restoration efforts. These restoration projects comprise an essential element of an ongoing interagency and public effort to improve water quality in local urban creeks and the near shore environment of the adjacent Pacific Ocean within southern Santa Barbara County.
To demonstrate feasibility and establish the basis for a local program, wetland restoration projects will be implemented on two of the three sites already identified as degraded ecosystems; a comprehensive design will be created for the third site (see below). These sites will serve as local models for future restoration projects, as well as provide a visible demonstration of the importance of wetland restoration efforts for the public. Sites identified for these demonstration restoration projects are not part of any project mitigation requirement, but are, however, representative of the array of potential restoration sites that exists in Santa Barbara County.
The three restoration sites are located on San Jose, Arroyo Burro, and Carpinteria Creeks. These three creeks traverse urban and agricultural land uses. They were selected for demonstration projects because the creeks are geographically diverse and exhibit degraded wetland ecosystem functions. Preliminary restoration plans have been developed for evaluating feasibility and budget, but development of objective measures of success has been problematic. Detailed restoration approaches, incorporating the HGM assessment, will be targeted to restore native plant species, improve habitat for species of conservation concern (including steelhead trout), improve water quality, and reduce erosion of the creek banks.
1. The first proposed project restoration area is located on five sites along San Jose Creek in Goleta, California. All five sites occur between Cathedral Oaks Road and Calle Real in an area framed by N. Kellogg Avenue to the west and Patterson Avenue to the east. This effort is being coordinated with restoration efforts funded by the Southern California Wetlands Recovery Project that are occurring at adjacent sites.
2. The second proposed project restoration area is on Arroyo Burro Creek . Arroyo Burro Creek flows through the last major undeveloped corridor in the City of Santa Barbara. A 70- acre, city-owned park, Arroyo Burro County Beach, and 130 acres of open space at Ellings Park surround the estuary at the creek’s terminus. The demonstration project site itself stretches from the ocean to 2,000 feet upstream. The one-acre project zone selected for restoration extends on both banks of the creek. This project will be the first phase of a multi-phase restoration effort. The South Coast Watershed Resource Center (under contruction) is adjacent to the restoration site. Restoration efforts will be highly visible and can be used for educational purposes through the Center.
3. The third proposed project would create a preliminary restoration plan to restore/enhance approximately two acres of the riparian corridor along the Carpinteria Creek (See Figure 4b). Objectives and benefits include eradication of non-native plant species and establishment of native vegetation to enhance the existing highly developed mature native canopy. The Carpinteria Creek Recovery Team (CCRT) has recently been formed to implement efforts to restore steelhead to the creek through removal of barriers and stabilization of banks. This demonstration site is part of a larger project that also involves development of a city park and a land exchange with CALTRANS. Because this
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 406 Draft Plan, October 2001 site now has the potential to be part of a long term and watershed-wide effort, we will develop a design for the site that includes the objectives of the City of Carpinteria and the CCRT. This plan will then be available to the team when the watershed planning process is complete and they are ready to move forward with restoration. The plan will be a valuable tool in attracting additional funding for implementation.
Restoration efforts at these sites will improve water quality by providing increased filtration and absorption of pollutants and thermal regulation of water. In addition, it will provide recreational, habitat, and aesthetic improvements, as well as providing key opportunities for public education on the importance or riparian restoration efforts.
Project Partners include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Santa Barbara County (Project Clean Water), the Cities of Santa Barbara and Carpinteria, South Coast Watershed Alliance, and Conception Coast Project.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This project is consistent with Goal 1 (Stewardship) by conserving and managing the County’s coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. Also, this project is consistent with Goal 4 (Jurisdiction and Ownership) by maximizing the County’s interests in coastal watersheds.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 407 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Alameda County Department: Community Development Agency , Planning Department Prepared by: James Sorensen, Planning Director Phone number: (510) 670-5400 Address: 399 Elmhurst Avenue, Room 136 Hayward, CA 94544 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: San Lorenzo Creek Bayland Restoration and Sedimentation Assessment Project location: San Lorenzo Creek Watershed Total cost: $145,894 Funding request: $145,894
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 408 Draft Plan, October 2001 SAN LORENZO CREEK BAYLAND RESTORATION AND SEDIMENTATION ASSESSMENT
Phase I: Initial Assessment · $30,000 for Baylands restoration and channel reconfiguration assessment, and · $30,000 for Bayland sediment source control assessment Phase II: Implementation Planning · $84,894 for subsequent, detailed studies, and plans and specs Phase III: Implementation · Implement recommendations from Phase II by means of other funding sources.
The Community Development Agency Planning Department of Alameda County respectfully requests a grant of $145,894 for the San Lorenzo Creek Bayland Restoration and Sedimentation Assessment. This project will enable us to design and implement projects to improve the rapid decline of the health of the San Lorenzo Creek Watershed and improve water quality in San Francisco Bay. Your support will provide leadership to our community as well as enable us to work toward our mutually desirable goal of protecting and improving the invaluable coastal resources of San Francisco Bay for current and future generations.
Background:
Covering approximately 50 square miles, the San Lorenzo Creek Watershed is one of the largest watersheds in Alameda County. The San Lorenzo Creek system ranges from a highly modified channels in the urbanized areas to relatively natural creeks in its headwater areas. The creek flows westerly through the communities of Castro Valley, Hayward, San Lorenzo, and San Leandro entering San Francisco Bay approximately 14 miles southeast of the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge. From 1952 to 1963, the US Army Corps of Engineers channelized approximately 5 miles of the creek, 4.1 miles of which are completely lined with concrete, and the remainder is lined with either earthen channel or a combination of concrete and earthen channel.
This channelization is causing negative impacts on the natural resources of the creek and San Francisco Bay. As part of an urban environment, the creek is used for recreational purposes by local residents. Wildlife, including fish and waterfowl, also live in the creek and surrounding areas. Flow patterns within the creek are changing due to increased development within the watershed. Increases in the amount of sediment flowing through the channel are creating a large sediment delta at the mouth of the creek in San Francisco Bay. The overall health of the watershed is declining due to habitat destruction, streambank and slope failures, nonpoint source pollution, excessive runoff, and soil erosion. These problems are having a detrimental effect on beneficial uses and natural resources of the watershed and the bay.
Steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were common in the creek about thirty years ago, but their numbers have dropped precipitously. These fish are part of the Central California Coast Evolutionarily Significant Unit, and were listed as a federally threatened species by the National Marine Fisheries Service in 1997. The decline in numbers of Steelhead is largely due
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 409 Draft Plan, October 2001 to various construction projects throughout the watershed. These projects including, dams, drop structures, retention basins, culverts, concrete channels, and the diking of tidal wetlands, have led to habitat destruction and fragmentation of the watershed.
Project Summary:
Phase I: Initial Assessment There is no longer a tidal marsh at the mouth of San Lorenzo Creek due to creek channelization and diking of adjacent baylands. This assessment will evaluate options for restoring historic tidal wetlands and improving wildlife habitat within the channel corridor. Restoration of San Lorenzo Creek baylands and channel are compatible with the need to improve wildlife habitat while maintaining flood control capacity. The channel’s existing configuration, hydrology, availability of land, and biological needs will be considered. The final scope of work will be conducted with the assistance of the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The assessment will focus on options that would improve water quality and wildlife habitat, and decrease sedimentation of San Francisco Bay. This portion of Phase I will cost approximately $30,000 and take approximately three months to complete.
The Phase I assessment will also include options for comprehensive watershed enhancement projects including but not limited to re-vegetation, bioengineered erosion control measures, and improved grazing and land used management practices. The goals of these enhancement projects are to lessen the sedimentation of San Francisco Bay at the mouth of San Lorenzo Creek. This portion of Phase I will also cost $30,000.
The total budget for Phase I will be $60,000.
Phase II: Implementation Planning Based on results of the Phase I preliminary assessment, a more detailed survey will be conducted of the most promising options with intent to develop a plan, specifications for specific improvements, and a timeline. The actual costs of constructing the improvements along with sources of funding will also be identified. Phase II will cost approximately $85,894 and take six months to complete.
Phase III: Implementation In Phase III, the recommendations from Phase II will be implemented. In future years, additional funding will be requested to continue sediment source control and coastal habitat improvements.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The project calls for collaborative efforts from staff of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and stakeholders such as, the San Lorenzo Creek Workgroup, Friends of Crow Creek, US Army Corps of Engineers, Alameda County, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Alameda County Resource Conservation District, and
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 410 Draft Plan, October 2001 watershed residents. At a recent public meeting, members of the community voiced support for habitat improvements and continued flood protection.
This project is consistent with the stewardship and economic sustainability goals of the Coastal Impact Assistance Program. The project will coordinate management efforts at the county (Alameda) and federal (Army Corps of Engineers) levels, while supporting local groups and residents to conserve and enhance wildlife habitat. Furthermore, restoration of riparian and wetland habitats will improve the water quality within San Lorenzo Creek Watershed and San Francisco Bay.
An assessment of the coastal resources of the San Lorenzo Watershed will provide necessary information to develop a strategy for baylands restoration and improvement of the surrounding ecosystem.
Finally, the project advances the understanding and application of new and innovative technologies needed to improve coastal resources and decrease sediment supply to San Francisco Bay.
A grant of $145,894 from the NOAA and the California Resources Agency will enable Alameda County to increase wildlife habitat within a watershed with significant potential for restoration and improve the ecological and recreational needs of this regionally important watershed. We welcome the opportunity to partner with the NOAA and the California Resources Agency so that we may work toward our mutually desirable goal of preserving and improving coastal resources for the benefit of current and future generations.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 411 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: County of Los Angeles Department: Department of Public Works Prepared by: Lyn Wallensak, Principal Analyst Phone number: 213-974-4267 Address: Chief Administrative Office 754 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project location: Los Angeles County Total cost: $185,000 Funding request: $185,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 412 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The County of Los Angeles’ 72 miles of shoreline include approximately 27 miles of public beaches that draw an annual attendance of more than 53 million visitors. Continued public enjoyment of these coastal resources requires a comprehensive approach that promotes environmental protection and provides the appropriate amenities and adequate access for the public.
The Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project balances the need to maintain public access to popular beach locations and to preserve the ecological integrity of coastal watersheds assisting in the development of a comprehensive watershed management plan to identify and reduce current and future urban runoff.
The Topanga Creek watershed is a diverse area that includes many land uses, including residential and business developments, as well as wilderness areas that include important ecological habitat. Because of the historical development of the Topanga Canyon, many of the residential and business developments are concentrated along the major creek channels.
The Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment will provide additional analysis and data necessary to complete the Topanga Creek Watershed Management Plan, the draft of which was prepared for the County’s Board of Supervisors in April 1996 and is part of the Topanga Creek Watershed Management Study. The goal of the Management Plan is to develop an integrated management approach to the entire Topanga Creek watershed that will protect the existing habitat, properties and infrastructure; help identify sources of pollution in the watershed; and provide guidelines, including voluntary citizen involvement, to improve the quality of the watershed.
The Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment will provide information to better assess the water quality needs and remedies for the Topanga Creek Watershed. The Hydrology Analysis will analyze the hydrological processes of the watershed and help determine the feasibility of lagoon and watershed enhancement and restoration designs. The analysis will make use of models that can evaluate both continuous storm events and normal low flow conditions, allowing planners to assess the natural and anthropogenic impacts in the watershed.
The Water Quality Study will examine the relationship between water quality and associated land use practices, source and non-point source pollution, and distribution of sensitive species through regular water quality sampling throughout the watershed with sampling locations to be determine by criteria that include proximity to suspected sources or non-point sources of pollution hot spots; habitat types necessary to support target species; and public access. Many sampling points will be necessary to gain a full understanding of the patterns resulting from septic failure, the impacts of corralled animals and the trends associated with seasonal flushing.
