DOCSLIB.ORG

Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. The mission of the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works is to provide public infrastructure and municipal services to protect and enrich the daily lives of over 10 million people in Los Angeles County. Cover Photo: Tujunga Dam, Los Angeles County, California. Summary Report Los Angeles Basin Study November 2016 Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Lower Colorado Region Southern California Area Office Jack Simes, Area Planning Officer County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Los Angeles County Flood Control District Watershed Management Division Lee Alexanderson, PE, Associate Civil Engineer Daniel Bradbury, PE, Senior Civil Engineering Assistant “Anyone who can solve the problems of water will be worthy of two Nobel prizes – one for peace and one for science.” John F. Kennedy Acknowledgements Effective water resources management practices are essential in Southern California to help the region sustain its water supply. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District is charged with effectively managing local stormwater to help supplement these vital natural resources. The LACFCD and its partners collaborated with the Bureau of Reclamation to complete this extensive Study. A great deal of time and energy over the past three years went into making the Los Angeles Basin Study a successful planning tool for the region to use in preparing for the challenges of climate change by capturing stormwater through enhanced conservation practices. To that end, many thanks go out to the following: Los Angeles County Flood Control District Gail Farber, Mark Pestrella, Gary Hildebrand, Angela George, Terri Grant, Alan Nino, Andrew Ross, Christine Quirk, Cung Nguyen, Daniel Bradbury, Greg Jaquez, Jonathan Bell, Joshua Svensson, Lee Alexanderson, Mark Lombos, Mercedes Passanisi, Russ Bryden, Steve Ross, TJ Moon, Youn Sim, Christopher Stone, Keith Lilley, Adam Walden, Arthur Gotingco, Eric Batman, Hans Tremmel, Haris Harouny, Iraj Nasseri, Jack Husted, John Bodenchak, Ken Zimmer, Martin Araiza, Matthew Frary, Michele Chimienti, Pat Wood, Rodney Brown, Sterling Klippel, William Saunders Bureau of Reclamation David Palumbo, Bill Steele, Subhrendu Gangopadhyay, Victoria Sankovich, Steve Piper, Tom Pruitt, Tom Nichols, Rob Owen, James Lu, Scott Tincher, Colleen Dwyer, Jack Simes, Amy Witherall Consultant Teams RMC Water & Environment - Persephene St. Charles, Brian Detrick, Dawn Flores, Brenda Ponton CH2M - Kathleen Higgins, Richard Sturn, Nathaniel Summerville Stakeholder Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) Alex Hall, Andy Niknafs, Ben Peralta, Brian Baldauf, Cathy Chang, Dan Drugan, Edith de Guzman, Felicia Federico, Guangyu Wang, Hadley Arnold, Jamie Uyehara, Jeffrey Hwang, John Tangenberg, Kathleen Kunysz, Lauma Willis (nèe Jurkevics), Mark Hanna, Matt Hacker, Melanie Winter, Mike Antos, Nina Jazmadarian, Peter Arnold, Rafael Villegas, Rebecca Batchelder, Reymundo Trejo, Richard Atwater, Richard Slade, Sam Lo, Shane Chapman, Shirley Birosik, Tim Brick, Tony Zampiello, Virginia Wei, Wendy La Army Corps of Engineers Josephine Axt, Ed Demesa, Eileen Takata, Kerry Casey, Nathaniel West Public Members Andy Malone, Belinda Faustinos, Bill Mace, Bonnie Rogers, Brad Boman, Cara Meyer, Darin Kasamoto, David Gould, Deborah Enos, Erinn Wilson, James Alamillo, Jan Dougall, Jim Lamm, Joe Edmiston, Jonathan Perisho, Jonathan Snyder, John Riverson, Kelly Gardner, Kiran Magiawala, Madelyn Glickfeld, Mario Garcia, Mark Grey, Mark Stanley, Marybeth Vergara, Maurice Oillataguerre, Meredith McCarthy, Michael Harvey, Neal Shapiro, Peter Louie, Robert Beste, Roger Gorke, Steve Zurn, Tammy Hierlihy, Ted Johnson, Thomas Contreras If any names have been inadvertently omitted, the Study Team offers sincere apologies. Everyone’s time and expertise contributed during this study is truly appreciated. Participating Agencies Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster Pomona Valley Protective Association c/o City of Upland Six Basins Watermaster Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report Contents Page Contents .................................................................................................................. i Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................. v 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Authority ..................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Study Purpose and Objectives .................................................................... 3 1.4 Future Challenges ....................................................................................... 4 1.5 Study Approach .......................................................................................... 4 1.6 Partner/Stakeholder Involvement and Outreach ......................................... 5 1.7 Location and Description of Study Area .................................................... 7 2.0 Coordination with Other Local Efforts ...................................................... 10 2.1 Integrated Regional Water Management Planning ................................... 10 2.2 Local Stormwater Activities ..................................................................... 10 3.0 Climate Change Assessment ........................................................................ 12 3.1 Vulnerability to Climate Change .............................................................. 