DOCSLIB.ORG

Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System San

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System San SANTA ANA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC SYSTEM HAER No. CA-130 SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST REDLANDS VICINITY SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PF_R CALIFORNIA PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN ENIGNEERING RECORD NATIONAL PARK SERVICE WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94107 ma c, 0-/-- HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD Ou7 • SANTA ANA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC SYSTEM HAER No. CA-130 Location: The southern boundary of the Santa Ana Hydroelectric System is located in the Santa Ana River Canyon, 1.4 miles northeast of the City of Redlands in San Bernardino County, California and 0,52 mile northeast of Greenspot Road. The distance between the northern and southern ends of the system is approximately 3.8 miles, oriented southwest to northeast. USGS Yucaipa and Keller Peak Quadrangles, Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates: North end (SAR 1): 10.494720.3778100. South end (SAR 3): 10.490900.3773920 Date of Construction: SAR 1 - 1898; SAR 2 - 1905; SAR 3 - 1904 Engineer: O. H. Ensign; E. M. Boggs Builder: Thornton and Leonardy, Redlands; Mentone Power Company (SAR 3) Present Owner: Southern California Edison Company, P.O. Box 800, Rosemead, California 91770 Present Use: Operating hydroelectric generating facilities to be affected by new Seven Oaks Dam Significance: When completed in 1898, Powerhouse 1 had the longest transmission line in the country, and possibly the largest hydroelectric generators in the world. Innovative features which became industry standards include the individual tail races, internal revolving field alternators, and transposition of wires. When Powerhouses 2 and 3 were added, the system became the prototype for the larger hydroelectric systems of the twentieth century. Nominated to the National Register of Historic Places in 1985; American Society of Civil Engineers Historic and Engineering Landmark in 1985. Report Prepared by: Mark T. Swanson, Historian Greenwood and Associates 725 Jacon Way Pacific Palisades, California 90272-2830 David De Vries, Photographer Mesa Technical 2630 Hilgard Berkeley, California 94709-1002 Date: November 1992 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page 2 CONTENTS Introduction 5 Environmental Setting 5 Historical Setting 9 Generalized Scheme of Powerhouse Operation 11 Summary 12 Early Electrical Work 18 Period to ca. 1875 18 Supremacy of Arc Lights, 1876-ca. 1879 21 Edison's Achievements, 1879-1886 24 Direct Current and the First Motors 27 Development of Alternating Current, ca. 1885-1890 30 Consolidation of Electrical Companies, ca. 1889-1892 35 Early Electrical Developments in Southern California 39 Overview, 1892-1892 39 The Pomona Plant, 1891-1892 43 The Mill Creek Plant, 1892-1896 46 Westside Lighting Company and the Southern California Edison System, 1888-1909 52 Development of Santa Ana River No. 1 56 The Santa Ana Canal, 1892-1894 56 » Organizational Beginnings 60 Construction and Original Layout of SAR 1 Features 61 Intake/Headworks 62 Conduit Systems/Tunnels and Flumes 63 Reservoir, Forebay, and Pressure Pipe 68 Receiver 69 Powerhouse Construction 71 Physical Plant 71 Water Wheels, Governors, Tail Races 73 Generators 7 6 Exciters 76 Wiring, Switchboards, and Transformers 77 Orville Ensign and the Development of the Transmission Line 79 Line Wires and Insulators 81 Transmission Line and Wire Transposition 84 Plant Start-Up and Initial Problems 87 Other Famous Santa Ana Plant Personnel 89 Major Support Structures at SAR 1 90 Impact of SAR 1 and Subsequent Development of the Edison Electric Company 92 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page 3 Santa Ana River No. 2 95 Intake and Conduit System 96 Powerhouse Plant 98 Water Wheels 99 Generators and Exciters 100 Transformers and Wiring 101 7. Santa Ana River No. 3 103 Intake and Conduit System 103 Pressure Pipe 106 Physical Plant and Auxiliary Buildings 106 Water Wheel 107 Generators and Exciters 108 Wiring, Switchboard, and Transformers 109 Plans for Other Powerhouses in the Canyon 110 8. The Santa Ana River Hydroelectric Community, 1905-1921 111 9. Development of the Edison Distribution System 119 Hydroelectric Developments in the Sierra Nevada 119 Evolution of the Edison System, ca. 1910-1940s 121 Alterations to the SAR System, 1912-1980 125 10. Conclusion 135 Sources 139 References 140 # Appendix List of Engineering Drawings at Southern California Edison 156 Figures 1. Vicinity Map 2. Drainage Basins and the Powerhouses 3. Brush Arc-Lamp, ca. 1880 22 4. Early Edison Lamps 25 5. The Edison General Electric Company, 1891 28 6. Sprague Electric Motor 29 7. Early Transformers 33 8. Principle of the Pelton Wheel 42 9. Three-Phase Synchronous Motor, 1903 49 10. Plan of Sand Box 63 11. Flume Construction 67 12. Plan and Profile of SAR 1, 1899 72 13. End Section of SAR 1 75 14. Plan of Tail Races 75 15. Interior of SAR 1 Powerhouse, 1909 79 16. Wiring Diagram, SAR 1, 1910 80 17. 