In addition, this project will include the monitoring of water movement by utilizing dyes or other tracers to identify the time it takes for water to move through the watershed under dry and saturated conditions. This monitoring will also assist in tracing the movement of pollutants
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 413 Draft Plan, October 2001 through the watershed, which is currently unknown. Further, additional flow monitoring will take place using current meters and/or an additional stream gage to measure the contributions from major subdrainages during a rainfall event in the fall and under saturated conditions toward the end of the rainy season.
Consistency with Mission and Goals: Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project will provide vital information to complete implementation of a comprehensive approach to the conservation and enhancement of the County’s coastal resources and furthers the County’s long-term goal of protecting the environmental quality of its coast through coordinated management of its coastal watersheds. Specifically, the Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project will further the State of California’s goals in the areas of Stewardship and Economic Sustainability.
Goal 1, Stewardship: The Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrology Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project will further the goal of assessing, conserving and managing the Los Angeles County coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports them for the benefit of current and future generations.
The Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrologic Analysis and Water Quality Assessment will further the County’s understanding of the watershed and the impacts of various developments and land uses on water quality. The information gained from these analyses will assist the County in developing a comprehensive watershed management plan for the Topanga Creek watershed, protect sensitive habitats, and enhance the environmental quality of coastal waters.
Goal 2, Economic Sustainability: The County’s beaches and coastal amenities are significant assets in attracting tourists to the County, which in turn provides a substantial economic benefit to the County and to the State of California. It is estimated that tourism supports more than 437,000 jobs in the County, and the estimated 23.8 million overnight visitors to the County contributed more than $12.3 billion to the County’s economy during 1999 alone.
By protecting the Topanga Creek watershed through the Topanga Creek Watershed Hydrologic Analysis and Water Quality Assessment Project, the County can alleviate potential future water quality problems associated with urban runoff and thus ensure that the public can enjoy its ocean resources along Topanga Beach.
Goal 3, Research, Education and Technology: Not Applicable.
Goal 4, Jurisdiction and Ownership: Not Applicable.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 414 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget and Cost Estimate:
Amount Total Project Budget $325,980
Available Funding Santa Monica Conservation District $140,980 Coastal Impact Assistance Program $185,000
Total Available Funding $325,980
Project Cost Estimate
Acquisition $0 Architectural & Engineering Services $0 Consultant Services $304,900 Project Management $0 Permits and Plan Check $0 County Services $2,250 Misc. Costs $18,830 Construction $0
Total Project Cost $325,980
Project Timeline:
Completion Date Water Quality Study:
Track water movement through watershed Sept. 30, 2002
Perform lab analysis on water movement and report results Nov. 30, 2002
Weekly water quality sampling Oct. 31, 2002
WQA/QC samples sent for analysis March 31, 2003
Monthly water quality sampling Nov. 30, 2003
Volunteer Training May 31, 2003
Monthly Topanga Creek report card Oct. 31, 2003
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 415 Draft Plan, October 2001 Evaluate quality control and data collected Oct. 31, 2003
GIS overlays of water quality Oct. 31, 2003
Report data and recommendations Nov. 30, 2003
Summary Report Nov. 30, 2003
Hydrological Analysis:
Perform Hydrological analysis Sept. 30, 2002
Evaluate three scenarios for lagoon configuration Sept. 30, 2002
Develop phased approach to lagoon and watershed enhancement/restoration Sept. 30, 2002
Final summary report Nov. 30, 2002
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 416 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: County of Los Angeles Department: Chief Administrative Office Prepared by: Lyn Wallensak, Principal Analyst Phone number: 213-974-4267 Address: 754 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration 500 West Temple Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 E-mail: [email protected] Title of proposed project: Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project Project location: Los Angeles County Total cost: $220,000 Funding request: $220,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 417 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The County of Los Angeles’ 72 miles of shoreline include approximately 27 miles of public beaches that draw an annual attendance of more than 53 million visitors. Continued public enjoyment of these coastal resources requires a comprehensive approach that promotes environmental protection and provides the appropriate amenities and adequate access for the public.
The Los Angeles County Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project balances the need to maintain public access to popular beach locations and to preserve the ecological integrity of coastal watersheds by reducing future urban runoff.
The Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project is a collaborative effort of Los Angeles County with other public agencies and nonprofit organizations to protect the headwater of three major coastal watersheds: Zuniga Creek and Pond of Old Topanga Creek of Topanga Creek; Dry Canyon Creek of Arroyo Calabasas of the Los Angeles River; and Cold Creek of Malibu Creek.
As part of its efforts, Los Angeles County and its partners have identified 3,000 acres of core habitat for acquisition that not only will ensure the preservation of the headwaters for these three major coastal watersheds, but also will protect critical east-west and north-south wildlife corridors in the Santa Monica Mountains. The properties identified for acquisition connect Topanga State Park and Big Wild to Malibu Creek State Park and to Malibu Lagoon on Santa Monica Bay and through Simi Hills to the Los Padres National Forest.
The Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition component will acquire three parcels, valued at $4.4 million and totaling 120± acres, adjacent to State-owned parklands in the Zuniga Creek and Pond of Old Topanga area of the Topanga Creek Watershed, which empties into the Pacific Ocean just west of Topanga County Beach. The Mountains Restoration Trust, a nonprofit organization that has worked extensively with Los Angeles County to preserve critical habitat lands in the Tri-Watershed area, has an option on these parcels, which include a small watershed, and represent a critical habitat for approximately 40 species, including western pond turtles and nesting raptors.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project further implements the County’s comprehensive approach to the conservation and enhancement of the County’s coastal resources through the acquisition into public ownership of critical land that will protect its coastal watersheds. Specifically, the Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project will further the State of California’s goals in the areas of Stewardship, Economic Sustainability, and Jurisdiction and Ownership.
Goal 1, Stewardship: Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project will further the goal of assessing, conserving and managing the Los Angeles County coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports them for the benefit of current and future generations.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 418 Draft Plan, October 2001 The Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project will leverage other available funds to purchase three high priority parcels to protect the headwaters of Topanga Creek, and thus the ecosystem that contributes to the quality of the coastal resources. By acquiring these parcels and protecting them from future development, the County will reduce potential future water runoff and increased flow volumes through the Topanga Creek watershed, and its attendant problems including erosion and pollution.
Goal 2, Economic Sustainability: The County’s beaches and coastal amenities are significant assets in attracting tourists to the County, which in turn provides a substantial economic benefit to the County and to the State of California. It is estimated that tourism supports more than 437,000 jobs in the County, and the estimated 23.8 million overnight visitors to the County contributed more than $12.3 billion to the County’s economy during 1999 alone.
Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project will sustain this economic resource for the County by helping to protect the quality of the beach-going experience for Los Angeles County residents and visitors alike. By protecting the Topanga Creek watershed through the Tri- Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project, the County can alleviate potential future water quality problems associated with urban runoff from development of this land and thus ensure that the public can enjoy its ocean resources along Topanga Beach.
Goal 3, Research, Education and Technology: Not Applicable.
Goal 4, Jurisdiction and Ownership: The Tri-Watershed Preservation and Acquisition Project will also further the goal to maximize California’s public agency interests in coastal watersheds by acquiring into public ownership three critical parcels to protect the headwaters of Topanga Creek as part of a broader effort to preserve and protect 3,000 acres of critical habitat lands that support the ecosystems of the northern California Coast and the Santa Monica Mountains.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 419 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget and Cost Estimate:
Amount Total Project Budget $1,100,000
Available Funding Mountains Restoration Trust $300,000 Prop. 117 Grant Program $300,000 Santa Monica Mountains $280,000 Conservancy Coastal Impact Assistance Program $220,000
Total Available Funding $1,100,000
Project Cost Estimate
Acquisition $1,100,000 Architectural & Engineering Services $0 Consultant Services $0 Project Management $0 Permits and Plan Check $0 County Services $0 Misc. Costs $0 Construction $0
Total Project Cost $1,100,000
Project Timeline: Completion Date County and Mountains Restoration Trust execute acquisition and maintenance agreement Dec. 18, 2001
Escrow opens Dec. 26, 2001
Property acquisition completed Jan. 26, 2002
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 420 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County: Sonoma County Department: C o un t y A d m i n is t r a t o r ’ s O f f i c e Prepared by: Gayle Goldberg Phone number: (831) 454-7580 Address: 575 Administration Drive, Suite 104-A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Various Stockpile Sites within Sonoma County Project location: Various locations along rivers, creeks and streams throughout the County Total cost: $49,295 Funding request: $49,295
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 421 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
In some areas of the county, slide materials that accumulate on county roads during storms are deposited in temporary sites until disposal. The proposed project will conduct engineering and environmental studies of potential spoil sites that could be developed for county road maintenance activities. These spoil sites would be used to permanently stockpile slide material accumulated on county roads during storms, particularly in remote, mountainous terrain roads adjacent to the Russian River, Gualala River and major creeks within the county. The development of permanent spoils stockpile sites would help prevent the possibility of erosive and slide debris from being deposited on hillside slopes above creeks and rivers that support salmonid species. Engineering and environmental studies would involve locating potential sites, conducting environmental reviews for impacts mitigation, performing field surveys and preliminary engineering, and determining purchase feasibility and costs. The cost for conducting these engineering and environmental studies is $49,295.
Implementation Plan
Establish Interdisciplinary Staff: Development of future stockpile sites will take a team of engineers, environmentalists, surveyors, and right-of-way agents to take the project from inception to the beginning stages of land acquisition. Staff may be composed entirely of in- house staff or a combination of in-house staff and consultants. Workloads will have to be determined based on concurrent projects and the number of viable stockpile sites that become available for development through the search process. The amount of work for each discipline will have to be quantified, and the need for hiring consulting staff will be determined, if necessary.
Determine Stockpile Scope and Limitations: The scope and limitations of the locations, size, and operational factors of the stockpile sites will have to be determined. A study of land use permits, building and grading permits, and environmental permit conditions and limitations will determine the locations and size of potential stockpile sites. Targeted sites may include, but not be limited to, old quarry sites in need of land restoration, sites that are within existing road right-of-ways, and sites that are otherwise not able to be conventionally developed for other land uses. With the scope and limitations determined, identification of potential sites could begin.
Identification of Potential Stockpile Sites: Identification of potential stockpile sites will be conducted in two stages. First, a review of information available from the Permits and Resource Management Department (PRMD) may develop leads toward potential sites. Land planning staff at PRMD work with a variety of land use issues and are familiar with various segments of the county overall. This depth of knowledge and expertise will provide a large canvas of potential stockpile sites within the bounds of the county. Additionally, the Transportation and Public Works Department (TPWD) road engineering and field maintenance staff are a significant resource for identifying potential sites along the vast county maintained road system.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 422 Draft Plan, October 2001 Accumulation of Prospective Sites and Prioritization: Following sites information received from PRMD and TPWD staff, potential sites will be prioritized for field review based a number of factors. These factors would include potential right-of-way acquisition costs, location to roads with active slides, degree of construction difficulty, environmental impacts, and access.
Field Review: The sites with the highest priority (based upon the factors described above) will be field reviewed by the engineering and environmental team for compatibility with environmental, engineering/construction, and land use constraints and road maintenance purposes. The field review will create a list of sites that minimize environmental impacts and their associated costs, minimize engineering and construction costs, minimize right-of-way acquisition process and costs, and maximize the capacity of stockpiled materials.
Right-of Way Acquisition Potential: Stockpile sites that require right-of-way acquisition will be reviewed by TPWD right-of-way agents for potential acquisition cost. Property owners of potential sites will be contacted regarding their interest in selling portions of their property for use as stockpiled sites. Potential sites will be removed from consideration if the right-of-way costs are considerable or if the acquisition process could become protracted. The preference is to acquire sites through simple easements or deeded rights-of-way that are inexpensive and straightforward.
Stockpile Site Engineering: Following the final determination of the best suited sites from an environmental, preliminary engineering, and road maintenance perspective, the site development engineering process will start. Field surveys will be performed, followed by the making of topographic plans, grading plans, and engineering detail plans suitable for construction. The plans will include access, drainage, grading, and erosion control details.
Permits: Following development of the engineering plans, permits for construction can be applied for from a variety of agencies such as the Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries Service, Army Corps of Engineers, and PRMD.
