DOCSLIB.ORG

Sediment Discharge in the Santa Clara River Basin, Ventura and Los Angeles Counties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sediment Discharge in the Santa Clara River Basin, Ventura and Los Angeles Counties (;109 v0R \ he , 19-'7'l> SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE SANTA CLARA RIVER BASIN, VENTURA AND LOS ANGELES COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA lflII lliiil! :llll1llliill Il,~1•·~ } U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations 79-78 Prepared in cooperation with Ventura County Flood Control District, United Water Conservation District, and California Department of Boating and Waterways 50272 I 01 ! 3 . Rec1p1ent's Accession No. REPORT DOCUMENTATION 11. REPORT NO. PAGE I 4. Title and Subtitle I 5. Repor, Date SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE SANTA CLARA RIVER BASIN, VENTURA AND I August 1979 LOS ANGELES COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA 6. 7. Au1horls) 8. Perform1nc Orsan1zation Rept. No. Williams, Rhea P. USGS/WRI 79-78 9. Performinc O,can1zation Name and Addreu 10. Pro1ect/Task/Work Unit No. U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division California District 11. Contract(C) or Grant(C) No. 345 Middlefield Road CC) Menlo Park, Calif. 94025 (Cl 12. Sponsorinc Orsan1zation Name and Address 13. Type of Report & Period Co,,..,ed U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division Final California District 345 Middlefield Road 1 u. Menlo Park, Calif. 94025 I 1S. Supplemenary Notes Prepared in cooperation with Ventura County Flood Control District, United Water Conservation District, and California Department of Boating and Waterways 16. Abstract cum,t 20c woros> Sediment data collected in the Santa Clara River basin during the 1967-75 water years were analyzed to determine the particle size and quantity of sediment transported past three gaging stations. The total sediment discharge of the basin, computed from records of Santa Clara River at Montalvo for water years 1968-75, was 63.5 million tons, of which 59.5 million tons was carried in suspension and an estimated 4 million tons was transported as unsampled sediment discharge. About 17.7 million tons, or 28 percent of the total sediment discharge, was coarse sediment. Most of the sediment was transported during only a few days of floodflow each year. During the 1968-75 water years, approximately 55 percent of the total sediment was transported in 2 days and 92 percent was transported in 53 days. The long-term (1928-75) average annual sediment discharge of the Santa Clara River at Montalvo is estimated at 3.67 million tons. Of that quantity, 2.58 million tons consisted of fine sediment and 1.09 million tons consisted of coarse sediment. A sediment budget for the Santa Clara River basin was estimated for sediment discharges under both natural and actual conditions. The major difference between natural and actual sediment discharges of the Santa Clara River basin is the sediment intercepted upstream from Lake Piru. The combined trap efficiency of Lake Piru and Pyramid Lake approaches 100 percent. Sediment deposited in these reservoirs resulted in about a 6-percent reduction of sediment to the Santa Clara River basin during the historical period (1928-75) and a 12-percent reduction during t~e period most affected by dams (1953-75). Sediment losses to the basin by gravel m·ining, diversion of flows, and interception of sediment in the Castaic Creek basin resvlted in additional reductions of 2 percent during the period 1928-75 and 4 percent during the period 1953-75. 17. Document Analysis •· DeM:npto" *Sediment Discharge, *Sediment Transport, California, Coarse Sediments, Suspension b. ldentlf1el"S/C)pe"•Ended Terms Santa Clara River basin, Ventura County, Los Angeles County c COSATI Field/Group l&. Availability Statement l 19. Security Class (This Reoor: 1 21. No of Pages UNCLASSIFIED 56 No restriction on distribution 20. Security Class (This Pagel UNCLASSIFIED (See ANSI-Z39.l8J OP-:-IO"iA~ ro111o1 :72 (t.-77 ) (rC",,.,f'rh ,-;• ,!-,.-3~, Of't"\.1trtm~nt r' CC'-,mfl'rCt SEDIMENT DISCHARGE IN THE SANTA CLARA RIVER BASIN, VENTURA AND LOS ANGELES COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA By Rhea P. Wi lliams U. S. GEO LOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations 79-78 Prepared in cooperation with Ventura County Flood Control District, United Water Conservation District, and California Department of Boati ng and Waterways August 1979 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY H. William Menard, Director For additional information write to: District Chief Water Resources Division U.S. Geological Survey 345 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, Calif. 