10,000-Volt Insulators 83 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page *i 18. Redlands Type Imperial Porcelain Insulator 83 19- Generic Imperial Porcelain Insulator, ca. 1897 85 20. Santa Ana Glass Insulator 85 21. Santa Ana Pole Line 86 22. Transmission Lines in Southern California, 1899 87 23. Plan of SAR i 91 24. SAR 2 Powerhouse, 1907 98 25. Wiring Diagram, SAR 2, 1910 102 26. Southern California Edison Company Transmission Lines, 1913 120 27. Southern California Edison Company Transmission Lines, 1925 122 28. Concrete Sand Box, SAR 1, 1913 126 Table 1. Southern California Edison Genealogy 55 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page 5 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD, CA-130 SANTA ANA RIVER HYDROELECTRIC SYSTEM 1. INTRODUCTION Environmental Setting Santa Ana River Powerhouses 1, 2, and 3, collectively known as the Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System, are located along the Santa Ana River, between the higher elevations of the San Bernardino Mountains and the mouth of the Santa Ana Canyon at Mentone, The three Santa Ana River powerhouses, and their water intake systems, are all linked together, making use of the same water at successively lower elevations along the Santa Ana River. The whole system is located in the mountainous San Bernardino National Forest, San Bernardino County, California, about 70 miles due east of downtown Los Angeles (Figure 1). The three facilities, currently known as Santa Ana River Powerhouses 1, 2, and 3, are often abbreviated to SAR 1, SAR 2, and SAR 3. Powerhouse 1 is the highest in elevation, followed by the other two in sequential order. The intake for Powerhouse 1 is located near the northeast corner of Section 19, Township 1 North, Range 1 West, San Bernardino Base Meridian. From there, the water conduit extends slightly more than 2.5 miles on the north and west side of the Santa Ana River to Powerhouse 1, located in the northeast quarter of Section 26, Township 1 North, Range 2 West. From the tailrace of SAR 1, the conduit of Powerhouse 2 crosses the river and extends just over 1.5 miles on the south and east side to Powerhouse 2, located in the northeast quarter of Section 34, Township 1 North, Range 2 West. From the tailrace of SAR 2, the conduit for Powerhouse 3 continues on the south and east side of the river for another 2.5 miles until it reaches Powerhouse 3, situated in the southwest quarter of Section 4, Township 1 South, Range 2 West (CA-13 0-56) . The total distance covered by this system, from the intake of SAR 1 to the tailrace of SAR 3, is 7.06 miles (Hornbeck and Botts 1938:19). There is a discrepancy among the most reliable sources as to the elevation of the system, especially SAR 1. To compound the problem, local USGS quadrangle maps vary yet again from the sources. The most accurate elevations appear to be those used by C.E. Fowler in an 18 99 article describing the construction and operation of Santa Ana No. 1. The other disagreements are relatively minor. With these provisos, the total drop in elevation within this system, from the intake of Powerhouse 1 to Powerhouse 3, is roughly 1472 feet. The SAR 1 intake is located at approximately 3422 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) . Water collected here drops 752 feet into Powerhouse 1, situated at 2670 feet AMSL (Fowler 1899:146). The water again drops another 320 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page 6 Santa Ana River Hydroelectric System HAER No. CA-130 Page 7 feet to Powerhouse 2, situated at 2350 feet AMSL. The final drop of 400 feet goes into Powerhouse 3, situated at 1950 feet AMSL (Hornbeck and Botts 1988:20-21). The three powerhouses are located within the San Bernardino Mountains, one of the east-west Transverse Ranges of southern California. The Transverse Ranges create the mountainous northern rim of the Los