DOCSLIB.ORG

Lopez Dam Basin Master Plan and Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lopez Dam Basin Master Plan and Environmental Assessment -,,,_ -, ­ DAM MASTER PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1 LOPEZ DAM MASTER PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District June2005 ! t Lopez Dam Basin Master Plan - 1 ­ Table of Contents Section · Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ................. .. ................................................. ........ .......... ............... ... .... 2 PREFACE ························································································································· 5 CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 6 1.1 Location ............................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Project Authorization ......................................................................................... 6 1.3 Project Purpose ................................................................................................. 6 1.4 Land Allocation .................................................................................................. 6 1.5 Purpose of Master Plan ..................................................................................... 7 1.6 Project Scope .................................................................................................... 8 CHAPTER 2 - GOVERNING LAWS AND REGULATIONS ...................................................... 11 2.1 Applicable Public Laws.................................................................................... 11 2.1.1 Federal Laws ...................................................................................... 11 .2.1.2 State Laws .......................................................................................... 12 2.2 Applicable Regulations .................................................................................... 12 2.3 Pertinent Publications ...................................................................................... 13 CHAPTER 3 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................. 14 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Flood Damage Reduction Project Component... ............................................. 14 3.2.1 Project Data ........................................................................................ 14 3.2.2 Reservoir Operations and Management ............................................ 14 3.2.3 Flood Damage Reduction Requirements ........................................... 15 3.2.4 Flood Damage Reduction Structures ................................................. 16 3.3 Recreation Project Component ....................................................................... 22 3.3.1 Existing Recreation Use ..................................................................... 22 3.3.2 Recreation Supply .............................................................................. 22 3.3.3 Opportunities and Constraints ............................................................ 22 3.3.4 Flood Damage Reduction Structures ................................................. 25 3.3.5 Recreation Demand ............................................................................ 25 3.4 Demographics ................................................................................................. 26 CHAPTER 4 - RESOURCE USE OBJECTIVES ....................................................................... 27 4.1 Authorization- Recreation Resource Development ......................................... 27 4.2 General Resource Objectives ......................................................................... 27 4.3 Recreation Resource Objectives ..................................................................... 27 4.4 Environmental Resource Objectives ............................................................... 28 CHAPTER 5 - EXISTING RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT......................................................... 29 5.1 Development of Existing Facilities ................................................................... 29 Lopez Dam Basin Master Plan -2­ CHAPTER 6 - RESOURCE ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 30 6.1 Biological Resources ....................................................................................... 30 6.1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 30 6.1.2 Vegetation .......................................................................................... 30 6.1.3 Environmentally Sensitive Species .................................................... 34 6.2 Geology ........................................................................................................... 34 6.2.1 Site Geology ....................................................................................... 34 6.2.2 Seismicity ........................................................................................... 35 6.2.3 Performance History ........................................................................... 35 6.3 Watershed Hydrology ...................................................................................... 35 6.3.1 Groundwater....................................................................................... 35 3.3.2 Surface Water Quality ........................................................................ 35 6.4 Climate ............................................................................................................ 36 6.5 Air Quality ........................................................................................................ 36 6.6 Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Features .............................................. 37 6.7 Access ............................................................................................................. 37 6.8 Existing Adjacent Land Uses........................................................................... 37 6.9 Utilities ............................................................................................................. 37 6.10 Outgrants ......................................................................................................... 37 . CHAPTER 7-LAND CLASSIFICATION ................................................................................... 40 7.1 Land Classifications ........................................................................................ 40 7.2 Classification Definitions Per ER 1130-2-550 ................................................. 40 7.2.1 Project Operations .............................................................................. 40 7.2.2 Recreation .......................................................................................... 40 7.2.3 Mitigation ............................................................................................ 40 7.2.4 Multiple Resource Management... ...................................................... 40 7.2.5 Easements.......................................................................................... 41 7.3 Proposed Lopez Dam Land Classifications .................................................... 41 7.3.1 Proposed Operations .......................................................................... 