Stockpile Site Construction: The cost of construction is not factored into the proposal cost. It is anticipated that TPWD road maintenance forces will be able to construct the sites if the sites are designed simply and on a small scale (approximately 25,000 cubic yards on average). It is preferable to have a number of small sites scattered along various areas within the county road system, so the sites should not be large. Depending on the location and size of the stockpile sites, it is estimated that three to five sites will be constructed.
Stockpile Site Maintenance: TPWD road maintenance staff would be responsible for maintenance of the site and compliance with imposed permit conditions for the ensuing years of operation.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The development of permanent stockpile sites for road slide material meets the goal of the California Impact Assistance Program, primarily through the goal of stewardship in conserving
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 423 Draft Plan, October 2001 California’s ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources. The Sonoma County coast represents significant marine and anadromous resources in an extremely dynamic coastal ecosystem. The “Coastal Impact Assistance Program: Program Administration and Plan Development Guidance” specifically sites projects that assist in the “protection, restoration and enhancement of coastal water quality” [IV.1.C.]; and “mitigating damage to fish, wildlife or natural resources” [IV.3] as authorized uses of funds.
The Russian River, Gualala River and major creeks within the county are a significant fish habitat area for both the Central California Coast Steelhead evolutionary significant unit (ES) and the Central California Coast Coho salmon ES, both of which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Currently in some areas of the county, slide materials that accumulate on county roads during storms are deposited in temporary sites until disposal. These slide materials can erode and deposit sedimentation into rivers and creek beds. The proposed project will provide permanent sites that minimize environmental impacts to the watershed. This will reduce silt deposition in river and creek beds, which will improve water quality and prevent degradation of fish habitat.
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Item Amount Stockpile Site Identification $ 5,000 Preliminary Engineering and Environmental 5,000 Right-of-Way Acquisition 1 5,000 Engineering 29,295 Permits 5,000 Construction 2 0 Total CIAP Project Costs $49,295
1 Selection of sites presumes only right-of-staff staff time, not actual land acquisition costs. 2 Sites to be constructed by TPWD maintenance forces.
The proposal presumes that all environmental, engineering, and right-or-way labor costs will be absorbed by the CIAP project allocation. Actual acquisition cost for right-of-way and cost for construction will be absorbed by PRMD right-of-way purchase and road maintenance budgets. Other funding sources may used to offset right-of-way purchases and construction costs, if they become available.
Project Schedule Completion Dates:
July 1, 2001 Submission of projects October 1, 2001 NOAA initial plan approval December 31, 2001 Develop Staff and Determine Scope March 1, 2002 Identify Potential Stockpile Sites
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 424 Draft Plan, October 2001 May 1, 2002 Prioritize and Field Review Sites August 1, 2002 Right-of-Way Determination and Site Engineering June 1, 2003 Permits and Right-of-Way Acquisition November 1, 2003 Construction
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 425 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation, Silverado District Prepared by: Margaret Baumgratz and Marla Hastings Phone number: (707) 939-6185 Address: 20 East Spain Street Sonoma, CA 95476 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Adobe Creek Watershed Management Plan Project location: Sonoma County - Adobe Creek watershed; Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park, tributary to the Petaluma River Total cost: $25,000 Funding request: $25,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 348 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
The proposed project is to prepare a comprehensive watershed management plan for the Adobe Creek sub-watershed of the Petaluma River (flows to San Pablo Bay) within the Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park. The plan will develop strategies and actions to control surface runoff and sedimentation into the stream and prevent contamination of water quality from possible bacterial sources. These natural processes are believed to be accelerated by disturbances caused by past land management practices prior to park acquisition, including extensive agriculture resulting in significant degradation of the riparian corridor. Accelerated sedimentation from eroding soils continues to aggravate stream bank instability, causing additional erosion and sedimentation. Significant fisheries habitat for threatened and endangered anadromous salmonids has been degraded or lost.
1. Water Quality Possible sources of water-quality degradation include erosion, runoff, septic systems, yard waste, oil and grease, and agricultural fertilizers and pesticides. Basic biological, chemical, and physical properties of streams are important indicators of stream health and are crucial factors in determining the types and numbers of animal and plant species that can survive within the wetted portion of the stream.
When funding is secured, we will expand the monitoring program by assessing water quality at selected sites on Adobe Creek. This monitoring will help us understand how water-quality parameters change from year to year in different portions of the stream and will help to determine source locations and magnitude of contributions. Trained volunteers will carry out much of the monitoring work. Sonoma Ecology Center staff will develop quality assurance and training procedures with review by qualified professionals and CDFG approval. Monitoring will be conducted with emphasis on water chemistry.
Volunteers will assess and analyze factors limiting steelhead and will be trained to use standard water-quality testing kits following the protocols developed by the EPA in Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual. Water-quality monitoring will examine factors including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO), conductivity, and pH. Sampling will be conducted in three teams, for which separate testing kits will be purchased. For DO and pH, CHEMets or similar water-test kits will be used for field determinations using vacuum-sealed ampoules that hold testing reagents. The kits are easy to train volunteers to use, with changes in the ampoule liquids compared to color charts to assess concentration. For conductivity, ORION or similar hand-held meters will be purchased, one for each kit. The meters are specially designed for conductivity analysis in the field, with the durability and ease of reading necessary for teams of volunteers. Temperature will continue to be evaluated with stainless- steel thermometers already in use by the volunteers. Results of water-quality testing will be used to draw conclusions about the specific parameters as they relate to stream health.
For this task, monitors will be trained for collection of data for two seasons under this grant, with the expectation of continuing the program indefinitely. To train volunteers to work in both water-quality arenas, at least four training workshops will be held. The training will result in a group of approximately 30 knowledgeable, concerned citizens who can gather valuable data to assist the SEC in assessing watershed health. This group will be divided into three teams for
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 349 Draft Plan, October 2001 BMI sampling and six teams for water-quality sampling. Interpretation of the biological, physical, and chemical information from water-quality monitoring will help to identify limiting factors for the steelhead population, pinpoint sites for further monitoring, and provide a blueprint for ecological restoration in the watershed.
Work Products for Water Quality · Two or more trainings, approximately 30 trained volunteers · Report of two years of water chemistry monitoring as performed by volunteers For each report listed above, summary of methods and data sources used, discussion of results, and references.
2. Excessive Sediment Yield
The natural process of soil erosion can be accelerated by human activities. According to the NRCS, natural soil erosion rates in watersheds similar to Adobe Creek watershed, estimated at 1 to 4 tons per acre per year, can more than double through land uses. Sheet and rill erosion, which remove an approximately even layer of soil over large areas, can account for the erosion of up to 10 tons of soil per acre without significant visual effect and more than 20 tons when gullies and rills form. Streambank erosion, caused by stream flows out of equilibrium with their channels, can account for 300 tons or more of soil loss per acre per year. Mass wasting, such as landslides and soil creep, although not quantified here, account for large amounts of sediment loss in certain areas in the Adobe Creek watershed. When soil losses result in increased delivery of sediment to the stream, as is common in the rainy season, suspended sediment concentrations and stream sediment bedloads can increase. Our approach to sediment yield issues in Adobe Creek will be two fold, as outlined below.
Task 2a. Analysis of Hillslope Sediment Production and Land-Use Relationships
Using GIS and field-collected hydrologic data, SEC will assess hillslope sediment production and characterize erosion rates in the Adobe Creek watershed. The GIS model will incorporate factors of the MUSLE (modified universal soil loss equation), including slope, upslope catchment area, vegetation, soil type, and bedrock geology. These factors are weighted and combined to predict the level of sediment production across the landscape. The predicted sediment production will be calculated in 10-meter cells, and aggregated over subwatersheds. The resulting maps will indicate areas most prone to sediment production based on physical and biological landscape features.
Volunteers will collect hydrologic data to quantify actual sediment levels, flow rates and other key information (as described below in Task 2b). These sediment data will be compared to predicted values for sediment production from the GIS model. The analysis will focus on separating baseline sediment levels from current sediment levels. The results should depict where sediment production is higher than a predicted baseline erosion rate.
Sediment levels will be measured, so the results can be tracked over time and long-term trends can be established. SEC will also evaluate the range of effects from different land uses on sediment levels by comparing subwatersheds. In the next three months, we will have completed a parcel-level land use coverage for the entire watershed. This fine-scale data
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 350 Draft Plan, October 2001 provides an opportunity to create an index of land use types, roads, and other sources of sediment production. Sediment field measurements will be compared among subwatersheds to test correlations with the land use impacts. If correlations can be found, the results will be used to calibrate the GIS sediment production models, so they can be applied across the watershed with a known uncertainty. Future field work in other subwatersheds can be used to refine the models.
The overall questions addressed by this analysis include: How much sediment is being produced and where? How much of this sediment is from natural causes vs. human impacts? Where are the most erosion-sensitive areas? What is the relationship between roads, land use, and sediment in our watershed?
Currently, no comprehensive program exists for assessing turbidity and sediment loadings in Adobe Creek. Methods to assess sedimentation include measuring rainfall, flow, total suspended sediment (TSS) and/or turbidity and correlating among the parameters. We will expand our volunteer program with a coordinated data collection program for TSS and/or turbidity in Adobe Creek using the best available methods. Sampling sites will be chosen on the basis of testing the hypothesis that land cover changes and management practices cause significant increases in peak flow runoff and sediment input to streams. Samples will be collected according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture protocols and in consultation with RWQCB volunteer monitoring specialists. Samples will be analyzed by qualified staff in SEC's SVWS laboratory following EPA protocols and a QAPP approved by the RWQCB, with pro bono assistance where needed from certified laboratory.
Monitors will be trained for collection of data for two seasons under this grant, with the expectation of continuing the program, as additional funds become available. Volunteers will be trained at four workshops previously described for Task 1. Interpretation of the data relating to excessive sediment yield will help to provide information to the community regarding human-induced sedimentation, identify turbidity-related limiting factors for steelhead, pinpoint sites for continued monitoring, and identify restoration sites in the watershed.
Work products for Sedimentation: · Four training workshops, 4-10 trained volunteers · Report of two years of TSS or turbidity monitoring as performed by volunteers · Maps of parameters used in the model and model outputs, classifying subwatersheds for their erosion potential · Map of restoration opportunities/priorities for sediment by subwatershed For each report listed above, summary of methods and data sources used, discussion of results, and references.
3. Education Coordination for Watershed Studies – Adopt-A-Watershed
Adopt-A-Watershed is a community-based non-profit that assists educators in implementing the Adopt-A-Watershed curriculum, an award-winning, sequential K-12 science curriculum that emphasizes hands-on activities in the local watershed. Students learn to understand the long- term changes in their environment by participating in projects, which use the same sites each year. The students' participation in restoration projects and community actions teach students
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 351 Draft Plan, October 2001 the value of their local environment. AAW will expand environmental education efforts in elementary schools and launch the "Fish in Schools" program district-wide. In expanding the elementary school program, we will introduce and discuss fish, streams, habitat, bugs and eventually the entire watershed, to ensure students understand concepts that are requisite to studying fish in great detail in fifth grade. We will provide training, in-class support, field trip assistance, curricula and essential lab materials so that the elementary schools can teach focused, sequential science and prepare students to participate in the "Fish in Schools" program.
4. Public Relations and Planning
All Stakeholders will be invited to attend public meetings where objectives of watershed plan and concerns will be addressed. DPR will make consistent and continuous efforts to involve stakeholders in the watershed plan process.
Consistency with Mission and Goals of CIAP:
Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park is situated approximately midway along Adobe Creek, a tributary to the Petaluma River. Adobe Creek has gained attention in recent years due to its recognized importance and value to anadromous steelhead populations. Through other grant funding sources, such as 319h (RWQCB) the department has accomplished meaningful water quality improvements in the State Park by addressing the highest priority projects. These individual projects, though effective in restoring much of the stream riparian corridor, improving fish passage, spawning beds and fish rearing habitat, and reducing sediment-source contributions in the subwatershed, are not tied to an overall comprehensive conservation plan.