94025 CONTENTS Page Conversion factors------------------------------------------------------- V Abstract----------------------------------------------------------------­ 1 Introduction------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Previous investigations-------------------------------------------------- 2 Envirorunent-------------------------------------------------------------­ 3 Streamflow--------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Measured streamflow------------------------------------------------­ 4 Estimated streamflow, 1928-75--------------------------------------- 5 Sediment transport------------------------------------------------------­ 7 Data collection----------------------------------------------------- 10 Sediment-discharge relations---------------------------------------- 19 Streambed changes--------------------------------------------------- 19 Long-term sediment discharge---------------------------------------­ 21 Estimated sediment budget for the Santa Clara River basin---------------­ 25 Selected references------------------------------------------------------ 28 ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Hap showing location of sediment-sampling stations---------­ 32 2-4. Graphs showing flow-duration curves: 2. Santa Clara River at Los Angeles-Ventura County line (11108500)---------------------------- 33 3. Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000)------------ 34 4. Sespe Creek near Fillmore (11113000)---------------­ 35 5-7. Graphs showing particle-size distribution of bed material: 5. Santa Clara River at Los Angeles-Ventura County line (11108500), determined by sieve analysis------------------------------------ 36 6. Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000), d termined by sieve analysis---------------------- 37 7. Sesp Creek near Fillmore (11113000), determined by optical, particle-count, and sieve analys s------------------------------------------ 38 8. Graph comparing bedload determined by modified E·nstein method to Meyer-Peter and Muller method, Sespe Creek near Fillmore (11113000), water years 1967-75--------------------------------------------- 39 III IV CONTENTS Page Figures 9-11. Graphs showing relation of suspended-sediment discharge to water discharge: 9. Santa Clara River at Los Angeles-Ventura County line (11108500), water years 1969-75---- 40 10. Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000), water years 1968-75---------------------------------- 41 11 . Sespe Creek near Fillmore (11113000), water years 1967-75---------------------------------------- 42 12-14. Graphs showing relation of water discharge to suspended-, unsampled-, and total s ediment discharges: 12 . Santa Clara River at Los Angeles-V ntura County line (11108500), water years 1969-75---- 43 13 . Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000), water years 1968- 75 ---------------------------------- 44 14. Sespe Creek near Fillmore (11113000), water years 1967 -75---------------------------------- 45 15 - 17 . Graphs showing relation of water discharge to coarse-sediment discharge : 15. Santa Clara River at Los Angeles-Ventura County line (11108500), water years 1969 -75---- 46 16 . Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000) , water years 1968- 75 ---------------------------------- 47 17 . Sespe Creek near Fillmo re (11113000), water years 1967-75---------------------------------------- 48 18 . Graph showing variation in low-water streambed elevation, Sespe Creek near Fillmore (11113000)-------- 49 19. Graph showing particle-size distribution of bed material, Santa Clara River at Montalvo (11114000), and at Saticoy (11113920) ------------------------------ 50 20. Graph showing relation of water discharge to bedload­ sediment discharge, Sa nta Clara River at Montalvo (11114000), and at Saticoy (11113920), water year 1969 ---------------------------------------- 51 TABLES Page Table 1 . Periods of streamflow record for the Santa Clara River basin, 1928-75---------------------------------------------- 6 2. Annual streamflow for 12 components of the Santa Clara River drainage system for 1928-75--------------------------- 8 3 . Particle-size distribution of suspended sediment and hydraulic properties at time of suspended-sedi ment sampling------------------------------ ---------------------- 12 4. Average particle-size distribution of surface bed material used------------------------------------------- 18 CONTENTS V Page Table 5. Relation