Angeles Basin. Within these ranges, the San Bernardino Mountains form a relatively compact group, separated from the San Gabriel Mountains to the west by the Cajon Pass, and differentiated from the Little San Bernardino Mountains to the east by Morongo Valley (Sharp 1976:10-12). The San Bernardino Mountains are among the highest that form the Los Angeles Basin, and the streams that flow from these mountains are some of the largest in southern California. The central portion of the San Bernardino Range is divided into three east-west trending valleys, all of which drain to the west or southwest (Figure 2). The northernmost of these valleys is Bear Valley, drained by Bear Creek. The central valley, also known as the Seven Oaks area, is formed by the upper reaches of the Santa Ana River. The southern valley is formed by Mill Creek. Bear Creek and the upper Santa Ana are separated by Sugarloaf Mountain (9952 feet AMSL) and its ridges.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • (ROPE) Table Top Exercise Mark A. Hartwig
    CONTACT: Cheryl Nagy, Emergency Services Officer/PIO (909) 356-3910, (909) 725-6627, pager #1516 September 24, 2013 Michael Antonucci, Emergency Services Manager San Bernardino County Fire Department Office of Emergency Services FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Responders Organized for Pass Emergencies (ROPE) Table Top Exercise After months of planning, First Responders and Private Sector partners from San Bernardino County came together on September 24, 2013, at the Goldy S. Lewis Community Center in Rancho Cucamonga to participate in the San Bernardino County Responders Organized for Pass Emergencies (ROPE) Table Top Exercise created by San Bernardino County Fire Department Office of Emergency Services and the ROPE Committee. The exercise scenario addressed the challenges of accessing the Cajon Pass after a 7.8 earthquake. With the San Andreas Fault cutting through southwestern San Bernardino County, which houses some of the most densely populated areas in the region, the likelihood of post-earthquake challenges in the Cajon Pass are evident. Due to the fact that the Cajon Pass incorporates a major transportation corridor (Interstate 15), rail, and utility resources; infrastructure coordinated operations are essential to the response and recovery of San Bernardino County and the Southern California region. The exercise focused on Incident Command objectives and priorities, Operational Communications and Operational Coordination, including strategic areas north and south of the Cajon Pass to facilitate emergency responses, along with analyzing any gaps within the ROPE planning process. At the conclusion of the exercise more than 100 participants now feel prepared to respond to an incident within the Cajon Pass using the newly established draft ROPE Standard Operating Guidelines (SOG) and the draft ROPE Field Operations Guide (FOG) for all-hazards.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is the Santa Ana River Watershed?
    32 1 32 1 2 3 Discharge of the Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam Water Year 1969 - 1970 2 3 4 5 – Gordon K. Anderson, former Chief of Planning, California Regional Water Quality Control Board “Too many people and not enough water to go around – that’s what led to the seemingly endless rounds of lawsuits and countersuits that characterized the 1960s in this watershed [which] takes in parts of three separate counties.” – Gordon K. Anderson, former Chief of Planning, California Regional Water Quality Control Board 1 4 5 6 7 ItIt All All StartedStarted withwith ConflictConflict AfterAfter decades decades of of disputes disputes dating dating to to the the early early 1900s, 1900s, two two major major lawsuits lawsuits were were filedfiled in in 1963, 1963, involving involving surface surface water water and and groundwater groundwater pumping pumping rights rights in in thethe Santa Santa Ana Ana River River Watershed. Watershed. One One lawsuit lawsuit was was filed filed by by Western Western MunicipalMunicipal Water Water District District and and the the other other by by Orange Orange County County Water Water District. District. InIn reference reference to to the the Orange Orange County County lawsuit, lawsuit, Corona Corona City City Attorney Attorney Robert Robert TimlinTimlin and and Don Don Stark, Stark, Counsel Counsel for for the the Chino Chino Basin Basin Municipal Municipal Water Water District,District, declared declared in in 1968, 1968, “The “The suit suit was was the the largest largest and and most most complex complex ever