41 7.3.2 Recreation .......................................................................................... 41 7.3.3 Multiple Resource Management.. ....................................................... 41 7.3.4 Easements.......................................................................................... 42 CHAPTER 8 - PROPOSED RESOURCE USE PLAN............................................................... 44 8.1 Resource Development ................................................................................... 44 8.1.1 Planning Area 1 .................................................................................. 44 8.1.2 Planning Area 2 .................................................................................. 44 8.1.3 Planning Area 3 .................................................................................. 44 8.1.4 Planning Area 4 .................................................................................. 45 8.1.5 Planning Area 5 .................................................................................. 45 CHAPTER 9- CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 48 9.1 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 48 9.2 Fut~re Development........................................................................................ 48 CHAPTER 10- RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 49 Lopez Dam Basin Master Plan i --' -3­ I ,J TABLES Table 3.2 Max. Inflow, Outflow, and Elevation for Frequencies ...................................... 14 Table 3.2.4 Pertinent Data for Lopez Dam and Reservoir ................................................. 15 Table 3.3 Minimum Guidelines for Basin Land Use Projects .......................................... 23 Table 3.4 Demographics ................................................................................................. 25 PLATES Plate 1 Regional Map ...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report
    16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report Jingfen Sheng John P. Wilson Acknowledgements: Financial support for this work was provided by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the County of Los Angeles, as part of the “Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California” Project. The authors thank Jennifer Wolch for her comments and edits on this report. The authors would also like to thank Frank Simpson for his input on this report. Prepared for: San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 900 South Fremont Avenue, Alhambra, California 91802-1460 Photography: Cover, left to right: Arroyo Simi within the city of Moorpark (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng); eastern Calleguas Creek Watershed tributaries, classifi ed by Strahler stream order (Jingfen Sheng); Morris Dam (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng). All in-text photos are credited to Jaime Sayre/ Jingfen Sheng, with the exceptions of Photo 4.6 (http://www.you-are- here.com/location/la_river.html) and Photo 4.7 (digital-library.csun.edu/ cdm4/browse.php?...). Preferred Citation: Sheng, J. and Wilson, J.P. 2008. The Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California. 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report. University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory and Center for Sustainable Cities, Los Angeles, California. This report was printed on recycled paper. The mission of the Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California is to offer a guide to habitat conservation, watershed health and recreational open space for the Los Angeles metropolitan region. The Plan will also provide decision support tools to nurture a living green matrix for southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Reservoir Sedimentation and Water Supply Reliability By: Aubrey Mescher, MESM Ms
    Reservoir Sedimentation and Water Supply Reliability By: Aubrey Mescher, MESM Ms. Mescher is a water resources specialist at Aspen’s Agoura Hills headquarters office. Our reservoirs are filling with sediment. That’s the same as dirt. Mud, muck, silt. Rocks, gravel, even boulders. All of this stuff where there’s supposed to be just water. Water for drinking, irrigation, recreation, commercial and industrial uses, flood control, and groundwater recharge. This isn’t a new issue. Actually, reservoirs are assumed to have a finite lifetime, limited by loss of function due to sedimentation. But reservoirs are filling with sediment far more quickly than anticipated, and important water supply and flood control facilities are not only being rendered useless before their time, but in doing so they are simultaneously introducing new issues with public safety and water supply reliability. What is sedimentation? Sedimentation is a natural process that occurs when soil particles suspended in water settle out of the main water column to the bottom. Sediment content in a waterway is higher during and after storm events, when rates of flow and erosion are higher, and lower during dry months, when these rates tend to be lower. Under natural conditions, unconstrained by a dam, the quantity of water and sediment in a waterway is generally balanced, as the ground surface and riverbed erode into the waterway, and sediment is deposited in downstream areas, where it provides habitat and replenishes riverbanks and beaches. But when a dam is constructed in a waterway, it traps the flow of both water and sediment. The sediment gradually accumulates behind the dam, larger particles such as rocks and gravel settling to the reservoir floor while the spaces in between fill with finer material such as silt and mud.
    [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]
  • NWS Los Angeles/Oxnard
    901 SRUS46 KLOX 050611 RRMLOX PRECIPITATION SUMMARY NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 1006 PM PST THU DEC 04 2014 ...FINAL PRECIPITATION STORM TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS EVENT FROM EARLY TUESDAY THROUGH 1000 PM THURSDAY EVENING. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN AVALON INLAND..................... 1.25 HAWTHORNE (KHHR).................. 1.55 LA AIRPORT(KLAX).................. 1.33 LA DOWNTOWN (CQT)................. 1.52 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 1.82 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 1.21 REDONDO BEACH..................... 1.46 TORRANCE.......................... 1.11 MONTE NIDO........................ 2.09 BEL AIR........................... 1.82 CULVER CITY....................... 1.06 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 1.66 HOLLYWOOD RESERVOIR............... 1.34 SOUTH GATE........................ 1.80 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 1.15 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 1.65 NORTHRIDGE........................ 1.88 WOODLAND HILLS.................... 1.87 AGOURA HILLS...................... 1.89 CHATSWORTH RESERVOIR.............. 1.78 CANOGA PARK....................... 2.08 PACOIMA DAM....................... 1.93 HANSEN DAM........................ 1.44 NEWHALL........................... 3.03 SAUGUS............................ 2.11 DEL VALLE......................... 1.99 EAGLE ROCK RESERVOIR.............. 1.22 PASADENA.......................... 2.67 ALHAMBRA.......................... 1.70 EATON DAM......................... 1.70 LA VERNE.........................