The scope of future work will be improved by a watershed management plan prepared in collaboration with other stakeholders. The proposed project will complement the previous efforts by assessing and planning more detailed and comprehensive corrective measures within the subwatershed context, which will lead to the accomplishment of coastal resource management goals for this park unit. Without a comprehensive planning effort for this subwatershed, an important component of watershed restoration will be missing from the overall watershed health. The region will continue to suffer from degraded coastal resources and low value habitat for anadromous fisheries.
This proposed project conforms with statewide policies and initiatives addressing coastal resource management and watershed protection and restoration goals. The proposed project involves multiple agencies and watershed stakeholders in planning and decision-making. Some of these cooperating agencies are; California Department of Fish and Game (Bill Cox), State Water Resources Control Board, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (Carmen Fewless), Southern Sonoma County Resource Conservation District (David Luther), United Anglers, and Casa Grande High School (Tom Furr). The initiatives of these stakeholders facilitate local, collaborative planning efforts to accomplish coastal resource and water quality goals by encouraging participation in ways that look to solutions of mutual benefit to those affected by watershed management decisions.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 352 Draft Plan, October 2001 The department will continue to plan for watershed improvements in its park units through forming partnerships and alliances, and by encouraging volunteer support and citizen involvement including an educational component. An element of the education component will involve the K-12 Adopt a Watershed Program conducted through local schools and supported by the proposed project proponents and collaborators. Adopt a Watershed is an increasingly popular and now well-established program in California that uses a local watershed as the focal point of a science curriculum.
Adopt a Watershed promotes stewardship toward the land through classroom activities, field studies, restoration projects, professional speakers and community outreach programs. Through these activities, students are provided with skills to make educated, informed decisions regarding wise resource management.
A now famous project, conducted in the 80’s, involved the efforts of students and teachers at Casa Grande High School in Petaluma. The Adobe Creek Restoration Project, organized by the United Anglers, removed trash and restored reaches of Adobe Creek by planting willows and other trees. Students were responsible for a decision to abandon and remove an old dam and reservoir that restored Adobe Creek to a free-flowing stream. In addition, students planned and constructed a fish hatchery and visitor center to rear and release steelhead, which has since been enlarged and improved as a Chinook salmon facility. These valuable educational opportunities and linkages to coastal ecosystem resources would be maintained and further developed through this project.
In addition, Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park contains significant archeological resources that are actively being lost to streambank failures. Assessment of causal factors to this process will be essential to reduction of cultural resource impacts.
Schedule of Work:
Many of the activities proposed in this application operate on an ongoing schedule or have schedules dependent on our collaborators. The table below outlines the schedule for those tasks that are constrained by season.
Year Spring Summer Fall Winter
2001 Contract signed AAW (assumed) peak flow 2002 sampling, WQ sampling, AAW WQ sampling, AAW TSS sampling, PR Planning AAW peak flow 2003 sampling, WQ sampling, AAW PR Planning WQ sampling, AAW TSS sampling,
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 353 Draft Plan, October 2001 AAW.
2004 WQ sampling, AAW PR Planning Final reporting
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Nearly all work included in this proposal would be contracted out to partners in this project. Three years of project oversight and administration would be conducted by DPR, but all technical work would be undertaken by experienced experts in this field.
Upon award of a grant, a detailed cost breakdown and timeline would be requested of contractors.
2001: AAW: $5,000 2002: All water sampling, AAW: $5,000 2003: All water sampling, AAW: $5,000 2004: Final sampling and reporting: $5,000 DPR retained funds for project oversight, administration, public outreach planning and coordination: $5,000
Total Project Budget: $25,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 354 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation Prepared by: Patrick Vaughan Phone number: (707) 445-6547, Ext. 24 Address: California State Parks, North Coast Redwoods District P.O. Box 2006 Eureka, CA 95502 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Espa Lagoon and Watershed Analysis Project location: Humboldt County - Near Gold Bluffs Beach Prairie Creek State Park, North Coast Redwoods District Total cost: $82,500 Funding request: $75,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 355 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
Espa Lagoon, part of a salmonid bearing stream system, has been impacted by sedimentation and attendant eutrophication related to past logging and mining in its upper watershed. Inhibition of tidal mixing due to barriers (road and berm) at the downstream end of the lagoon, beach progradation due to littoral drift exacerbated by upcoast land use, nearby dune stabilization related to colonization by European beach grass and abnormally high amounts of large wood at the Espa Creek-ocean interface have disrupted the dynamic processes inherent to this coastal ecosystem. In addition this coastal lagoon has been a significant Native American occupation site.
This project will analyze the upper watershed to identify and prioritize treatment of potential sediment sources through GIS and air photo analysis and field reconnaissance; measure the potential for tidal mixing and water flux through salinity measurement and staff plate measurement upstream and downstream from the barriers below the lagoon; determine the hydrologic impacts of barrier removal through stream profile and cross section analysis; assess and test the best methods for controlling exotic plants and managing the large wood that affect the lagoon and dune system; measure the fish populations and other water quality parameters relevant to their health (dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH); evaluate the long term trends in beach progradation via air photo analysis and historical review; identify any potential impacts from nearby park development (a nearby residence and diesel fueled generator) and assess what impacts ground disturbance or restoration might have on nearby Native American sites. These parameters require analysis so that the restoration strategies have focused, well-thought out, integrated and effective goals for implementation.
In addition, unsuccessful tsunami core studies have occurred in this vicinity in the past (unsuccessful because of thick anthropogenic sediments, which either inhibited reaching or disturbed potential tsunamigenic strata). Further opportunities for alternative exploration sites will also be assessed as part of this project.
Once these parameters have been defined and a plan of action developed other agencies interested in water quality and fish health can assist with funding for implementation. For example, the California Department of Fish and Game has a program for the restoration of coastal watersheds (SB 271). The State Regional Water Quality Control Board also administers a program related to water quality improvement. Information obtained from this project would be used to submit such a proposal.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
The purpose of this project is to develop a comprehensive and coordinated implementation strategy for coastal ecosystem restoration. The project is within a state park with very low potential for development within the subject watershed. Therefore there is a high potential that the restoration work would be preserved for future generations, consistent with the mission of the CIAP program.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 356 Draft Plan, October 2001 This project also meets at least three of the stated goals to achieve the mission: 1) stewardship – the goal of this project is the assessment of a coastal lagoon, its watershed and the beach interface with the goal of their restoration to a naturally functioning ecosystem, 2) economic sustainability – the road barrier assessment at the downstream end of the lagoon will involve determination of the viability of upgrading a culvert to a flatcar bridge, which should have enhanced economic and environmental sustainability. Furthermore, alternative energy systems are being explored by State Parks and Humboldt State University to a diesel fueled generator that currently serves a park residence near the lagoon, 3) research and education – study of the Native American culture at Espa lagoon may have implications for other coastal projects near native American sites on the north coast of California through determination of linkages between sites. Potential opportunities for further tsunamigenic study will also be assessed (Vaughan has obtained grant funding for paleoseismic work [National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program] in the past).
Timeline (arbitrarily use July 1 as project start date):
A. GIS/air photo analysis (Vaughan - State Park geologist/ National Park GIS staff) – 7/1 to 9/30 year 1 B. Field reconnaissance in upper watershed and GIS integration (State Park geology staff) – 9/30 to 12/31 year 1 C. Water quality and water level measurement (National Park hydrology staff) - 7/1 to 6/30 year 1 D. Stream cross section development and analysis (National Park hydrologist/staff) – 9/30 to 10/31 year 1 E. Fish monitoring (National Park fish biologist/staff) – 7/1 to 6/30 year 1 F. Exotic plant and large wood management (pilot program – CCC’s/State Park ecology staff) – 7/1 to 8/30 year 1 G. Assessments of park impacts and potential tsunamigenic sites (Vaughan [geologist]) – 4/1 to 4/15 year 1 H. Native American study (contract – Humboldt State University) – 7/1 to 12/31 year 1 I. Plan integration and report writing (Vaughan) - 7/1 to 9/30 in year 2
Cost estimate:
A. GIS/air photo = $7,500 B. Field reconnaissance = $11,500 C. Water quality = $10,000 D. Stream cross sections = $7,500 E. Fish monitoring = $7,500 F. Exotic plant program = $10,000 G. Park impact/tsunami assessment = $750 H. Native American study = $7,500 I. Report and project management = $7,500 J. Overhead @ 20% on A. through H., inclusive = $12,500 Total = $82,500 ($75,000 from CIAP and $7,500 from State Parks – see budget)
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 357 Draft Plan, October 2001 Estimated budget: ______Amount Amount of Project Requested Cost Share Total ______
PERSONNEL COSTS
Level of Staff Hours Rate
Eng. Geologist (CSP)172 $40.00 $ 750.00 $ 6,140.00 $ 6,890.00
Ecologist (CSP) 40 34.00 0.00 1,360.00 1,360.00
Physical science 1341 13.50 18,100.00 0.00 18,100.00 Technicians (NPS)
Environmental 852 13.50 11,500.00 0.00 11,500.00 Services Interns (CSP)
NPS GIS specialist 200 24.00 2,400.00 0.00 2,400.00
NPS biologist 100 27.50 2,750.00 0.00 2,750.00 NPS hydrologist 200 27.50 5,500.00 0.00 5,500.00
CCC’s (contract) 8,000.00 0.00 8,000.00
Water quality/volume instruments 3,000.00 0.00 3,000.00
Water quality lab (contract) 3,000.00 0.00 3,000.00 Cultural study (contract) 7,500.00 0.00 7,500.00
Overhead at 20% (requested amounts)12,500.00 0.00 12,500.00
TOTAL COSTS $75,000.00 $7,500.00 $82,500.00
NPS = National Park Service CSP = California State Parks CCC = California Conservation Corps
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 358 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Resources Agency Prepared by: Maria Rea, Assistant Secretary for Salmon and Watershed Restoration Phone number: (916)654-1885 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: For the Sake of the Salmon Regional Watershed Coordinators Project location: Coast of Central and Northern California Total cost: $180,000 Funding request: $180,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 359 Draft Plan, October 2001 Background: In late 2000, For the Sake of the Salmon (FSOS) contracted with the California Resources Agency for $225,000 to assist California coastal watershed groups for a one-year period (through December 1, 2001). With these funds, FSOS is contracting for three Regional Watershed Coordinators to provide direct technical assistance to local watershed groups in three coastal regions of California (North Coast, Central Coast, and South Central Coast). This assistance focuses on organizational development and referrals to salmon and watershed information resources and specialists. The top priority for each Regional Coordinator is to help watershed groups develop technically sound, well-written proposals to fund watershed assessment, planning and restoration projects. Regional Coordinators are organizing funding workshops, networking forums, and capacity building activities in coastal areas.
The Regional Watershed Coordinators, which work on an average of 20-25 hours per week, commenced work on December 1, 2000. FSOS has received very positive feedback from watershed groups regarding the Coordinator's services. To continue the California Regional Watershed Coordinator program into 2002 and beyond, FSOS is currently pursuing additional funding to supplement any renewed funding through the California Resources Agency. Accordingly, FSOS is preparing a grant application for $100,000 to $125,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation's (NFWF) Pacific Salmon Grassroots Initiative program. Initial discussions with NFWF officials in San Francisco have generated a very positive response.
Project Summary: By adding the above mentioned level of NFWF funding to a second year of funding (i.e., CIAP) from the California Resources Agency in the amount of $180,000 to $225,000, two primary options for sustaining and expanding the California Regional Watershed Coordinator program emerge:
1. Scores of watershed groups exist in Southern California that could benefit from the Regional Watershed Coordinator program. The combination of renewed California Resource Agency support and NFWF funds would allow the program to add a South Coast Regional Coordinator. 2. Demand for the current program has already exceeded “supply” in the sense that the Coordinators are only available 20-25 hours per week. Combined NFWF and Resources Agency funding would facilitate expansion of the program to approximately 30 hours per week for the three existing positions.