12 3.2 Downscaled Climate Analysis .................................................................. 13 3.3 Hydrologic Modeling ................................................................................ 15 3.4 Climate and Modeling Results .................................................................. 15 3.4.1 Change in Annual Average Rainfall ................................................ 15 3.4.2 Change in Storm Event Intensity ..................................................... 17 3.4.3 Change in Hydrologic Runoff .......................................................... 20 3.5 Other Climate Impacts .............................................................................. 22 3.5.1 Imported Supply............................................................................... 22 3.5.2 Sea-Level Rise ................................................................................. 23 3.5.3 Wildfire Risks .................................................................................. 23 3.5.4 Local Snowfall ................................................................................. 24 3.6 Summary of Climate Impacts ................................................................... 25 4.0 Water Supply and Demand Analysis .......................................................... 27 4.1 Methods..................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Supply Projections .................................................................................... 28 4.2.1 Supply Framework ........................................................................... 28 4.2.2 Supply Constraints ........................................................................... 29 4.2.3 Current Supplies............................................................................... 30 4.2.4 Future Supplies ................................................................................ 30 4.3 Demand Projections .................................................................................. 32 4.3.1 Current Demands ............................................................................. 32 4.3.2 Future Demands ............................................................................... 33 4.4 Gap Analysis ............................................................................................. 35 5.0 Existing Infrastructure Response ................................................................ 38 i Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report 6.0 Formulation of Adaptive Concepts ............................................................. 42 6.1 Objectives and Criteria ............................................................................. 42 6.2 Approach to Concept Development .......................................................... 43 6.3 Technical Analysis of Concepts................................................................ 43 6.3.1 Centralized Projects ......................................................................... 44 6.3.2 Decentralized Projects & Distributed Programs .............................. 44 6.3.3 Plans, Policies, & Partnerships ........................................................ 44 6.4 Adaptive Concepts Considered ................................................................. 45 6.4.1 Local Solutions ................................................................................ 47 6.4.1.1 Local Stormwater Capture .....................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Three Chumash-Style Pictograph Sites in Fernandeño Territory
    THREE CHUMASH-STYLE PICTOGRAPH SITES IN FERNANDEÑO TERRITORY ALBERT KNIGHT SANTA BARBARA MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY There are three significant archaeology sites in the eastern Simi Hills that have an elaborate polychrome pictograph component. Numerous additional small loci of rock art and major midden deposits that are rich in artifacts also characterize these three sites. One of these sites, the “Burro Flats” site, has the most colorful, elaborate, and well-preserved pictographs in the region south of the Santa Clara River and west of the Los Angeles Basin and the San Fernando Valley. Almost all other painted rock art in this region consists of red-only paintings. During the pre-contact era, the eastern Simi Hills/west San Fernando Valley area was inhabited by a mix of Eastern Coastal Chumash and Fernandeño. The style of the paintings at the three sites (CA-VEN-1072, VEN-149, and LAN-357) is clearly the same as that found in Chumash territory. If the quantity and the quality of rock art are good indicators, then it is probable that these three sites were some of the most important ceremonial sites for the region. An examination of these sites has the potential to help us better understand this area of cultural interaction. This article discusses the polychrome rock art at the Burro Flats site (VEN-1072), the Lake Manor site (VEN-148/149), and the Chatsworth site (LAN-357). All three of these sites are located in rock shelters in the eastern Simi Hills. The Simi Hills are mostly located in southeast Ventura County, although the eastern end is in Los Angeles County (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Some Preliminary Rainfall Totals from Around the Area