and frequency of occurrence of water and suspended-sediment discharge--------------------------------- 22 6 . Annual water and sediment discharge in the Santa Clara River basin-------------------------------------------------- 24 7. Estimated long-term coarse-sediment discharge of the Santa Clara River basin, various periods--------------------- 25 8. Annual sediment budget for the Santa Clara River basin, 1928-75----------------------------------------------- 27 CONVERSION FACTORS The inch-pound system is used in this report . For readers who prefer metric units, the conversion factors for the terms used in this report are listed below: Multiply inch-pound unit By To obtain metric unit acre-ft (acre-foot) 0.001233 hm 3 (cubic hectometer) ft (foot) 0 . 3048 m (meter) ft/s (foot per second) 0 . 3048 m/s (meter per second)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Santa Clara River Conservancy Sespe Cienega Restoration and Pubilc Access Project
    Santa Clara River Conservancy Sespe Cienega Restoration and Pubilc Access Project About Santa Clara River Conservancy Vision Vision The Santa Clara River Conservancy (SCRC) is a Public Access non-profit, collaborative land trust focusing on restoring The surrounding communities are currently isolated native habitat to one of California’s most dynamic water- from the river and have asked for increased public sheds. SCRC encourages the community to join the access to the river for some time. SCRC and organization’s mission through various outreach, educa- CDFW hope to address some of that demand in tion, recreation events, activities, and volunteer efforts. the envisioned public access improvements on this Project Description property. The plans for public access improve- ments will include design of interpretative displays The goal of this planning effort at Sespe Cienega is to and walking trails that will allow for public access develop working plans to restore riparian and wetland to and along the Santa Clara River, ultimately habitats and natural river function to this property under increasing the public access footprint along the permanent protection by CDFW, and to provide public Santa Clara River that is the Santa Clara River access to the river for the communities of Fillmore, Santa Parkway vision. Paula, and Piru. Restoring the river to its natural and historical functions has additional benefits to the surrounding area by providing a space for sustainable Restoration agriculture, land conservation, and climate resilience. The SCRC, in coordination with UCSB, CDFW, and Still planning process will be a joint effort among the Santa Water Sciences will develop working plans to Clara River Conservancy (SCRC), the California Depart- guide restoration of riparian and wetland habitats ment of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the University of and natural river function on the property to its California, Santa Barbara (UCSB).
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 SANTA CLARITA VALLEY WATER REPORT Castaic Lake
    2016 SANTA CLARITA VALLEY WATER REPORT June, 2017 Prepared by Castaic Lake Water Agency CLWA Santa Clarita Water Division Los Angeles County Waterworks District 36 Newhall County Water District Valencia Water Company 2016 Santa Clarita Valley Water Report prepared for: Castaic Lake Water Agency CLWA Santa Clarita Water Division Los Angeles County Waterworks District 36 Newhall County Water District Valencia Water Company June 2017 JUNE 2017 2016 SANTA CLARITA VALLEY WATER REPORT Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.1 2016 Water Requirements and Supplies ............................................................................. ES-1 ES.2 Alluvial Aquifer ................................................................................................................... ES-2 ES.3 Saugus Formation............................................................................................................... ES-4 ES.4 Imported Water ................................................................................................................. ES-5 ES.5 Recycled Water ................................................................................................................... ES-6 ES.6 2017 Water Supply Outlook................................................................................................ ES-6 ES.7 Water Conservation ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Sespe Creek Comprehensive Wild and Scenic River Management Plan, Los Padres National Forest