    [Show full text]
  • EARTHQUAKE RECORDINGS on and NEAR DAMS Paul Morrison, Richard Maley, Gerald Brady and Ronald Porcella USCOLD Committee on Earthq
    EARTHQUAKE RECORDINGS ON AND NEAR DAMS by Paul Morrison, Richard Maley, Gerald Brady and Ronald Porcella USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes Panel on Instrumental Recordings at Dams , } IV BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA 11. Report No. 2 1 . SHEET 4'. Title and Subtitle 15. Report'"Uate"""" - - • Earthquake Recordings On Or Near Dams November 1977 6. 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Rept. P. Morrison. R. Malev. G. Bradv. R. Porcella No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. United States Committee on Large Dams (USCOLD) California Institute of Technology 11. Conrract/Grant No. 1201 E. California Blvd. D::lC:;:\l1oY1ri fA Q11?t:; NSF ENV74-05163 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report & Period National Science Foundation Covered Washington, D.C. 20550 14. 15. Supplemenrary Notes 16. Abstracts This report presents data on earthquake recordings made on or near dams. The serious consequences of failure makes it imperative that dams in seismic regions be designed to resist earthquake shaking safely and economically. To achieve this, designers of dams must be provided with information about those dams that have been subjected to strong ground shaking, with or without damage. The most valuable of such information is provided by seismic recordings made on or near dams during strong shaking, as these show the nature of the earthquake shaking. Unfortunately there exist relatively few such recordings because only few dams are instrumented for this purpose. This report provides a collection of seismic records, ranging from very strong shaking to moderate shaking, which whould be informative to engineers who design dams.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.8 Hydrology/Water Quality
    Draft EIR CHAPTER 4 Environmental Analysis October 2012 SECTION 4.8 Hydrology/Water Quality 4.8 HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY This section of the EIR analyzes the potential environmental effects on hydrology and water quality from implementation of the proposed Granada Hills–Knollwood Community Plan and implementing ordinances and the proposed Sylmar Community Plan and implementing ordinances (proposed plans). It addresses stormwater runoff and urban pollutants, flood hazards, including sea level rise, drainage and groundwater resources. A regulatory framework is also provided in this section, describing applicable agencies and regulations related to hydrology/water quality. The evaluation of the proposed plans’ effects on water supplies, including groundwater, is included in Section 4.14 (Utilities/Service Systems). Several comments regarding hydrology and water quality related to drainage and flooding were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) circulated for the proposed plans. The comments focused on the importance of the Pacoima Wash and other flood control channels for stormwater management and groundwater recharge. Baseline information for the analysis was compiled from a review of data and reports published by state agencies, environmental documents for projects in the vicinity, as well as information compiled and evaluated by the City of Los Angeles in conjunction with its stormwater management and hazard mitigation programs. These sources include the California Department of Water Resources, City of Los Angeles Water Quality Compliance Master Plan for Urban Runoff, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain mapping, the City of Los Angeles Hazard Mitigation Plan, General Plan, and Municipal Code, and other published materials. Full reference-list entries for all cited materials are provided in Section 4.8.5 (References).
    [Show full text]
  • Arleta-Pacoima Community Plan Area
    Historic Resources Survey Report Arleta-Pacoima Community Plan Area Prepared for: City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Office of Historic Resources Prepared by: Architectural Resources Group, Inc. Pasadena, CA March 20, 2014 Revised January 29, 2021 Table of Contents Project Overview 1 SurveyLA Methodology Summary 1 Project Team 3 Survey Area 3 Designated Resources 12 Community Plan Area Survey Methodology 12 Summary of Findings 14 Summary of Property Types 14 Summary of Contexts and Themes 16 Selected Bibliography 26 Appendices Appendix A: Individual Resources Appendix B: Non-Parcel Resources Appendix C: Historic Districts and Planning Districts Revisions made to the Historic Resources Survey Report for the Arleta-Pacoima Community Plan Area are to the summary report not the survey findings for the area. Project Overview This Historic Resources Survey Report (Survey Report) has been completed on behalf of the City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning’s Office of Historic Resources (OHR) for the SurveyLA historic resources survey of the Arleta-Pacoima Community Plan Area (CPA). This project was undertaken from May 2013 to March 2014 by Architectural Resources Group (ARG). This Survey Report provides a summary of the work completed, including a description of the Survey Area; an overview of the field methodology; a summary of relevant contexts, themes and property types; and complete lists of all recorded resources. This Survey Report is intended to be used in conjunction with the SurveyLA Field Results Master Report (Master Report), which provides a detailed discussion of SurveyLA methodology and explains the terms used in this report and associated appendices.