    Print This Page Go Back | Version: Current 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Font: A A A | MISCELLANEOUS HYDROLOGIC DATA SRUS46 KLOX 261623 RRMLOX PRECIPITATION SUMMARY NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 630 AM PDT MON MAR 26 2012 ...FINAL PRECIPITATION TOTALS... ...SNOW REPORTS IN INCHES FOR THIS STORM... LAKE OF WOODS ELEVATION 4500 FEET...... 2 INCHES LOCKWOOD VALLEY ELEVATION 5500 FEET...... 5 INCHES PINON PINES ELEVATION 5500 FEET...... 4 INCHES CUDDY VALLEY ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 6 INCHES PINE MTN CLUB ELEVATION 6500 FEET...... 8 INCHES FRAZIER PARK ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 10 INCHES MT. PINOS ELEVATION 8800 FEET...... 12 INCHES MTN. HIGH RESORT ELEVATION 7000 FEET...... 14 INCHES WRIGHTWOOD ELEVATION 6000 FEET...... 14 INCHES THE FOLLOWING ARE FINAL RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THE WEEKEND RAIN EVENT THROUGH 500 AM THIS MORNING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON INLAND..................... 0.63 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 1.10 LA AIRPORT(KLAX).................. 1.11 LA DOWNTOWN (CQT)................. 0.95 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 0.62 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 0.87 REDONDO BEACH..................... 1.68 TORRANCE.......................... 1.23 BEL AIR........................... 1.65 CULVER CITY....................... 0.90 GETTY CENTER...................... 1.83 UCLA.............................. 1.26 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 1.47 HOLLYWOOD RESERVOIR............... 2.01 HILLCREST COUNTY CLUB............. 1.49 VENICE............................ 1.24 MANHATTAN BEACH................... 1.21 INGLEWOOD......................... 1.38 ROLLING HILLS..................... 0.95 L.A. RIVER @ WARDLOW.............. 1.27 BELLFLOWER........................ 0.80 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 1.40 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 1.30 NORTHRIDGE........................ 1.91 WOODLAND HILLS.................... 2.02 AGOURA HILLS...................... 1.74 CHATSWORTH RESERVOIR.............. 1.56 CANOGA PARK....................... 1.61 PACOIMA DAM......................
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Surface-Water Records
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 72 January 1950 INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 Prepared by San Francisco District UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director WASHINGTON, D. C. Free on application to the Director, Geological Survey, Washington 26, D. C. INDEX OF SURFACE-WATER RECORDS PART 11.PPACIFIC SLOPE BASINS IN CALIFORNIA TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1948 EXPLANATION The index lists the stream-flow ana reservoir stations in the Pacific Slope Basins in California for which records have been or are to be pub­ lished for periods prior to September 30, 1948. The stations are listed in downstream order. Tributary streams are indicated by indention. Station names are given in their most recently published forms. Paren­ theses around part of a station name indicate that the enclosed word or words were used in an earlier published name of the station or in a name under which records were published by some agency other than the Geological Survey. The drainage areas, in square miles, are the latest figures published or otherwise available at this time. Drainage areas that were obviously inconsistent with other drainage areas on the same stream have been omitted. Some drainage areas not published by the Geological Survey are listed with an appropriate footnote stating the published source of the figure of drainage area. Under "period of record" breaks of less than a 12-month period are not shown. A dash not followed immediately by a closing date shows that the station was in operation on September 30, 1948.
    [Show full text]
  • Rosett 1 Tectonic History of the Los Angeles Basin: Understanding What
    Rosett 1 Tectonic history of the Los Angeles Basin: Understanding what formed and deforms the city of Los Angeles Anne Rosett The Los Angeles (LA) Basin is located in a tectonically complex region which has led to many, varying interpretations of its tectonic history. Current literature indicates that processes from rifting and extensional volcanism to pure dextral strike-slip displacement created the LA Basin. It appears that the best interpretation falls somewhere in between these two end-member explanations, with processes taking place simultaneously, including transtensional pull-apart faulting and clockwise rotation of large crustal blocks. With a comprehensive literature review, and paleomagnetic, seismic refraction, and low-fold reflection survey data, I intend to clarify what tectonic processes actually occurred in the LA Basin, and how that information can provide insight for other research in the region, as well as predicting future seismic hazards in the highly- populated, economically significant, and culturally rich city of Los Angeles. Introduction The Los Angeles Basin sits in a tectonically-active region, and thus, a large amount of research exists regarding its formation and tectonic history. However, due to several different fault systems, complex structures, and angles of slip currently affecting the area, the history of the LA Basin is not decisive; there are some discrepancies in the current literature regarding the tectonic and subsidence histories of the LA Basin. These include basin formation due to extensional rifting and basaltic volcanism (Crouch and Suppe, 1993; McCulloh and Beyer, 2003), transtensional pull-apart processes (Schneider et al., 1996), and dextral strike-slip faulting (Howard, 1996).