Some combination of the above options is also possible. Irrespective of the final structure of any expanded program, renewed support from California Resources Agency, leveraged by a NFWF grant, would provide for early assurance that the current Regional Watershed Coordinator program would have the multi-year continuity essential to retaining qualified Coordinators and to delivering consistent services to watershed groups.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 360 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: On going support for three FSOS Regional Watershed Coordinators is consistent with the mission of Coastal Impact Assistance Program in that in order to have coordinated and consistent watershed management in Northern and Central Coastal California, technical assistance to local watershed groups must be readily available. As stated above, we plan to do this by providing CIAP funds to FSOS so that it can continue to contract for three Regional Watershed Coordinators.
Goal 1 Stewardship: This proposal addresses stewardship of ocean and coastal resources by providing assistance to local watershed groups in developing technically sound, well-written funding proposals for watershed assessment, planning and restoration projects.
Goal 2 Economic Sustainability: The document California’s Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future states that ocean dependent industries contributed $17 billion to the state economy in 1992, creating over 370,000 jobs that year. That economy is largely based on the existence of clean coastal waters for sustainable fisheries, swimming, healthy marine resources, and the existence of beaches that are safe from erosion. Watershed assessment, planning and restoration projects that are funded and implemented by local watershed groups will potentially lead to improvements in coastal water quality.
Goal 3 Research, Education, and Technology Development: This proposal will facilitate research and education by providing continuing funding for Regional Coordinators who are currently organizing and holding funding workshops, networking forums, and capacity building activities in coastal areas.
Goal 4 Jurisdiction and Ownership: This proposal is intended to increase the already existing coordination between the Resources Agency’s departments, other State and federal agencies, universities and local groups/landowners involved in watershed management. This coordination will eliminate duplicative efforts and is in the best interest of cooperative and consistent watershed management.
Project Budget:
· Three Regional Watershed Coordinators $ 180,000
Project Schedule:
CIAP funding would permit FSOS Regional Watershed Coordinators to continue and expand their work through the year 2002.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 361 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation, Channel Coast District Prepared by: Ronnie Glick, Resource Ecologist Phone number: (805) 899-1413 Address: 1933 Cliff Drive, Suite 27 Santa Barbara, CA 93109 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Gaviota Creek Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource Management Plan Project location: Santa Barbara County Total cost: $100,000 Funding request: $100,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 362 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
PROBLEM STATEMENT Gaviota Creek is one of the largest sediment sources into the Santa Barbara Channel. It drains approximately 20 square miles of the western end of the Transverse Range in southwestern Santa Barbara County. Gaviota Creek remains in a natural condition; however, there are a number of problems that threaten to degrade aquatic habitats, alter natural stream geomorphic processes, impact natural migration of sensitive wildlife, and damage wetland vegetation.
Aerial photographs after storms in 1998 show a plume of sediment from Gaviota Creek that measured approximately 20 miles into the Santa Barbara Channel. Mitchell Swanson Hydrology and Geomorphology (June 1999) prepared a cursory examination of the watershed and documented some of the degraded features of the watershed. Swanson found that increased sedimentation is pervasive throughout the watershed, and threatens to degrade water quality, habitat values, and physical stream processes. CDPR has documented steelhead trout migration barriers in the lower three miles of the watershed. Additionally, over the past two years of monitoring, CDPR has documented instances of higher than normal water temperature, increased algal growth, and lower than normal dissolved oxygen levels in the lower three miles of the watershed.
Land use practices throughout the watershed are a significant source of the existing water quality and habitat degradation. To date, there has not been any planning to address water quality in the Gaviota Creek watershed. The proposed project offers an opportunity to improve marine ecosystems and ocean water quality by addressing siltation and water quality degradation on Gaviota Creek.
CDPR proposes to implement a Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource Management Plan (WMP) on Gaviota Creek. The proposed WMP will provide a forum for all property owners to work cooperatively in addressing surface water and habitat degradation in Gaviota Creek. The WMP will provide an action plan to address the root causes of surface water degradation in Gaviota Creek. The proposed WMP is consistent with and complements existing efforts by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to address non-point sources of pollution in surface waters. The proposed effort stresses voluntary implementation of Best Management Practices to reduce non-point source pollution, consistent with the Statewide Non-Point Source Pollution Control Program. The RWQCB is working with CDPR to secure funds for the proposed WMP.
CDPR proposes to partner with the Cachuma Resource Conservation District (CRCD), the RWQCB, and neighboring property owners to implement this WMP.
SETTING Gaviota Creek drains approximately 20 square miles of the western end of the Transverse Range in southwestern Santa Barbara County. Gaviota Creek drains into the Santa Barbara Channel. The watershed extends 6.5 miles inland and reaches elevations of 1,800 feet above Mean Sea Level. CDPR, CalTrans, and the United States Forest Service own and manage approximately one-third of the watershed. The remaining two-thirds of the watershed is
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 363 Draft Plan, October 2001 privately owned and managed as rangeland. Surface flow within the creek is typical of many steep coastal drainages in southern California, with highly variable surface flow between periods of winter storms and the summer drought. Flows range from 0.0 cfs in summer and fall to a peak estimated discharge of between 6,000 and 7,000 cfs in February 1998 (Swanson 1998).
HABITAT VALUES Gaviota Creek provides habitat for a number of rare, threatened and endangered aquatic species including the California red-legged frog (Federal threatened), two-striped garter snake (Species of Concern [SC]), tidewater goby (Federal endangered), southwestern pond turtle (SC), and arroyo chub (SC). In addition, Gaviota Creek supports an active steelhead trout (Federal Endangered) run. A recent survey of the lower 3 miles of the main stem of Gaviota Creek found 8 steelhead trout individuals (Glick November 2000).
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN/COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN PROCESS CDPR has identified four phases for implementing a WMP on Gaviota Creek. (See attached flowchart).
· The first phase of the WMP involves identifying critical elements in the watershed (for example: sediment, sensitive taxa, soils, slopes, etc.), compiling existing information on all watershed elements, and identifying gaps in knowledge about watershed features. Some of the data gaps that CDPR has identified for the watershed include stream channel stability, sediment sources and a sediment budget, sources of water quality impairment, and surface and sub-surface hydrology. · The second phase includes a facilitated stakeholder group that will prepare a WMP through a process of establishing baseline data; establishing goals and objectives; identifying problems; determining desired conditions; developing restoration, management, and monitoring activities; determining measures of success; and identifying funding sources. Ultimately, the stakeholder group will determine the final elements to be addressed in the WMP based on the specific needs of the watershed and the interests of the land managers. · The third phase involves implementing the recommendations of the WMP; and, · The fourth phase involves monitoring the results of the management recommendations.
Funding Proposal:
PHASE I $100,000
CDPR seeks funds to complete various steps in this Phase I planning stage of the WMP. Once Phase I is complete, land managers in the watershed will have a comprehensive database of all existing information on important watershed attributes. This database will guide management decisions in the watershed and focus attention, action, and planning on critical areas. This database will guide future monitoring activities in the watershed.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 364 Draft Plan, October 2001 STEP 1A -- Compile and Analyze Data on State Park Lands
Prepare a report that compiles and analyzes existing information about critical watershed elements on State Park lands. This report will summarize existing data, provide complete bibliographic information of relevant studies, analyze existing information for quality and relevance, and identify areas where further study is necessary. The information from this report will help identify problems on the watershed, establish baseline data, and focus additional research on critical areas. Additionally, this work will include preparing a report based on a comprehensive assessment of all roads, trails and other erosional features on Gaviota State Park. This report will provide a prioritized list of erosion control projects for all State Park lands.
Step 1A includes a contract for compiling existing data on Gaviota State Park, a contract to assess erosional features in Gaviota State Park, and funds for project management and oversight.
BUDGET -- $30,450 (Total cost is $38,950, with CDPR contributing $8,500)
STEP 1B -- Compile and Analyze Data Throughout the Watershed
Prepare a report that compiles and analyzes existing information about critical watershed elements throughout the entire watershed. This report will summarize existing data, provide copies or complete bibliographic information of relevant studies, analyze existing information for quality and relevance, and identify areas where further study is necessary. The information from this report will help identify problems on the watershed, establish baseline data, and focus additional research on critical areas.
Step 1B includes a contract for compiling and analyzing existing data throughout the watershed and funds for project management and oversight.
BUDGET -- $16,750
STEP 2 -- Create a Spatial Database to Manage Existing and Future Data.
Develop a spatial database (GIS or other format), enter all existing information into the database, and prepare maps and queries of the data. A GIS database is essential to manage existing and future data that will result from this WMP. This database will allow land managers in the watershed to examine multiple layers of data on watershed features and identify water quality problems, causes and possible solutions. This database will be accessible to agencies, property owners, the research community, and other parties interested in understanding the Gaviota Creek watershed.
Step 2 includes funds for a contractor to develop the database, production of maps and queries from this database, and project management and oversight.
BUDGET -- $46,500
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 365 Draft Plan, October 2001 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
This proposal includes costs for staff to prepare contract documents, administer contracts, and track budgets.
BUDGET $6,300
Consistency with the Mission and Goals:
The proposed Gaviota Creek Watershed Management Plan/Coordinated Resource Management Plan will provide for coordinated management and enhancement of coastal resources and ecosystems. The proposed WMP is consistent with the Mission and Stewardship goals of the CIAP. The WMP will allow landowners to collaboratively assess, conserve, manage and enhance coastal ecosystems and resources. The proposed WMP will provide direct surface water quality benefits to marine and terrestrial ecosystems through the identification of specific actions for best management practices that are designed to reduce sedimentation and improve overall water quality within the Creek thereby improving impacts as the Creek enters coastal waters. The project is consistent with existing efforts by the RWQCB and other agencies.
Timeline:
Formal Notice of Project Award 0 Weeks Contract Between CIAP and CDPR 4 Weeks Notice to Begin Work at District Level 5 Weeks Develop RFP's for Watershed Reconnaissance and Mapping 5 Weeks - 15 Weeks Bid Advertising 16 Weeks - 20 Weeks Bid Award and Contract Processing 22 Weeks - 26 Weeks Draft Database and Maps 42 Weeks Final Database and Maps 48 Weeks
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 366 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget:
Item Unit Unit Cost Extended Total STEP 1A -- Compile and Analyze Data on $30,450 State Park Lands
Contract for Services (Compile Existing 1 $8,500 $8,500 ** CDPR Information) Match Contract for Services (Compile Existing 1 $8,000 $8,000 Information) Contract for Services (Gaviota State Park 1 $20,000 $20,000 Erosion Assessment) Project Management 70 $35/Hour $2,450 Total $30,450
STEP 1B -- Compile and Analyze Data $16,750 Throughout the Watershed
Contract for Services 1 $15,000 $15,000 Project Management 50 $35/Hour $1,750 Total $ 16,750
STEP 2 -- Create a Spatial Database to Manage $46,500 Existing and Future Data.
Contract For Services 1 $43,000 $43,000 Project Management 100 $35/Hour $3,500 Total $ 46,500
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION $6,300
Contract Management 275 $23/Hour $6,300
TOTAL REQUESTED $100,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 367 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Resources Agency Prepared by: Cathy Bleier Phone number: (916)653-5698 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: North Coast Watershed Assessment Program – Phase II Project location: California North Coast Total cost: $450,000 Funding request: $450,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 368 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
This project would help ensure that watershed assessments initiated this fiscal year in six coastal watersheds will be used for watershed protection planning, management, and restoration. It will accomplish this by filling outstanding critical information gaps, establishing monitoring projects where needed, and helping local groups maintain and use NCWAP products for restoration project prioritization, design, and adaptive management.
Background
A North Coast Watershed Assessment Program was established this year as part of a broader eight-point Coastal Salmon and Watersheds strategy to increase salmon recovery efforts. It is an interagency program, consisting of five departments, which is designed to assess watershed conditions for all watersheds with private or state ownership in the North Coast Hydrologic Region over a 7 year period. The Agency considers assessment to the first of a five step restoration process that also includes planning, implementation, monitoring, adaptive management, and outreach and education. These steps are critical to developing cost- effective strategies to protect our best watersheds and restore the rest.