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads/Dec2018/Harpercollins, Oops
    oops 20 Life Lessons from the Fiascoes That Shaped America MARTIN J. SMITH and PATRICK J. KIGER To William Leford Smith,M.J.S whose. dimming eyes still see the humor in almost everything To Beastboy P.and J.K his. momster Good judgment is usually the result of experience. And experience is frequently the result of bad judgment. —An attorney in a lawsuit involving Boston’s John Hancock Tower, after the skyscraper’s windows fell out Some said I couldn’t sing, but no one could say I didn’t sing. —Florence Foster Jenkins, widely recognized as the worst opera diva ever contents Introduction The Joy of Oops ix Lesson #1 READ THE FINE PRINT The Eroto- Utopians of Upstate New York John Humphrey Noyes’s sexually adventurous Perfectionist commune was one of the most successful utopian religious groups in 19th-century Amer- ica. Alas, the devil was in the details. { 1 } Lesson #2 ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE How Thomas Edison Invented Trash Talk Why would one of America’s iconic inventors publicly electrocute a full- grown carnival elephant? The answer reveals a little- known story of ego, failure, and the moment when America began “going negative.” { 13 } Lesson #3 BEWARE SOLUTIONS THAT CREATE NEW PROBLEMS The Global Underarm Deodorant Disaster Thomas Midgley Jr. was among America’s greatest problem solvers. Unfor- tunately, his landmark “Eureka!” moments had an echo that sounded a lot like “Oops!” { 27 } CONTENTS v Lesson #4 BAD RESULTS TRUMP GOOD INTENTIONS Kudzu: A Most Tangled Tale What began as a well- intentioned effort to stop soil erosion in the American South became a dramatic example of what can happen when you mess with Mother Nature.
    [Show full text]
  • War of the Currents
    An Electric Battle A WebQuest for War of the Currents Introduction At the turn of the twentieth century, the War of the Currents had a clear winner—Tesla and his alternating current. However, direct current survived into the twenty-first century. As recently as 2007, some parts of Manhattan were finally converted to alternating current. The transition from direct current to alternating current begin in the late 1920s but took decades, in part, because the foundation of New York City’s energy grid was build by Edison’s company. Task Your task is to research the everyday devices credited to Edison and Tesla. You will compare these inventor’s influences by creating a script for a 5-min mock “debate” between Edison and Tesla in which they debate their influences on today’s and future technology. Process Use the resources listed in the Resources section to begin your research. The Web sites listed are good starting points, but further Internet research will be necessary. Record your answers to the following questions. 1. What was the relationship between Tesla and Edison prior to the War of the Currents? 2. Both Tesla and Edison were prolific inventors. If the two were competing to obtain the most number of patents filed, who wins and by what margin? 3. Did any of Tesla’s or Edison’s inventions build upon one another or work together to bring about new technology? 4. Could direct current make a comeback? Explain your answer. Write a Script Write a script for a 5-min mock debate between Edison and Tesla, in which each tries to convince the audience that he was the more influential inventor.
    [Show full text]
  • War of Currents
    War of Currents In the War of Currents era (sometimes, War of the Currents or Battle of Currents) in the late 1880s, George Westinghouse and Thomas Edison became adversaries due to Edison's promotion of direct current (DC) for electric power distribution over alternating current (AC). Edison's direct-current system generated and distributed electric power at the same voltage as used by the customer's lamps and motors. This meant that the current in transmission was relatively large, and so heavy conductors were required and transmission distances were limited, to about a mile (kilometre); otherwise transmission losses would make the system uneconomical. At the time, no method was practical for changing voltages of DC power. The invention of an efficient transformer allowed high voltage to be used for AC transmission. An AC generating plant could then serve customers at a great distance (tens to hundreds of miles), or could serve more customers within its economical transmission distance. The fewer much larger plants needed for AC would achieve an economy of scale that would lower costs further. The invention of a practical AC motor increased the usefulness of alternating current for powering machinery. Edison's company had invested heavily in DC technology and was vigorously defending its DC based patents. George Westinghouse saw AC as a way to get into the business with his own patented competing system and set up the Westinghouse Electric Company to design and build it. The Westinghouse company also purchased the patents for alternating current devices from inventors in Europe and licensed patents from Nikola Tesla.