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction I-1 Adopted by City Council 1/25/93
    Introduction INTRODUCTION A. Overview of the City of Palmdale 1. Location and Regional Setting The City of Palmdale is located in the High Desert region of Los Angeles County, approximately 60 freeway miles north of downtown Los Angeles (see Exhibit I-1). Palmdale is one of two incorporated cities and several unincorporated communities within the Antelope Valley. The City is bordered by the City of Lancaster and unincorporated community of Quartz Hill to the north; unincorporated communities of Lake Los Angeles and Littlerock to the east; the unincorporated community of Acton to the south; and the unincorporated community of Leona Valley to the west (see Exhibit I- 2). The City of Palmdale Planning Area encompasses approximately 174 square miles within a transitional area between the foothills of the San Gabriel and Sierra Pelona Mountains and the Mojave Desert to the north and east (see Exhibit I-3). As a result, the Planning Area contains a variety of plant and animal communities, slope conditions, soil types and other physical characteristics. In general, the Planning Area slopes from south to north-northeast, with surface flows and subsurface flows trending away from the foothills to Rosamond Dry Lake. The major watercourses flowing through Palmdale are Amargosa Creek, Anaverde Creek, Little Rock Wash and Big Rock Wash. While foothill areas within and adjacent to the City contain significant slopes, a majority of the Planning Area is relatively flat. The climate of Palmdale and the Antelope Valley is dominated by the region’s Pacific high pressure system, which contributes to the area’s hot, dry summers and relatively mild winters.
    [Show full text]
  • Groundwater Resources and Groundwater Quality
    Chapter 7: Groundwater Resources and Groundwater Quality Chapter 7 1 Groundwater Resources and 2 Groundwater Quality 3 7.1 Introduction 4 This chapter describes groundwater resources and groundwater quality in the 5 Study Area, and potential changes that could occur as a result of implementing the 6 alternatives evaluated in this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 7 Implementation of the alternatives could affect groundwater resources through 8 potential changes in operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State 9 Water Project (SWP) and ecosystem restoration. 10 7.2 Regulatory Environment and Compliance 11 Requirements 12 Potential actions that could be implemented under the alternatives evaluated in 13 this EIS could affect groundwater resources in the areas along the rivers impacted 14 by changes in the operations of CVP or SWP reservoirs and in the vicinity of and 15 lands served by CVP and SWP water supplies. Groundwater basins that may be 16 affected by implementation of the alternatives are in the Trinity River Region, 17 Central Valley Region, San Francisco Bay Area Region, Central Coast Region, 18 and Southern California Region. 19 Actions located on public agency lands or implemented, funded, or approved by 20 Federal and state agencies would need to be compliant with appropriate Federal 21 and state agency policies and regulations, as summarized in Chapter 4, Approach 22 to Environmental Analyses. 23 Several of the state policies and regulations described in Chapter 4 have resulted 24 in specific institutional and operational conditions in California groundwater 25 basins, including the basin adjudication process, California Statewide 26 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program (CASGEM), California Sustainable 27 Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), and local groundwater management 28 ordinances, as summarized below.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. NEOGENE TECTONICS of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA . the Focus of This Research Project Is to Investigate the Timing of Rotation of T
    1. NEOGENE TECTONICS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. The focus of this research project is to investigate the timing of rotation of the Transverse Ranges and the evolution of the 3-D architecture of the Los Angeles basin. Objectives are to understand better the seismicity of the region and the relationships between petroleum accumulations and the structure and stratigraphic evolution of the basin. Figure 1 shows the main physiographic and structural features of the Los Angeles basin region, the epicenter of recent significant earthquakes and the our initial study area in the northeastern Los Angeles basin. Los Angeles basin tectonic model: Most tectonic models attribute the opening of the Los Angeles basin to lithospheric extension produced by breakaway of the Western Transverse Ranges from the Peninsular Ranges and 90 degrees or more of clockwise rotation from ca. 18 Ma to the present. Evidence of this extension includes crustal thinning on tomographic profiles between the Santa Ana Mountains and the Santa Monica Mountains and the presence in the Los Angeles basin of Middle Miocene volcanic rocks and proto-normal faults. Detailed evidence of the 3-D architecture of the rift created by the breakaway and the timing of the rift phase has remained elusive. The closing of the Los Angeles basin in response to N-S contraction began at ca. 8 Ma and continues today (Bjorklund, et al., 2002). A system of active faults has developed that pose significant seismic hazards for the greater Los Angeles region. Crustal heterogeneities that developed during the extension phase of basin development may have strongly influenced the location of these faults.