The North Coast Watershed Assessment Program (NCWAP) will: 1) describe watershed conditions, processes, and land uses; 2) provide hypotheses about linkages among these factors and their effect on habitat conditions for salmonids; and 3) develop recommendations for protecting and restoring watersheds. NCWAP was funded to compile, digitize and analyze existing information from multiple agencies, landowners, and stakeholder groups and to conduct field data collection at a relatively coarse scale, for the most part, over the course of one calendar year.
NCWAP will produce very valuable watershed-level information for many watersheds and will also provide products that small landowners or watershed groups need for planning and cumulative effects analysis but could not otherwise afford, such as geology and erosion maps and timber harvest maps. However, more intensive or multi-year data collection or monitoring may be needed to reach acceptable levels of certainty about a particular factor potentially limiting fish and to gain community support for addressing that variable. This is particularly true for instream parameters such as temperature, streamflow, and fish population. Although NCWAP was not funded to monitor fish populations, population data will be critical to agency and landowner efforts to evaluate restoration and regulatory actions.
Proposed Actions
This project will be used to fund follow-up activities by watershed groups, local agencies, landowners or other stakeholder groups that are consistent with watershed assessment data gaps, findings, or recommendations. These may include but are not limited to support for activities such as: · More focused assessment on multi-ownership watershed parameters, such as rural subdivision road assessments
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 369 Draft Plan, October 2001 · Developing or implementing locally based plans to monitor specific watershed variables, consistent with NCWAP findings or hypotheses about potential limiting factors, such as temperature, fish presence/absence · Training or setting up a community-based capacity for using data and models developed by NCWAP, such as riparian recruitment, road erosion, and limiting factors Ecosystem Management Decision Support models · Developing plans to implement priority restoration needs; identifying potential projects and actions that contribute to recovery; and clarifying funding options or other types of incentives · Additional fieldwork to design specific projects to implement high priority restoration, protection, and recovery actions.
Budget:
This budget identifies the types of projects follow-up that we will do, depending on the level of local organization of watershed or stakeholder groups, RCD activity, or other mechanisms for implementing these in the watershed. Other activities may be substituted for fieldwork, such as rural subdivision roads assessments (up to $50K) or other concerns or data needs identified in the NCWAP assessment.
% PWS requiring Hourly Fieldwork: Basins PWS fieldwork Hours costs Total Instream 6 30 ** 0.25 80 * $65.00 *** $219,000 ****
Planning: 6 Professional6 500 $75.00 $ 210,000 Production 6 100 $20.00 $ 12,000
Training/support for local use of NCWAP products 6 60 $25.00 $ 9,000 Total $ 480,000
* Based on estimates for temperature and fish surveys Based on estimate of 80 planning watersheds per basin from NCWAP ** BCP for year 1 Estimate of 500 hrs professional time @ $75 + 100 hrs support staff *** @$25 May substitute uplsope work, e.g. road assmts @ $39K/basin x 6 basins **** = $234,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 370 Draft Plan, October 2001 Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal is consistent with two of the four goals:
· It promotes stewardship for north coast watershed resources by : 1) increasing the quality and credibility of assessments in north coast California watersheds which are needed to guide management, conservation and restoration; 2) promoting local “ownership” of information, monitoring activities, and analytical tools that will assist landowners, watershed groups, and other local stakeholders in planning, implementation, and adaptive management to protect watershed resources; and 3) directly assisting in the development of watershed-level plans to protect, restore or preserve critical habitats and resources. · It will advance research, education, and technology by 1) raising the awareness of local landowners and stakeholders in coastal watersheds through hands-on assessment activities; 2) test and apply various GIS-based modeling tools for analyzing or predicting riparian vegetation and habitat impacts, erosion potential and sedimentation, and limiting factors to listed anadromous fish recovery.
Project Timeline:
Contracts will be implemented in FY 2001/2002 but may last up to 3 years for full implementation.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 371 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Department of Parks and Recreation, Silverado District Prepared by: Margaret Baumgratz and Marla Hastings Phone number: (707) 939-6185 Address: 20 East Spain Street Sonoma, CA 95476 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Sonoma and Santa Rosa Creeks Watershed Management Plans Project location: Sonoma County - Sonoma Creek watershed; headwaters and tributaries in Sugarloaf Ridge and Annadel State Parks, and tributaries in Jack London State Historic Park Total cost: $100,000 Funding request: $100,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 372 Draft Plan, October 2001 Summary of the Project:
The proposed project is to prepare comprehensive watershed management plans for the sub- watersheds within three DPR units. The plans will propose strategies and actions to control surface water runoff and sedimentation into stream courses. These natural processes are accelerated by disturbances caused by past land management practices prior to park acquisition, including road building, timber harvesting, rock quarrying and agriculture. Since acquisition, the increase of “volunteer” trails and associated recreational use has increased sedimentation. Accelerated sedimentation from eroding soils continues to aggravate stream bank instability, causing additional erosion and sedimentation. Significant native plant cover has been lost, fisheries habitat has been degraded, and archaeological sites have been negatively impacted.
Sugarloaf Ridge State Park and Jack London State Historic Park have headwater streams feeding Sonoma Creek and out to the San Pablo Bay. Annadel State Park has tributaries flowing to Santa Rosa Creek to the Russian River which enters the Pacific Ocean on the North Coast near Jenner. Both of these watersheds have gained attention in recent years due to a drop in water quantity and quality, and associated decrease in anadromous fish populations.
This project will integrate each of the ecological concerns into a comprehensive approach for a watershed-level solution based on sub-watershed level assessment. Restoration strategies coordinated and compatible with the entire Sonoma Creek watershed will be assessed. DPR will plan for watershed improvements through forming partnerships and alliances with the Southern Sonoma County Resource Conservation District and the Sonoma Ecology Center. It is through these partnerships that DPR will encourage volunteer support and citizen involvement, which will include an educational component at the watershed level.
Without the comprehensive planning effort for these headwater sub-watersheds, an important component of watershed restoration will be missing. The region will continue to suffer from degraded wetlands and low value habitat for anadromous fisheries. DPR suffers from intense pressure to maintain degraded access roads while providing for public access onto DPR lands. A full evaluation of the current road systems and trail corridors is essential as well as investigation of alternative transportation corridors (both road and trail) that would decrease sedimentation.
Consistency with the Mission of the CIAP:
This project fosters stewardship of public lands as we assess, conserve, and manage significant ecosystems. The Sonoma Valley’s three State Parks hold the headwaters to the Sonoma Creek and Santa Rosa Creek Watersheds. Through other grant funding sources, such as 319h (RWQCB) the department has accomplished meaningful water quality improvements in the State Parks by addressing the highest priority projects. The most significant 319(h) project is currently being undertaken at Annadel State Park, where over three miles of degraded roadway is being decommissioned during summer, 2001. This is a segment of a continuing project in Annadel where l8 miles of roadway have been fully recontoured and topographically restored since l998. These individual projects, though
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 373 Draft Plan, October 2001 effective in restoring much of the stream riparian corridor, improving fish passage, spawning beds and fish rearing habitat, and reducing sediment-source contributions in the subwatershed, are not tied to an overall comprehensive conservation plan. Implementation projects are not possible within Sugarloaf Ridge and Jack London State Historic Park until comprehensive planning has been accomplished.
The scope of future work will be improved by a watershed management plan prepared in collaboration with other stakeholders. The proposed project will complement the previous efforts by assessing and planning more detailed and comprehensive corrective measures within the subwatershed context, which will lead to the accomplishment of coastal resource management goals for this park unit. Without a comprehensive planning effort for this subwatershed, an important component of watershed restoration will be missing from the overall watershed health. The region will continue to suffer from degraded coastal resources and low value habitat for anadromous fisheries.
This proposed project conforms with statewide policies and initiatives addressing coastal resource management and watershed protection and restoration goals. The proposed project involves multiple agencies and watershed stakeholders in planning and decision-making. Some of these cooperating agencies are; California Department of Fish and Game (Bill Cox), State Water Resources Control Board, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (Carmen Fewless), Southern Sonoma County Resource Conservation District (David Luther), and National Marine Fisheries Service (Rick Wantuck). The initiatives of these stakeholders facilitate local, collaborative planning efforts to accomplish coastal resource and water quality goals by encouraging participation in ways that look to solutions of mutual benefit to those affected by watershed management decisions.
This project fosters research, education and technology through educational programs, and technology developments. The department will continue to plan for watershed improvements in its park units through forming partnerships and alliances, and by encouraging volunteer support and citizen involvement including an educational component. An element of the education component will involve the K-12 Adopt a Watershed Program conducted through local schools and supported by the proposed project proponents and collaborators. Adopt a Watershed is an increasingly popular and now well- established program in California that uses a local watershed as the focal point of a science curriculum.
Adopt a Watershed promotes stewardship toward the land through classroom activities, field studies, restoration projects, professional speakers and community outreach programs. Through these activities, students are provided with skills to make educated, informed decisions regarding wise resource management.
All stakeholders will be invited to attend public meetings where objectives of watershed plan and concerns will be addressed. DPR will make consistent and continuous efforts to involve stakeholders in the watershed plan process.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 374 Draft Plan, October 2001 Schedule of Work:
Many of the activities proposed in this application operate on an ongoing schedule or have schedules dependent on our collaborators. The table below outlines the schedule for those tasks that are constrained by season.
Spring Summer Fall Winter
2001 Contract AAW signed (assumed) BMI training, BMI peak flow 2002 BMI sampling, BMI ID sampling, sampling, WQ sampling, AAW WQ TSS sampling, PR sampling, AAW Planning AAW BMI peak flow 2003 BMI sampling, BMI ID sampling, sampling, WQ sampling, AAW PR WQ TSS sampling, Planning sampling, AAW. AAW
2004 BMI sampling, BMI ID Final WQ sampling, AAW PR reporting Planning
Cost Estimate and Budget:
Nearly all work included in this proposal would be contracted out to partners in this project. Three years of project oversight and administration would be conducted by DPR, but all technical work would be undertaken by experienced experts in this field.
Upon grant award, a detailed cost breakdown and timeline would be requested of contractors.
2000: $10,000: AAW 2001: $30,000: BMI and all water sampling, AAW, Initiation of public process with stakeholders and implementing recommendations. 2002: $30,000: BMI and all water sampling, AAW. Continuation of public process. 2003: $10,000: Final sampling and reporting. DPR retained funds for project oversight, administration, public outreach planning and coordination: $20,000
Total Project Budget: $100,000
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 375 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Coastal Commission, Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Prepared by: Natalie Cosentino-Manning Phone number: 415-561-6622 Address: Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Building 201, Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94123 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring Project location: Tomales Bay, Marin County Total cost: $101,000 Funding request: $50,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 376 Draft Plan, October 2001 Introduction:
Two sentence summary of the project: The California Coastal Commission (CCC) in conjunction with Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) will develop and implement a high school student water quality monitoring project for Tomales Bay that would monitor temperature, pH, salinity, conductivity, turbidity and dissolved oxygen; create water quality data that can serve as a baseline for federal, state, and regional water agencies; and to provide students a sense of ownership by taking a key role in the watershed management process by supplying valuable information.
Brief description of Tomales Bay: Tomales Bay is located in Marin County, California, approximately 40 miles north of San Francisco and 15 miles south of the Russian River. It opens at the southern end of Bodega Bay and extends southeast. The drainage areas of Tomales Bay are 223 square miles. Land use on the water shed is chiefly livestock grazing and dairy farming with scattered forested area along the creek valleys and along the western shore of the southern portion of Tomales Bay. There are nine, small, unincorporated towns in the watershed area: Tomales, Inverness, Nicasio, Olema, Point Reyes Station, Woodacre, San Geronimo, Forest Knolls, and Lagunitas. Population in these towns ranges from about 1,000 to 5,000 persons.