    Comprehensive River United States Department of Management Plan Agriculture Forest Service Sespe Creek Pacific Southwest Region R5-MB-038 Los Padres National Forest November 2003 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Description of River Setting and Resource Values .................................................................................... 4 Regional River Setting ............................................................................................................................ 4 Free-flowing values and impacts ............................................................................................................. 4 Outstandingly
    [Show full text]
  • To Oral History
    100 E. Main St. [email protected] Ventura, CA 93001 (805) 653-0323 x 320 QUARTERLY JOURNAL SUBJECT INDEX About the Index The index to Quarterly subjects represents journals published from 1955 to 2000. Fully capitalized access terms are from Library of Congress Subject Headings. For further information, contact the Librarian. Subject to availability, some back issues of the Quarterly may be ordered by contacting the Museum Store: 805-653-0323 x 316. A AB 218 (Assembly Bill 218), 17/3:1-29, 21 ill.; 30/4:8 AB 442 (Assembly Bill 442), 17/1:2-15 Abadie, (Señor) Domingo, 1/4:3, 8n3; 17/2:ABA Abadie, William, 17/2:ABA Abbott, Perry, 8/2:23 Abella, (Fray) Ramon, 22/2:7 Ablett, Charles E., 10/3:4; 25/1:5 Absco see RAILROADS, Stations Abplanalp, Edward "Ed," 4/2:17; 23/4:49 ill. Abraham, J., 23/4:13 Abu, 10/1:21-23, 24; 26/2:21 Adams, (rented from Juan Camarillo, 1911), 14/1:48 Adams, (Dr.), 4/3:17, 19 Adams, Alpha, 4/1:12, 13 ph. Adams, Asa, 21/3:49; 21/4:2 map Adams, (Mrs.) Asa (Siren), 21/3:49 Adams Canyon, 1/3:16, 5/3:11, 18-20; 17/2:ADA Adams, Eber, 21/3:49 Adams, (Mrs.) Eber (Freelove), 21/3:49 Adams, George F., 9/4:13, 14 Adams, J. H., 4/3:9, 11 Adams, Joachim, 26/1:13 Adams, (Mrs.) Mable Langevin, 14/1:1, 4 ph., 5 Adams, Olen, 29/3:25 Adams, W. G., 22/3:24 Adams, (Mrs.) W.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.12 Hydrology and Water Quality
    3.12 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section describes the drainage features, stormwater quality, flooding hazards, and flood-protection improvements within the City’s Planning Area. Regulatory agencies governing stormwater quality and flooding hazards are also discussed. The City’s Planning Area is comprised of the City’s boundaries and adopted Sphere of Influence (SOI). The County’s Planning Area consists of unincorporated land within the One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Planning Area boundaries that is outside the City’s boundaries and adopted SOI. Together the City and County Planning Areas comprise the OVOV Planning Area. With implementation of the proposed General Plan goals, objectives, and policies potential impacts on hydrology and water quality would be less than significant. EXISTING CONDITIONS Surface Water Drainage Patterns within City’s Planning Area Surface water drainage patterns are dependent on topography, the amount and location of impervious surfaces, and the type of flood control that is located in an area. The size, or magnitude, of a flood is described by a term called a “recurrence interval.” By studying a long period of flow record for a stream, hydrologists estimate the size of a flood that would have a likelihood of occurring during various intervals. For example, a five-year flood event would occur, on the average, once every five years (and would have a 20 percent chance of occurring in any one year). Although a 100-year flood event is expected to happen only once in a century, there is a 1 percent chance that a flood of that size could happen during any year.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Complexity at Vasquez Rocks: a Bioarchaeological Study of a Middle Period Cemetery
    California State University, Northridge Social Complexity at Vasquez Rocks: A Bioarchaeological Study of a Middle Period Cemetery A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Arts in Anthropology By Sebastian Cristobal Garza May 2012 The thesis of Sebastian Cristobal Garza is approved: ____________________________________ _____________ Dr. Hélène Rougier Date ____________________________________ _____________ Dr. Michael Love Date ____________________________________ _____________ Dr. Matthew Des Lauriers, Chair Date California State University, Northridge ii Acknowledgements Thank you a million times over to Professor Hélène Rougier. Without your knowledge and assistance this project never would have happened. Thank you for spending hours in the lab with me sorting out the mess that the collection