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Consolidation Communities of Los Angeles, 1862-1932
    LOS ANGELES CITYWIDE HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT Context: Pre-Consolidation Communities of Los Angeles, 1862-1932 Prepared for: City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Office of Historic Resources July 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE 1 CONTRIBUTOR 1 INTRODUCTION 1 THEME: WILMINGTON, 1862-1909 4 THEME: SAN PEDRO, 1882-1909 30 THEME: HOLLYWOOD, 1887-1910 56 THEME: SAWTELLE, 1896-1918 82 THEME: EAGLE ROCK, 1886-1923 108 THEME: HYDE PARK, 1887-1923 135 THEME: VENICE, 1901-1925 150 THEME: WATTS, 1902-1926 179 THEME: BARNES CITY, 1919-1926 202 THEME: TUJUNGA, 1888-1932 206 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPY 232 SurveyLA Citywide Historic Context Statement Pre-consolidation Communities of Los Angeles, 1862-1932 PREFACE This historic context is a component of Los Angeles’ citywide historic context statement and provides guidance to field surveyors in identifying and evaluating potential historic resources relating to Pre- Consolidation Communities of Los Angeles. Refer to www.HistoricPlacesLA.org for information on designated resources associated with this context as well as those identified through SurveyLA and other surveys. CONTRIBUTOR Daniel Prosser is a historian and preservation architect. He holds an M.Arch. from Ohio State University and a Ph.D. in history from Northwestern University. Before retiring, Prosser was the Historic Sites Architect for the Kansas State Historical Society. INTRODUCTION The “Pre-Consolidation Communities of Los Angeles” context examines those communities that were at one time independent, self-governing cities. These include (presented here as themes): Wilmington, San Pedro, Hollywood, Sawtelle, Eagle Rock, Hyde Park, Venice, Watts, Barnes City, and Tujunga. This context traces the history of each of these cities (up to the point of consolidation with the City of Los Angeles), identifying important individuals and patterns of settlement and development, and then links the events and individuals to extant historic resources (individual resources and historic districts).
    [Show full text]
  • San Bernardino & Inyo Counties, California
    BLM-California Old Spanish National Historic Trail Recreation & Development Strategy San Bernardino & Inyo Counties, California—September, 2015 14 Old Spanish National Historic Trail Recreation & Development Strategy Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Utah State Office Prepared For: The Bureau of Land Management, Barstow Field Office The Old Spanish Trail Association Prepared By: Michael Knight, BLM, ACE Landscape Architect Intern Graydon Bascom, BLM, ACE Historic Trails Intern September, 2015 Contents Note to the Reader 1 Participants 2 Explanation of Document Sections 3 Project Overview Old Spanish Trail Map 7 Recreation Route Map 9 Typical Trail Elements 11 Trail Zone Details Cajon Junction to Barstow (Zone 1) 15 Barstow to Harvard Rd (Zone 2) 19 Harvard Rd to Salt Creek (Zone 3) 27 Zzyzx to Piute Gorge (Zone 4) 31 Salt Creek to California State Line (Zone 5) 37 Summary 41 Above: Old Spanish Trail Marker at Emigrant Pass Cover Page: Top photo: Salt Creek ACEC, Bottom Photo: Mouth of Spanish Canyon looking southwest Note To The Reader National Historic Trails are trails that have a historical significance to the nation, and can only be designated by an act of Congress. There are currently 19 National Historic Trails in the United States. In 1968, the National Trails System Act, which is intended to provide for the outdoor recreation needs of the public, opened the door to federal involvement in all types of trails. Today, the Bureau of Land Management, along with the National Park Service and National Forest Service, are responsible for the administration and management of National Historic Trails.