Tomales Bay is exceptionally rich in flora and fauna. Virtually all-major types of marine and estuarine habitats occur in or near the Bay, including exposed and protected rocky shorelines, sandy beaches, extensive mud, sand, and eel grass flats, and Salicornia marshes. The Bay supports diverse populations of fish, invertebrates, and algae. It also supports a harbor seal colony and an abundant and varied bird population.
Tomales Bay is the spawning ground for several economically and biologically important fishes and invertebrates. Millions of herring enter the Bay to spawn each year and are important food items for sea lions, harbor seals, and larger fish and birds. The Bay also serves as critical habitat for anadromous fish, and flatfish. Commercial oyster beds support a viable source of employment for the area, and tourism depends largely on the health of the Tomales Bay ecosystem.
The need to study Monitoring of water quality parameters provides valuable information about the ecological status of marine and freshwater systems. Fishermen, oyster farmers, those who use Tomales Bay for recreation or depend upon it for their livelihood, are affected by fluctuations in factors such as salinity, temperature, turbidity, nutrients, and bacteria levels. Bacterial contamination, and algal blooms remain seasonably high and continue to hamper oyster farming. Recently, state and federal agencies have shown renewed interest in the Bay and it’s resources. This interest ranges from public health issues involving aquaculture operations (i.e., commercial oyster farming), to overall management concerns and long-range planning of watershed developments.
How can students help Local high school students will conduct monthly tests for water quality parameters. They will sample in spring, summer, after the first big runoff event in autumn and in winter. The students
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 377 Draft Plan, October 2001 using simple testing equipment will measure all temperature, pH, salinity, conductivity, turbidity and dissolved oxygen in the field. The data collected can then be entered into a spreadsheet and distributed to coordinating agencies.
Project Summary:
Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) will administer the student water quality project. This plan would incorporate partners such as Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNS), Golden Gate National recreation Area (GGNRA), Tomales Bay Watershed Council, California Department of Environmental Health Services (DHS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) that have concerns over water quality in Tomales Bay and in the education of the public, especially the youth.
The Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring Program would educate local high school students on data collection activities aimed at understanding, protecting and improving the physical, chemical and biological conditions in Tomales Bay while providing valuable information. Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary will provide the coordination, training, equipment, and manuals for the program
Consistency with the Mission and Goals:
The Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring will involve the coordination between different agencies and develop a unique experience for local high school students. The program will educate, and foster a sense stewardship on the biologically diverse and economically important Tomales Bay.
Stewardship The Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring will provides the students a collaborative approach to water-related environmental education, build awareness of pollution problems, become trained in pollution prevention, and create skills in environmental stewardship.
Economic Sustainability The Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring will provide information to federal, state, and local water agencies on changing water quality conditions that may negatively impact the oyster and herring fisheries.
Research, Education, and Technology
Through the monitoring process, the students gain an appreciation for the scientific method, exposure to facts about their local watershed, and an opportunity for hands-on learning The data collected from the Tomales Bay High School Student Water Quality Monitoring Program can provide important base-line information to Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNS), Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), Tomales Bay Watershed Council, California Department of Environmental Health Services (DHS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 378 Draft Plan, October 2001 and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Students learn about water quality, estuarine and bay systems, and local flora and fauna. The program will also provide the student skills in real scientific data collection by a using YSI 85 meter and other water quality equipment. The students will also learn how to read the data gathered and distribute to relevant agencies.
Budget, Cost Estimate, and Timeline:
TASK TIMELINE CIAP OTHER GRANT FUNDS 1. Contractor 1/02-12/05 $30,000 $41,000 2. Meet with other agencies Ongoing 3. Identify schools 1/02-3/02 4. Inventory and purchase 2/02-5/02 8,000 equipment 5. Boat costs 7,000 10,000 6. Produce Education manual 6/02-11/02 5,000 7. Distribute manual to schools 12/02-1/03 8. Take students to Tomales to 1/03- 12/05 practice techniques 9. Accumulate data 1/03-12/05* TOTAL $50,000 $51,000
*Future funding through other sources would allow for integration of data into web sites.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 379 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: Resources Agency Prepared by: Renée Hoyos, Special Assistant Watersheds and Outreach Phone number: (916)653-9205 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Tools for Watershed Management Project location: Entire State of California Total cost: $700,000 Funding request: $700,000
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 380 Draft Plan, October 2001 Project Summary:
There are over 150 active watershed partnerships in California working to protect, restore and manage watershed health for a variety of reasons including: protecting drinking water, floodplain management, protecting beaches, restoring native salmon and steelhead fisheries, and cleaning up polluted urban streams. Most of these partnerships are community-based. They were not created by state government agencies, but rather consist of interested landowners, local government officials, businesses, and community activists that have a direct and vital interest in the health of their watersheds. These community-led efforts have become an integral and necessary part of accomplishing the State’s goals of clean water, safe beaches, and restored native fisheries.
Unlike some other states, California does not have a coordinated set of State programs to assist these community efforts and to ensure their effectiveness. To date watershed groups often operate independently of each other and state agencies. In order to do the simplest projects, they must reinvent the wheel of watershed assessment, planning and management for each watershed. Frequently, watershed practitioners are requested to satisfy requirements of the different State agencies and departments without creating an integrated plan that would serve multiple purposes. State agencies and departments, similarly, develop guidance for their individual programs, but do not have resources to evaluate how their programs fit with similar programs of other departments.
The need to create a set of Tools for Watershed Management has been identified by staff from multiple departments and from local practitioners of watershed management. The goal is to assist local groups in accessing sound technical assistance, providing a tool set that serves as guidance on watershed issues to watershed managers and the public. The outcome is a more educated watershed manager, a better project and ultimately improved resources.
This effort to develop a set of consistent watershed tools will not constitute a new program, but will focus on coordinating existing programs to make the state’s programs easier to use from a local watershed practitioner perspective. The Resources Agency proposes to develop these tools through the California Biodiversity Council’s Watershed Workgroup (CBC WWG). This work group consists of watershed program managers from all the major state and federal agencies with natural resources and water quality management responsibility. We have already begun this effort and have several products underway. A dedicated source of funding is needed to ensure products are completed in a timely manner.
This effort will also be informed and guided by the Joint Task Force on California Watershed Management headed by the Resources Agency and the State Water Resources Control Board. This new task force is formed under a new state law AB 2117 (Wayne). This group will be conducting an evaluation of ten watershed projects around the state to look at agency involvement in watershed management and to make a set of recommendations for potential legislation that will affect watershed management in the State. The result of this effort will be a report presented to the legislature on February 1, 2002. These ongoing efforts will be used to help create the tool set for watershed management. We plan to build on existing programs and practices before creating new ones.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 381 Draft Plan, October 2001 By unifying watershed management throughout the state, coastal resources will be served. This set of tools is especially needed for coastal watersheds because of the lack of extension of CalFed funding to the Coast. Ultimately, these tools will benefit all watersheds in the state regardless of their geographic location.
Watershed management tools: The goal is to provide a tool set to assist local watershed groups and landowners with their watershed restoration projects. These tools will assist groups in planning and tracking the success of their projects and provide support for maintaining their projects into the future.
· Watershed Agenda: This agenda will provide the framework for unifying watershed management throughout the state. It will outline the watershed programs that are currently underway and announce upcoming programs. This document will also be used to educate the public about the watershed activities in the State. This document will outline the goals for the watershed program and guide the development of a watershed management tool set. · Statewide Watershed Planning Handbook Suite: This suite of tools will contain handbooks on watershed assessment, planning, implementation and monitoring for local watershed groups and landowners that perform restoration projects. These handbooks will provide an overall framework for watershed project planning that draws upon the work of State, federal and local efforts. · Databases and Libraries: These databases and libraries will provide a repository for data for restoration projects, contain a GIS interface so that data can be displayed geographically and provide information on funding programs. These databases exist or will be available in the next year. Upkeep and maintenance is essential to provide up- to-date information as the legislature requests it. · Create, maintain and update a funding database that will serve as a one-stop shopping site for all issues related to finding, applying for and attaining watershed funding. · Encourage coordinated, multi-agency and multi-institution approaches to watershed management by increasing the exposure of the Natural Resources Project Inventory (NRPI). This database is searchable by habitat, species, county and agency sponsor. Our program seeks overhaul this database to incorporate more robust monitoring outcome data similar to the database used by the Oregon Plan. · Assist in the development of a referenced library to contain watershed restoration documents. · Create a web page to display these tools. The web page would serve as a service center for local groups, landowners, state and federal agencies to locate information, provide educational opportunities, links to other programs, on-line discussions groups and other pertinent data relevant to watershed group’s needs. · Technical Assistance: We intend to assist watershed groups with direct funding or assisting groups to find other sources of funding for their watershed coordinators. This technical assistance can also be in the form of providing workshops for grant writing, facilitation, field techniques and project management.
These tools will provide support, services and advocacy to California’s watershed partnerships and to landowners. In order to provide this support, we need to assemble the resources already available before creating new ones. In this manner, we intend to draw upon the
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 382 Draft Plan, October 2001 collective knowledge of those in the field that perform on-the-ground restoration, agency staff and the academic community to enhance existing resources and to engage the legislature by advancing watershed issue legislation.
Implementation of the tool set: The plan for implementation of the tools set involves collaboration with all the resource agencies and departments primarily through the (CBC WWG). This workgroup’s membership includes federal and State resource agency staff, and local watershed, university, non-profit and environmental group members.
Key Challenges. The key challenges of creating such a tool set are largely geographic in nature. Because California is so diverse, we plan to be sensitive to the need to create a flexible framework rather than one prescribed approach. We understand that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ tool set for California’s watersheds. Another challenge to overcome is assisting departments and other agencies in working together better and more often in watershed management projects. We will be looking at mechanisms for improved collaboration through the Joint Task Force on California Watershed Management.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
Mission: The creation of a statewide tool set is consistent with the mission of Coastal Impact Assistance Program in that in order to have coordinated and consistent watershed management in California, the tools that we have described must be readily available to the public. We plan to do this by providing an extensive web page that contains the tools necessary to assess, plan, implement and monitor watershed projects throughout the state. Better planning and management will ultimately result in better conservation and enhancement of California’s resources for present and future generations.
Goal 1 Stewardship: This proposal addresses stewardship of ocean and coastal resources by seeking to arm watershed managers with planning and assessment guidance that they need for effective management. This approach will help ensure the most effective and efficient approaches are used to develop the most valid management plan for watershed management purposes.
Goal 2 Economic Sustainability: The document California’s Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future states that ocean dependent industries contributed $17 billion to the state economy in 1992, creating over 370,000 jobs that year. That economy is largely based on the existence of clean coastal waters for swimming, healthy marine resources, sustainable fisheries, and the existence of beaches that are safe from erosion. This proposal requests funding that will enable the State to track the status of watershed programs on the coast and throughout the state, to make recommendations on future directions of watershed management. It will allow landowners and manager’s to participate in restoration activities that will ultimately benefit the economy of California.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 383 Draft Plan, October 2001 Goal 3 Research, Education, and Technology Development: This proposal will facilitate research and education by providing a location to post data, conference dates, workshops and to increase networking between watershed groups. The NRPI and Chico databases will contain data from the watershed projects in the state, provide historical data to give an statewide perspective to the state of watershed management past, present and future and contain all funding sources pertinent to watershed restoration.
Goal 4 Jurisdiction and Ownership: This proposal is intended to increase the already existing coordination between the Resources Agency’s departments, other State and federal agencies, universities and local groups/landowners involved in watershed management. This coordination will eliminate duplicative efforts and is in the best interest of cooperative and consistent watershed management.