was and not giving up on me despite all my grumbling. Thank you to Dr. Matthew Des Lauriers for your guidance on my thesis while serving as the chair of my thesis committee and for helping me through the tribal consultations with the Tataviam. Thank you to Dr. Michael Love for your guidance through the proposal process and for your comments on my drafts while serving on my thesis committee. Thanks to Wendy Teeter who walked me through the NAGPRA process as it pertained to the CA-LAN-361 collection. Thank you for your advice and suggestions. I would like to thank Albert Knight for giving Professor Rougier and myself a guided tour of some of the rock art sites around Vasquez Rocks County Park and bestowing
    [Show full text]
  • Ensuring Nature's Benefits Now, and Into the Future, Following The
    Ensuring Nature’s Benefits Now, and into the Future, following the Copper, Ranch, and Sayre Fires on the Angeles National Forest Water as Nature’s Benefit: The watersheds of the Angeles National Forest are the source of nearly one- third of the Los Angeles population’s drinking water, in addition to providing for all of the plant and animal life that live within the boundaries of the Forest. The Forest’s eighteen dams and debris basins support a massive flood control system to protect and provide for the millions of people that live downstream. And these are only a few of Nature’s Benefits the Forest provides. The Angeles National Forest serves as: • The natural picturesque backdrop for one of the country’s largest and most diverse urban centers, providing access to approximately 700,000 acres of open space in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area for outdoor recreation that includes, hiking ,walking, nature viewing, camping, swimming and more. • The Forest host for between 3 and 4 million annual visitors, giving them the opportunity to explore a variety of landscapes including chaparral, oak thickets, high desert, pine woods, steep and rugged mountains, and numerous lakes, streams, and rivers. • One of the world’s vital biodiversity hot spots. The Forest contains many natural and cultural resources unique to Southern California as well as a variety of wildlife, including the California condor, spotted owl, bighorn sheep, and numerous other threatened and endangered species. • A green space neighbor to multiple communities, to include the 4th largest city in Los Angeles, Santa Clarita. Wildfire: In California, more than half of the state’s largest 20 wildfires have occurred within the last 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents 1. Section 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Overview ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Hazard Mitigation Planning ...................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 ............................................................................... 1-1 1.4 Community Rating System – Activity 510 Floodplain Management Planning ....... 1-2 1.5 Local Participants ..................................................................................................... 1-2 1.6 Community Profile ................................................................................................... 1-3 1.6.1 Unincorporated Ventura County................................................................... 1-3 1.6.2 Participating Cities ........................................................................................ 1-3 1.6.3 Participating Special Districts ....................................................................... 1-4 1.7 Description of the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan ..................................................... 1-6 1.7.1 Section 2: Record of Adoption ..................................................................... 1-6 1.7.2 Section 3: Planning Process .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 D13 Zone Hunt Info
    CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Wildlife Branch 1010 Riverside Parkway, West Sacramento, CA 95605 ZONE D13 2021 General Deer Hunting Information (Includes Additional Hunt M-7) GENERAL INFORMATION This information sheet has been prepared to assist deer hunters applying for, or planning to hunt in, Zone D-13 located in portions of Kern, Los Angeles, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties. The following information should be useful to hunters for archery and general seasons as well as any “additional hunts” within this geographic area. For more specific information or additional questions regarding this area, contact the following Department office(s): • South