    [Show full text]
  • Cajon Pass As You've Never Seen It
    MAP OF THE MONTH Cajon Pass as you’ve never seen it Your all-time guide to the busiest railroad mountain crossing in the United States. We map 126 years of railroad history “HILL 582” CP SP462 Popular railfan CP SP465 HILAND Alray INTERSTATE hangout SILVERWOOD Former passing 15 66 siding removed 1972, Original 1885 line through To Palmdale named for track Main 1 Setout siding Summit relocated 1972; the Setout siding supervisor Al Ray new line reduced the summit Main 3 3N45 elevation by 50 feet. “STEIN’S HILL” Tunnel No. 1 SILVERWOOD Named for noted Eliminated 2008 Main 2 MP 56.6 ific CP SP464 Pac rail photographer Tunnel No. 2 3N48 Union Richard Steinheimer. Eliminated 2008 Parker Dell Ranch To Barstow Rd. 138 BNSF WALKER Summit Road MP 59.4 Named for longtime 138 Summit operator and Gish author Chard Walker Original 1885 line; Summit SUMMIT Warning: became passing Site of depot and MP 55.9 The tracks east of the Summit siding 1920s; helper turning wye Road crossing are in the BNSF 1913 line removed 1956 security area, established 1996. relocated 1977 It is lit, fenced, and guarded. Do not trespass in this area. OLD TRAILS HIGHWAY First paved road over Cajon Exit 131 Pass 1916, first route for Route PACIFIC CRESTFUN HIKING FACT TRAIL Route 138 66; originally a 12-mile toll road The Pacific Crest Hiking Trail runs opened in 1861, now a trail. 2,638 miles from Canada to Mexico. 138 Rim of the World Scenic Byway Lone Pine Canyon Rd. DESCANSO MORMON ROCKS CP SP464 is the approximate SAN BERNARDINO NATIONAL FOREST Named for a party location of the Los Angeles Rwy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Last Days of Night
    FEATURE CLE: THE LAST DAYS OF NIGHT CLE Credit: 1.0 Thursday, June 14, 2018 1:25 p.m. - 2:25 p.m. Heritage East and Center Lexington Convention Center Lexington, Kentucky A NOTE CONCERNING THE PROGRAM MATERIALS The materials included in this Kentucky Bar Association Continuing Legal Education handbook are intended to provide current and accurate information about the subject matter covered. No representation or warranty is made concerning the application of the legal or other principles discussed by the instructors to any specific fact situation, nor is any prediction made concerning how any particular judge or jury will interpret or apply such principles. The proper interpretation or application of the principles discussed is a matter for the considered judgment of the individual legal practitioner. The faculty and staff of this Kentucky Bar Association CLE program disclaim liability therefore. Attorneys using these materials, or information otherwise conveyed during the program, in dealing with a specific legal matter have a duty to research original and current sources of authority. Printed by: Evolution Creative Solutions 7107 Shona Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45237 Kentucky Bar Association TABLE OF CONTENTS The Presenter .................................................................................................................. i The War of the Currents: Examining the History Behind The Last Days of Night .................................................................................................... 1 AC/DC: The Two Currents
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Ana River Watermaster
    SANTA ANA RIVER WATERMASTER ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT v. CITY OF CHINO, et al. CASE NO. 117628--COUNTY OF ORANGE WATERMASTER MAILING ADDRESS P. Joseph Grindstaff c/oSBVMWD Douglas D. Headrick 380 East Vanderbilt Way Roy L. Herndon San Bernardino CA 92408-3593 Michael R. Markus Telephone (909) 387-9200 John V. Rossi FAX (909) 387-9247 April 30, 2015 To: Clerk of Superior Court of Orange County and all Parties Re: Watermaster Report for Water Year October 1, 2013 - September 30, 2014 Ladies and Gentlemen: We have the honor of submitting herewith the Forty-Fourth Annual Report of the Santa Ana River Watermaster. The supporting Basic Data Appendices are bound separately. The principal findings of the Watermaster for the Water Year 2013-14 are as follows: At Prado 1 Measured Outflow at Prado 86,486 acre-feet 2 Base Flow at Prado 63,536 acre-feet 3 Annual Weighted TDS in Base and Storm Flows 582 mg/L 4 Annual Adjusted Base Flow 69,784 acre-feet 5 Cumulative Adjusted Base Flow 5,282,666 acre-feet 6 Other Credits (Debits) 0 acre-feet 7 Cumulative Entitlement of OCWD 1,848,000 acre-feet 8 Cumulative Credit 3,474,674 acre-feet 9 One-Third of Cumulative Debit 0 acre-feet 10 Minimum Required Base Flow in 2013-14 34,000 acre-feet April 30, 2015 Page 2 of 2 At Riverside Narrows 1 Base Flow at Riverside Narrows 32, 313 acre-feet 2 Annual Weighted TDS in Base Flow 646 mg/L 3 Annual Adjusted Base Flow 32,313 acre-feet 4 Cumulative Adjusted Base Flow 1,958,244 acre-feet 5 Cumulative Entitlement of IEUA and WMWD 671,000 acre-feet 6 Cumulative Credit 1,287,244 acre-feet 7 One-Third of Cumulative Debit 0 acre-feet 8 Minimum Required Base Flow in 2013-14 12,420 acre-feet Based on these findings, the Watermaster concludes that there was full compliance with the provisions of the Stipulated Judgment in 2013-14.