Project Budget:
· Watershed Agenda $ 50,000 · Statewide planning and assessment handbooks $ 200,000 · Databases & Libraries $ 300,000 · Technical Assistance $ 150,000 $ 700,000
Project Timeline:
Year of Completion
Watershed Agenda 2001 Watershed Handbook Suite 2002 Databases and Libraries 2003 Technical Assistance 2003
Agencies Involved in the CBC WWG
State Resource Agencies, Departments and Commissions Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game California Department of Fire and Forestry Department of Conservation Department of Water Resources Department of Parks and Recreation California Conservation Corps State Coastal Commission State Lands Commission State Water Resources Control Board Regional Water Quality Control Boards I - IV
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 384 Draft Plan, October 2001 Federal Agencies Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Land Management Department of Food and Agriculture Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary National Marine Fisheries Service National Park Service Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA US. EPA US. Forest Service US. Fish and Wildlife Service US. Geological Survey and Biological Resources US Marine Corps
Universities UC Berkeley CSU Chico UC Davis
Local/ Non-profit Groups California Association of Resource Conservation Districts CalTrout Coastal Watershed Council CRMP San Francisco Conservation and Development Commission North Coastal California Counties Association Northern California Counties Association Regional Council of Rural Counties Sacramento-Mother Lode Regional Association of California Counties San Diego Association of Governments San Joaquin Valley Regional Association of California Counties South Coast Regional Association of Counties Southern California Association of Governments Sonoma Ecology Center SCWA SRWP
Private Groups Jones & Stokes, Inc. PP&P
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 385 Draft Plan, October 2001 CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
Department: California Resources Agency Prepared by: Chris Potter Phone number: (916)654-0536 Address: 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 E-mail: [email protected] Title of project: Coastal Impact Assistance Program Administration Project location: Sacramento Total cost: $298,531 Funding request: $298,531
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 427 Draft Plan, October 2001 Background:
To facilitate a coordinated approach for the national Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP), each eligible state designated a state official and agency as a lead contact for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Coastal Resource Management. On February 6, 2001 California Governor Gray Davis designated Secretary for Resources Mary D. Nichols as the lead state official and the California Resources Agency as the lead state agency in developing the state’s Coastal Impact Assistance Plan (see Appendix A for a copy of this letter).
Governor Davis designated the Secretary for Resources as the lead state official for developing California’s Coastal Impact Assistance Plan because she is the cabinet level official in California delegated responsibility for marine and coastal matters. Specifically, 1991 amendments to the California Ocean Resources Management Act transferred responsibility for all non-statutory marine and coastal resource management programs to the Secretary for Resources and created the California Ocean Resources Management Program (Ocean Program) within the Resources Agency.
The Secretary for Resources oversees the activities of 27 departments, boards, commissions and conservancies, collectively referred to as "departments" (see Appendix B for a complete list). CIAP will have broad application to a variety of departments within the State of California government. As such, the Secretary for Resources is well placed to coordinate the participation of these departments, as well as the eligible coastal counties in California.
Project Summary:
The Resources Agency as the designated state agency for implementing the CIAP in California, proposes to hire or contract with sufficient staff to administer the program. Tasks would include, but are not limited to, developing contracts and reimbursement and payment procedures, project oversight (state and local), site visits, and writing and submitting periodic reports to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The expected duration of CIAP implementation is in the range of three to five years.
Consistency with Mission and Goals:
This proposal is fully consistent with the mission established by the Resources Agency in that it provides for comprehensive and coordinated administrative support for state and local agencies implementing CIAP projects. Further, the Resources Agency will achieve Goal 1(Stewardship) by providing the necessary support and oversight to ensure that the state and locally sponsored CIAP projects are implemented with minimal delays.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 428 Draft Plan, October 2001 Budget:
The requested CIAP funding ($298,531) would support one full-time staff position at the Resources Agency for a minimum of 3 years.
Project Schedule:
Implementation of this project was initiated in February 2001 when the Resources Agency convened meetings with local jurisdictions and state agencies to discuss the CIAP and solicit project proposals. Additional tasks already initiated include meetings with NOAA staff, public outreach to local jurisdictions, and development of the Draft Coastal Impact Assistance Plan. Overall, the expected duration of CIAP projects implementation in California is in the range of three to five years.
CA Coastal Impact Assistance Program 429 Draft Plan, October 2001 GOVERNOR GRAY D AVIS
1'he Honorable Dnfl i:;.... a ns Scertury U.S. DcpamucntofComuier-..e 14"• a.nd Constimtional Ave., ~'W Washin11on. D.C. 2(1230
Congr.'l t~• l'1tion s ou you: r-:::ccnt conrlrmation a(td swelning-i:o as Scc1etary of Couunen.:e. l »m pleased to lewn d·.at S.xt?on 903 <1 1' c!1e Cummcrcc, Justice and Sto.er: 1\ppropriw.lons A::t for ~seal Y:::ar 2001 includ:s SlSO million to ~~Si scat~ in 1nitigatin~ the impucl8 from :,:,c Ou:tr Co::tincnuJ Shelf (OCS) oil and gas ;wochlctio.n. caliiomi&, a1t one nf 11ev:f' cJ!_jb)e st.airA " 1th OCS oil ud ~ pruJucriun off its sbot'6...s., is ~ r-..ady m.ovin.I fOC'':\td witb j)e, dovclopnot.1 of cbe Cooual lmpoc1 AMisianre Plan. As you l:Jiov.-. lh!l plan i• required lO be subrniatd 10 d"' Ni!tioc.al O=onlc Annospheric Aimiristtttioo (l'OM} for a;>;>mval by July l , 2001.
Pu~u 11.n1 to Scction 903(:1)(2)(A) T.tm hel'eby desi.gnll!.ing my Sc:crct1U)' for ltesoL>r-ce' f\·lary T>. Nichols tile leod st.at::: officllll and t))e Rci«lur::::::s Agen~y ofCaJifO:ttiu u.s I.he lead $lt1.lt' t\&enc )' tu reprcscnr California in this: i:N'nrt. SE'",('J'tlat)' ~ich u l s und her !Mff are a.l.ref,d;: working 'h'ith membecs of your swrr to help enswe that <;'.a lifomjafs plP.I\ ll'.tets bolll lhe spirit 11u
J look fnrv.·.rd co '.l.uttias with you on mcny issue:s. to came.
Sincerely.
cc! Ms. !\>larg~rel .~. Oavi\ison Ac: ting .~ssistant Aci11:ini.1ttr'lltor !'or Oce~~ -S::r..,i.::-:s and Coastal lvl!ru~ecne:il National Ocean Str•icc· ':\OAl\
STA~ C:l\Pl'IUL · SA.CK•Mbftl"TU. CAUFOR.Nl.~ 95814 • (91(1) 1145 284 l ~
Departments, Commissions, and Conservancies of the California Resources Agency
Departments Department of Boating and Waterways Department of Conservation Department of Fish and Game Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Water Resources California Conservation Corps
Boards and Commissions California Coastal Commission California Energy Commission California State Lands Commission San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Delta Protection Commission Colorado River Board of California State Reclamation Board State Board of Forestry California Fish and Game Commission State Mining and Geology Board Native American Heritage Commission State Park and Recreation Commission State Historic Resources Commission California Water Commission
Conservancies Baldwin Hills Conservancy California Tahoe Conservancy Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Conservancy Rivers and Mountains Conservancy San Joaquin River Conservancy Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Coastal Conservancy
UNITED B T AT!.S DBPARTMENT O F C OMMERCE Na tlanal Ocea nic a nd Atmos pheric Ad mlni:stroatlo n NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE Si !v~r Spring, r.iaryla1' d 20910 J.l.13D
:-1r, . "f.:t tv l·I.i,.:;1:J_::; S:c r= r.~1·y C.:--i. l l ir..··r r: :.a Rt':$O"J r::e$ Ag ::·~\Cy '1 61 ~ ~ i. L l t l S t r~~= S~r:r-~ne ntc, Cali f o.t c1.i.ct 9 58 l'l
'1'°l" (• '\J.;i : .l. ':·O'.l- f:'=.:;:n :;!-'!rvi c•:: is e:!:-: :• .r;;;.ri l:',:,rl,:.v.;.1 1:9<"•'1:·:y . ::·.:· i r:ir:·l*mE'!r.r. .il·:g t. l~t-_;. Co;;;::;t ~. l lrnp;;.::;:-. ,:-.. c.:::i!?. L .:i1~': <:: f'.to grnrr: fc: t 1\?I . Re:::e;ttly . -..,<;- :1 •.~ l ·,:.:.:h ~ :::aff frot'l RC-P.:'E :i: t: t: t a r.:. v~ <:~i()l.{;<.' :i.ti l - '::r' :: c f fic=< l.· ,,..g.:: !·d i r .\J C: A'.."l l:u;;.dir:g .n 1 1<"'; Car. i Ofl!?. . .S ~e·: i f i e .rs 1 1 y . •,1e :Ji~Cu~~c.>:.i L:!c i :~ L ~ .: ·r,:·r?.r. at :. cn o f C'I AP $~c:ti·:>:i :; I (•:) ( :.; , wliic:t: ::.:..'.dr?.1'·;::es t.he :,:1:.F.:.. 1 1_1cn c- f f·. 1 n.,.~ .:;: t o ca 1:.:.:.,.: 1: :."' ccu·'l:. i c::; .:1~ L ~c: t.: >::d l);/ o : l r,;:f i r .el:' i <·::. . Base·:i er. :-.h~r.~ ...~ lc.~ 1.1 :J: io:1s, •·;e h -ei','e ::: r:v :.se<..t t t 1::.> ~ - lc ·::-a :: : C":n o: f imt.:l~ t o1· ~;;.: 1 fC":l""l i :i. i::O.lc1Lle:;.
·1·r..., spe:::i ( .!. '~ :· ~as.;,:i~ fo" :.h i:· ::: -:- ~t 1u; •9 ~a, ~ s ,,•el: as t t'.~ rvv i s=d ~ - l ~t1r.e r. :. s, r.Ye d !. .~Cui;Sed .:.n th* ~:n(: l c-:;~tl !'=:c er r: h ;:; r: T c~nt t ::i i<.~r: re:-:; :;; : L :::.t:-.~e t~.i l l P.". i\i;~ b~· ll'=V':? :!:;;::. t he ·~l;ati~ <:s ar·e r.e~~?:1':i'i l"Y :-.::. i:t<:<:t Cor:gr e~$ i O!la l i rtt enr. fnr r·.._ i.::: p:·o:;:::·il!r.. ? l ~rt:-: e <::ont.:i.cr: 1:1"' ut 3J1- ·.: 13 :!07,1 i f you )~av;: u :ly qu6st i:-Jn~:; .: '-'¥~£·ding t.hl;. m ;;r:r. 1~)· .
s:n:::E:r::::y, I ' ' ~1
CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCY COASTAL IMPACT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM
County:______Department:______Prepared by:______Phone number:______Address:______E-mail:______Title of proposed project:______Project location:______Total cost:______
Each proposal must include a summary of the project and a description of the project’s consistency with the mission and one or more of the goals listed below.
MISSION
To ensure comprehensive and coordinated management, conservation and enhancement of California's ocean and coastal resources for their intrinsic value and for the benefit of current and future generations.
GOALS: Four goals have been established by the State of California to achieve this mission.
Goal 1: Stewardship. To assess, conserve, and manage California's ocean and coastal resources and the ecosystem that supports those resources.
Goal 2: Economic Sustainability. To encourage environmentally sound, sustainable, and economically beneficial ocean and coastal resource development activities.
Goal 3: Research, Education and Technology. To advance research, educational programs, and technology developments to meet future needs and uses of coastal and ocean resources.
Goal 4: Jurisdiction and Ownership. To maximize California's interests in coastal watersheds, State Tidelands, the Territorial Sea, and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
Each proposal must include the following information:
S Department or county staff contact information. S A brief project summary - 1 to 2 pages. S A description of the project’s consistency with the mission and one or more of the goals listed above - 1 to 2 pages. S Cost estimate: If information is available, provide a line item breakdown of project costs. Can be an attachment. S Budget: If information is available, provide a list of project funding sources (i.e., committed and pending). Can be attachment. S Timeline/Schedule: If information is available, provide a timeline/schedule for project implementation and completion. Assume that you will have three years from the signing of a contract to complete your project. Can be an attachment.