    [Show full text]
  • Watershed Assets Assessment Report
    16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report Jingfen Sheng John P. Wilson Acknowledgements: Financial support for this work was provided by the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy and the County of Los Angeles, as part of the “Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California” Project. The authors thank Jennifer Wolch for her comments and edits on this report. The authors would also like to thank Frank Simpson for his input on this report. Prepared for: San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 900 South Fremont Avenue, Alhambra, California 91802-1460 Photography: Cover, left to right: Arroyo Simi within the city of Moorpark (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng); eastern Calleguas Creek Watershed tributaries, classifi ed by Strahler stream order (Jingfen Sheng); Morris Dam (Jaime Sayre/Jingfen Sheng). All in-text photos are credited to Jaime Sayre/ Jingfen Sheng, with the exceptions of Photo 4.6 (http://www.you-are- here.com/location/la_river.html) and Photo 4.7 (digital-library.csun.edu/ cdm4/browse.php?...). Preferred Citation: Sheng, J. and Wilson, J.P. 2008. The Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California. 16. Watershed Assets Assessment Report. University of Southern California GIS Research Laboratory and Center for Sustainable Cities, Los Angeles, California. This report was printed on recycled paper. The mission of the Green Visions Plan for 21st Century Southern California is to offer a guide to habitat conservation, watershed health and recreational open space for the Los Angeles metropolitan region. The Plan will also provide decision support tools to nurture a living green matrix for southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • NWS Public Information Statement
    Page 1 of 4 PNSLOX Current Version Previous Version: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NOUS46 KLOX 260119 PNSLOX PUBLIC INFORMATION STATEMENT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE LOS ANGELES/OXNARD CA 451 PM PST FRI JAN 25 2008 ...FINAL RAINFALL TOTALS... THE FOLLOWING ARE RAINFALL TOTALS IN INCHES FOR THIS RAIN EVENT 4 P.M. MONDAY AFTERNOON THROUGH 400 PM THIS AFTERNOON. .LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES.............. 3.43 LOS ANGELES AP (KLAX)............. 2.17 LONG BEACH (KLGB)................. 2.85 SANTA MONICA (KSMO)............... 2.71 MONTE NIDO FS..................... 2.44 BIG ROCK MESA..................... 0.04 BEL AIR HOTEL..................... 3.50 BALLONA CK @ SAWTELLE............. 2.16 BEVERLY HILLS..................... 4.32 HOLLYWOOD RSVR.................... 3.54 L.A. R @ FIRESTONE................ 2.05 DOMINGUEZ WATER CO................ 2.32 LA HABRA HEIGHTS.................. 1.81 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY VALLEYS BURBANK (KBUR).................... 4.10 VAN NUYS (KVNY)................... 3.28 AGOURA............................ 4.41 CHATSWORTH RSVR................... 4.13 SEPULVEDA CYN @ MULHL............. 4.57 PACOIMA DAM....................... 4.21 HANSEN DAM........................ 4.35 NEWHALL-SOLEDAD SCHL.............. 6.34 SAUGUS............................ 2.50 DEL VALLE......................... 2.68 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY SAN GABRIEL VALLEY EAGLE ROCK RSRV................... 2.80 EATON WASH @ LOFTUS............... 2.68 SAN GABRIEL R @ VLY............... 1.89 WALNUT CK S.B..................... 2.01 SANTA FE DAM...................... 2.03 WHITTIER HILLS.................... 2.27 CLAREMONT......................... 2.15 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/total_forecast/getprod.php?wfo=lox&pil=PNS&sid=LOX&version=5&banner=... 1/26/2008 Page 2 of 4 .LOS ANGELES COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND FOOTHILLS W FK HELIPORT..................... 6.97 SANTA ANITA DAM................... 3.42 SAN GABRIEL DAM..................