    [Show full text]
  • MASTER Projects List with Districts CR EQ.Xlsx
    Upcoming LA County Regional Infrastructure Projects Supporting Climate Resilience & Equity State State Congressional No. Project Name Location Project Type Assembly Senate District District District 1 Rosewood - Stanford Avenue, et al. Rosewood Road Construction 64 35 44 Cap Project - 2 Cogen Landfill Gas Mitigation Los Angeles 49 22 27 Buildings 3 East Los Angeles - Michigan Avenue, et al. East Los Angeles Road Maintenance 49, 51 22, 24 27, 40 Florence-Firestone - Compton Av at Nadeau 4 Firestone, Florence Traffic Design 64 35 44 St Hacienda Heights Community - Hacienda 5 Hacienda Heights Traffic Design 57 35 38, 39 Boulevard at Shadybend Drive Hacienda Heights-Garo St- Stimson 6 Hacienda Heights Traffic Design 57 35 38, 39 Av/Fieldgate Av 7 Willowbrook - Wadsworth Av at E 126th St Willowbrook Traffic Design 64 35 44 Cap Project - 8 Redondo Beach Yard Redondo Beach 66 26 33 Buildings 9 Altadena - Glenrose Ave, et al. Altadena Road Maintenance 41 25 27 10 Rowland Heights - Otterbein Avenue, et al. Rowland Heights Road Maintenance 55 29 39 Cap Project - 11 RB Maint Yard and Restroom DM Repair Redondo Beach 66 26 33 Buildings Cap Project - 12 Hansen Yard Sun Valley 39 18 29 Buildings Cap Project - 13 Imperial Yard 2 South Gate 63 33 44 Buildings South Whittier - Gunn and Du Page Avenue, et 14 South Whittier Road Maintenance 57 32 38 al. Cap Project - 15 LAC USC Parking Lot 12 Structure ADA Los Angeles 51 24 34 Buildings Cap Project - 16 East Yard Irwindale 48 22 32 Buildings Cap Project - 17 Rio Hondo Spreading Grounds Montebello 58 32
    [Show full text]
  • Tectonic Geomorphology of the Santa Ana Mountains
    Final Technical Report ACTIVE DEFORMATION AND EARTHQUAKE POTENTIAL OF THE SOUTHERN LOS ANGELES BASIN, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Award Number: 01HQGR0117 Recipient’s name: University of California - Irvine Sponsored Projects Administration 160 Administration Building, Univ. of CA - Irvine Irvine, CA 92697-1875 Principal investigator: Lisa B. Grant, Ph.D. Department of Environmental Analysis & Design 262 Social Ecology 1 University of California Irvine, CA 92697-7070 Program element: Research on earthquake occurrence and effects Research supported by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department of the Interior, under USGS award number 01HQGR0117. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Government. p. 1 Award number: 01HQGR0117 ACTIVE DEFORMATION AND EARTHQUAKE POTENTIAL OF THE SOUTHERN LOS ANGELES BASIN, ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Eldon M. Gath, University of California, Irvine, 143 Social Ecology I, Irvine, CA, 92697-7070; tel: 949-824-5382, fax: 949-824-2056, email: [email protected] Eric E. Runnerstrom, University of California, Irvine, 143 Social Ecology I, Irvine, CA, 92697- 7070; tel: 949-824-5382, fax: 949-824-2056, email: [email protected] Lisa B. Grant (P.I.), University of California, Irvine, 262 Social Ecology I, Irvine, CA, 92697- 7070; tel: 949-824-5491, fax: 949-824-2056, email: [email protected] TECHNICAL ABSTRACT The Santa Ana Mountains (SAM) are a 1.7 km high mountain range that form the southeastern boundary of the Los Angeles basin between Orange and Riverside counties in southern California. The SAM have three well developed erosional surfaces preserved on them, as well as a suite of four fluvial fill terraces preserved in Santiago Creek, which is a drainage trapped between the uplifting SAM and a parallel Loma Ridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft General Plan Document with Track Changes (PDF)
    DRAFT INTRODUCTION comparison to current General Plan Introduction 4/26/2018 version Note: This document compares the proposed Draft Introduction with the current General Plan Introduction. Changes are shown as follows: bold underline text for new text proposed to be added, strikethrough text for existing text proposed to be removed, and normal text for existing text to remain. 1 Palos Verdes Peninsula The City of Rancho Palos Verdes s located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in the southwest tip of Los Angeles County. The City includes 12.3 square miles of land and 7-1/2 miles of coastline. One-third of the total land is vacant, with more than three-fourths of the immediate coastline land vacant. The Peninsula has a unique physiography, formed over millions of years of submerging and lifting from the Pacific Ocean. The residents of the Palos Verdes Peninsula are the beneficiaries of a unique geography, formed from millions of years of volcanic activity, plate tectonics and terracing from changing sea levels. The nine-mile wide Peninsula, once an island, the Peninsula, none miles wide by four miles deep, now rises above the Los Angeles Basin with a highest elevation at to a maximum of 1,480 feet, with uniquely terraced configurations and steep, rocky cliffs jutting upward 50 to 300 feet from the ocean. The forming of the Peninsula has resulted in the unique terrace configurations readily observable today and the steep, rocky cliffs at the ocean’s edge which rise from fifty to three hundred feet. Erosion has created contributed to the creation of numerous steep-walled canyons.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAIN and FLOOD, FEBRUARY 27 to MARCH 4, 1938 by LAWRENCEH