Coast Region Office (Region 5), 3883 Ruffin Road, San Diego, CA 92123 (858-467-4201) encompassing Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Ventura counties. REGULATIONS Laws and regulations are designed to conserve wildlife and to provide for an equitable distribution of game mammals. All hunters should read and be familiar with the Current Hunting Regulations. Remember, if you are hunting on private property you must obtain, and have in your possession, written permission to hunt on private property. Hunter trespass laws are strictly enforced. NON-LEAD RESTRICTIONS As of July 1, 2019, all hunters must use nonlead ammunition when taking any wildlife in California, except when hunting with a pellet rifle for approved species. • CCR T14 250.1(d)(3) Effective July 1, 2019, it shall be unlawful to use, or possess with any firearm capable of firing, any projectile(s) not certified as nonlead when taking any wildlife for any purpose in this state.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Works Agency Watershed Protection District Five-Year Capital
    38%/,&:25.6$*(1&< :$7(56+('3527(&7,21',675,&7 ),9(<($5 &$3,7$/,03529(0(17352*5$0 VENTURA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT FIVE YEAR PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS (FUNDING SOURCE AND AMOUNT) FISCAL YEAR 2018/2019 2019/2020 2020/2021 2021/2022 2022/2023 Total Zone: 1 WPD $ 9,806,559 $ 289,000 $ 760,000 $ 130,000 $ - $ 10,985,559 Zone: 2 WPD $ 12,827,014 $ 12,875,775 $ 3,285,198 $ 885,000 $ 4,325,000 $ 34,197,987 Zone: 3 WPD $ 2,780,000 $ 2,895,000 $ 5,355,000 $ 4,060,000 $ 4,280,000 $ 19,370,000 Zone: 4 WPD $ 23,000 $ 782,381 $ - $ - $ - $ 805,381 Annual Total $ 25,436,573 $ 16,842,156 $ 9,400,198 $ 5,075,000 $ 8,605,000 $ 65,358,927 VENTURA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT FIVE YEAR PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS ZONE: 1 FISCAL YEAR (2018/2019) Project Location Estimated Costs 1 Fresno Canyon Diversion Community of Casitas Springs $ 6,972,559 2 Matilija Dam Removal 65% Design Planning Matilija Creek $ 2,260,000 Project 3 Matilija Dam Removal Estuarine and Coastal City of Ventura $ 265,000 Modeling 4 Ventura River Levee at Casitas Springs (VR-2) Community of Casitas Springs $ 66,000 5 Ventura River Levee at Ventura (VR-1) City of Ventura $ 243,000 Grand Total: $ 9,806,559 VENTURA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY WATERSHED PROTECTION DISTRICT FIVE YEAR PLANNED CAPITAL PROJECTS ZONE: 1 FISCAL YEARS (2019/2020 to 2022/2023) Project Location Estimated Costs 1 Fresno Canyon Diversion Community of Casitas Springs $ - 2 Matilija Dam Removal 65% Design Planning Matilija Creek $ 149,000 Project 3 Matilija Dam Removal
    [Show full text]
  • 3.9 Geology, Soils, Seismicity
    3.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, SEISMICITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This section describes the types of soils present within the City’s Planning Area. Development constraints associated with soil hazards, subsidence, and geologic hazards are discussed along with City development standards. The City’s Planning Area consists of its incorporated boundaries and adopted Sphere of Influence (SOI). The County’s Planning Area consists of unincorporated land within the One Valley One Vision (OVOV) Planning Area boundaries that is outside the City’s boundaries and adopted SOI. Together, the County and City Planning Areas comprise the OVOV Planning Area. With implementation of the proposed General Plan goals, objectives, and policies and mitigation measures defined in this section, potential impacts from geology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant. EXISTING CONDITIONS Soils Various soil types exist within the City’s Planning Area as shown on Figure 3.9-1, Soil Types within the City’s Planning Area. Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (ScF2) is the most abundant type of soil within the City’s Planning Area with approximately 7,689 acres. A detailed description of each soil type found within the City’s Planning Area is presented in Appendix 3.9 of this environmental impact report (EIR) and corresponds with the soil types mapped on Figure 3.9-1. Each soil characteristic is identified to determine the Capability Classification of the soil on site, which in turn determines the predicted productivity of the soil if it were under agricultural production; the majority of the soils within the City’s Planning Area would be used for wildland/grazing areas, and would not be able to economically or physically sustain agricultural production.
    [Show full text]