    [Show full text]
  • Orange County Boundary and Annexation Report 2019-2020 (January 1)
    Orange County Boundary and Annexation Report 2019-2020 (January 1) LA HABRA BREA Ü YORBA LINDA FULLERTON LA PALMA 1. 0 2.5 5 10 Miles PLACENTIA BUENA PARK ANAHEIM CYPRESS VILLA PARK STANTON LOS ALAMITOS GARDEN GROVE SEAL ORANGE WESTMINSTER BEACH 2. UNINCORPORATED SANTA ANA TUSTIN HUNTINGTON BEACH FOUNTAIN VALLEY COSTA MESA IRVINE LAKE FOREST RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA MISSION LAGUNA NEWPORT BEACH VIEJO WOODS LAGUNA ALISO HILLS VIEJO LAGUNA BEACH LAGUNA NIGUEL 1. Annexation of Cielo Vista Development (CA 19-03) SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO 2. Reorganization of the 17th St. and Tustin Unincorporated DANA Island to the City of Santa Ana and MWDOC (RO 19-07) POINT SAN CLEMENTE January 1, 2020 Jurisdictions January 1, 2019 Jurisdictions Source: OC Geomatics, 2019 & 2020 Note: Coastal boundary represents mean high tide circa 2015. Coastal boundary approximated by CDR GIS staff. Orange County Boundary and Annexation Report 2019-2020 Total Area (Square Miles)* Area Change Annexation Detailed Annexation List: Jurisdiction January 1, 2019 January 1, 2020 2019-2020** Reference # Aliso Viejo 6.921 6.921 0 1. Annexation of Cielo Vista Development (CA 19-03) Anaheim 50.872 50.872 0 Effective: 12/20/2019 Brea 12.221 12.221 0 From the County of Orange to the City of Yorba Linda Buena Park 10.550 10.550 0 Uninhabited Costa Mesa 15.849 15.849 0 84.812 Acres (0.13251875 sq. miles) Cypress 6.622 6.622 0 Dana Point 6.602 6.602 0 2. Reorganization of the 17th St. and Tustin Unincorporated Island (RO 19-07) Fountain Valley 9.065 9.065 0 From Unincorporated to the City of Santa Ana and MWDOC Fullerton 22.447 22.447 0 Effective: 12/31/2019 Garden Grove 17.924 17.924 0 Inhabited Huntington Beach 27.612 27.612 0 24.79 Acres (0.038734375 sq.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 High Desert Labor Study
    High Desert High Desert 2016 2016 WORK WORK FORCE FORCE 2016 2016 ADELANTO | APPLE VALLEY | BARSTOW HESPERIA | VICTORVILLE High Desert WORK FORCE 2016 2016 Disclaimer: The information presented is a compilation of data from various sources that are deemed reliable, however; we make no guarantees of its accuracy. The views expressed in the following report are attributable only to the authors and do not represent the views of the U.S. Census Bureau, Bureau of Economic Analysis, the data providers. or any of the five communities of study. 2 High Desert 2016 2016 WORK FORCE Data Presented by City of Hesperia Economic Development Department April 4, 2016 Lisa K. LaMere, Management Analyst Special acknowledgement to Joel Martinez, Intern April Antonio, Administrative Aide Mike Borja, Administrative Analyst Juli Rull, Senior Management Analyst Jennifer Shove, Administrative Analyst Rod Yahnke, Interim Economic Development Director 3 High Desert WORK TABLE OF CONTENTS FORCE 2016 2016 Page Contents 4-5 List of Figures 5-6 List of Tables 7 Introduction 8-9 Background 10-11 High Desert Overview 12-13 Economic and Workforce Trends 14-15 Jobs/Housing Balance 16-17 Within Region Commuting Workforce 18-19 Major Employers: Adelanto, Apple Valley, Barstow 20 Major Employers: Hesperia, Victorville, San Bernardino County 21 Active Workforce 22-23 City of Adelanto Workforce Profile 24-25 Town of Apple Valley Workforce Profile 26-27 City of Barstow Workforce Profile 28-29 City of Hesperia Workforce Profile 30-31 City of Victorville Workforce Profile 32-33
    [Show full text]