    MAY 1938 MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW 139 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RAIN AND FLOOD, FEBRUARY 27 TO MARCH 4, 1938 By LAWRENCEH. DAINGERFIELD [Weather Bureau, Los Angeles, Calif., June 19381 The season of 1937-38 (beginning July 1, 1937) has period which were directly the cause of the great flood. been marked by wide cont>mstsin rainfall over southern Showery conditions on the 3rd and 4th were followed California. Los Angeles was rainless from May 31 to by frequent threat,s of rainfall thereafter for 9 or 10 days October 2, 1937, inclusive, a eriod of 125 days, followed and actual rain on se.vera1days from a. series of depressions by 67 days, or until DecemE er 8, 1937, with only two appearing off the Cdifornia cod, which moved slowly light showers, tot,aling 0.03 inch. The combined period inland over the coast to the northward of the Los Angeles of 192 days ha.d only 0.03 inch of precipitation. This region. These were followed, however, by a well-defined long dry period is second only to that of 1927, when no anticyclone on the 13t,h, 1oc.ated over the Pacific Ocean measurable rainfall occurred at Los Angeles for the 107- new the thirt,iet,h parallel. The esta,blishment of this day period from April 13 to Oct,ober 26, although t,races high pressure field, and its continuance in modified form we,re recorded each mont,h. The re.cent drought was during the remainder of March brought relief to the rather de,hit,ely ended by t,he rain of December 9-12, flooded areas, through the attending fair weather.
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    National Weather Service Page 1 of 3 Print This Page Fast Page Home Version: Current 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 250119 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 619 PM PDT SAT MAY 24 2008 ...PRELIMINARY RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT THROUGH 600 PM THIS EVENING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON............................ 0.01 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 0.07 LOS ANGELES AP (KLAX)............. 0.10 DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.............. 0.06 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 0.17 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 0.08 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 0.20 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.08 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 0.12 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 0.18 HOLLYWOOD RSVR.................... 0.20 DOMINGUEZ WATER CO................ 0.12 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 0.15 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 0.18 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 0.16 AGOURA............................ 0.04 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 0.08 PACOIMA DAM....................... 0.75 HANSEN DAM........................ 0.27 NEWHALL-SOLEDAD SCHL.............. 0.12 SAUGUS............................ 0.11 DEL VALLE......................... 0.03 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY L.A. CITY COLLEGE................. 0.15 EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 0.47 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 0.12 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 1.50 EATON DAM......................... 0.86 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 1.06 SANTA FE DAM...................... 2.77 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 0.40 CLAREMONT......................... 1.63 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS MOUNT WILSON CBS.................. 1.98 W FK HELIPORT..................... 2.99 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/scripts/getprodplus.php?wfo=lox&print=yes&fastpage=yes&pil=pns&sid=l... 5/26/2008 National Weather Service Page 2 of 3 SANTA ANITA DAM..................
    [Show full text]