    [Show full text]
  • Sediment Impacts to Flood Control and Water Supply
    Sediment Impacts to Flood Control and Water Supply Southern California Chaparral Symposium June 9, 2015 Presentation By: Keith Lilley, P.E. Flood Control District • Formed in 1915 with Dual Mission • Reduce Flood Risk by Providing Flood Control Protection • Conserve Water for local supply Video Los Angeles River, 1914 Flood Control District Owns and operates complex flood protection and water conservation systems that includes: • 14 major dams • 162 debris basins • 500 miles of open channels • 27 Spreading Ground Facilities Stormwater Capture – Santa Anita Dam Valve Release – San Gabriel Dam Valve Release – San Gabriel Dam Spillway Flow - Big Tujunga Dam Water Conservation Process Cogswell Dam San Gabriel Dam Morris Dam San Gabriel Canyon Spreading Grounds Hansen Spreading Grounds Water Conservation • Stormwater capture recharges aquifers that provide 1/3 of our water supply • 2010-11 storm season : 600,000 ac-ft captured • 100% of stormwater at dams recharged What is an Acre-Foot of Water? .One Acre-Foot of Water is Sufficient to Serve Two Families of Four for an Entire Year. .There Are 325,852 Gallons in One Acre-Foot of Water. One Acre-Foot of Water Would Cover an Entire Football Field Approximately One- Foot Deep. Fire – Flood Sequence Major Debris Potential Burned Watershed Hydrophobic Soils Hydrophobic layer ½ to 3 inches beneath surface. DESIGN DEBRIS EVENT: Expected amount of sediment produced as a result of a 50 year design storm falling on a burned watershed after 4 years of watershed recovery. DESIGN DEBRIS EVENT (DDE) EXAMPLES:
    [Show full text]
  • 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
    4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality This section describes potential hydrology and water quality impacts associated with construction and operation of the Proposed Project. Project components that do not involve ground disturbance or groundwater impacts were not evaluated in this section. These components include installation of upgraded relay systems and equipment at the SCE Newhall, Chatsworth, and San Fernando Substations. 4.8.1 Existing Hydrology and Water Quality Setting The Proposed Project lies within both the Santa Clara River Valley watershed and the Los Angeles River (San Fernando Valley) watershed, as presented on Figure 4.8-1 Hydrology and Floodplains. These watersheds are divided by the east/west trending Santa Susana Mountains. The Proposed Project components including the proposed Central Compressor Station, proposed office trailer and guard house relocation, proposed SCE Natural Substation and almost half of the proposed SCE 66 kV sub- transmission lines are located within and south of the Santa Susana Mountains in the Los Angeles River watershed. The remainder of the proposed SCE 66 kV sub-transmission line modification is located in the Santa Clara River Valley watershed, north of the Santa Susana Mountains. The Santa Clara River Valley watershed encompasses the Santa Clara River, the largest river system in southern California that remains in a relatively natural state. The river originates in the northern slopes of the San Gabriel Mountains in north Los Angeles County, traverses in a westerly direction into Ventura County, and discharges into the Pacific Ocean near the city of Ventura. The river runs approximately 100 miles from its headwaters near Acton, California, to its outlet, and drains an area of approximately 1,600 square miles.
    [Show full text]
  • Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Volume I
    United States Committee on Large Dams Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Volume I July 1992 Prepared by the USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes Note: This publication, Observed Performance of Dams, Volume I, was published in 1992 and no electronic version is available. The following pages were scanned from a hard copy. FOREWORD This publication was prepared by the USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes, chaired by Joseph L. Ehasz. Gilles Bureau wrote the introductory section and coordinated the Committee's efforts in preparing this report. Principal contributors to dam write-ups were: Donald H. Babbitt, Gilles Bureau, Gonzalo V. Castro, Anil K Chopra, Joseph L. Ehasz, Richard L. Kramer, C. Eric Lindvall, Robert B. McDonald, and RamP. Sharma. The other members of the Committee reviewed the final manuscript and made numerous helpful comments and contributions. Dames & Moore, Oakland, California, provided word processing and technical illustration support. USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes: *Joseph L. Ehasz, Chairperson *Gilles Bureau, Vice Chairperson *Donald H. Babbitt *Thomas M. Leps *Gonzalo V. Castro Robert B. McDonald *Patrick J. Creegan Faiz I. Makdisi Ronald G. Domer Philippe Martin George F. Horowitz Ronald B. Meade *Richard W. Kramer *Harry E. Thomas *Subcommittee on Performance of Dams During Earthquakes Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the USCOLD Committee on Earthquakes and do not necessarily reflect the views of others. TABLE OF CONTENTS Observed Performance of Dams During Earthquake 1 Table 1: Historic Performance of Dams During Earthquakes 9 References . 15 Lower Crystal Springs Dam, California, USA 19 Hebgen Dam, Montana, USA 31 Koyna Dam, India .
    [Show full text]