Wildcat Creek Restoration Action Plan Version 1.3 April 26, 2010 Prepared by the URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

Home , Alvarado Park, Berkeley Hills, Jewel Lake, Lake Anza, Rheem Creek, San Pablo Bay

wildcat creek restoration action plan version 1.3 april 26, 2010 prepared by THE URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL for the WILDCAT-SAN PABLO WATERSHED COUNCIL

Adopted by the City of San Pablo on August 3, 2010 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 Table of Contents 2 2 8 7 5 4 7 7 4 1 9 6 9 5 8 2 9 0 6 3 7 8 2 3 7 1 3 2 3 6 5 2 7 6 7

2 7 version 1.3 april 26, 2010 april 26, version 1.3 5 1 3 5 5

5 2 1

1 1 3 3 3

4.1 objectives, findings and strategies 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.3 stream restoration recommendations by reach 4.4 Recommended Actions for phase one reaches 4.5 Phase One Flood Damage Reduction Reach 4.6 Recommended actions for watershed council Wildcat Creek 2.8 flood management on lower 2.9 Community 3.1 overview 3.2 flooding 3.4 In-stream conditions 3.5 SUMMER FISH HABITAT 3.6 bioassessment 1.5 metadata 2.1 INTRODUCTION 2.2 watershed LAND USE 2.3 impacts of urbanized watersheds 2.4 Hydrology 2.5 Sediment Transport 2.6 Water quality 2.7 Habitat 1.1 plan OBJECTIVES 1.2 Scope 1.5 Methods 4. recommended actions 3. project AREA analysis 2. watershed OVERVIEW able of Contents Table of 1. introduction wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 Table of Contents 3

figure 1-1: wildcat watershed overview

to Point Pinole Regional Shoreline wildcat watershed existing trail wildcat creek highway railroad city of san pablo planned trail other creek arterial road bart

Parkway SAN PABLO Richmond

BAY Avenue

San Pablo Point UP RR San Pablo WEST COUNTY BNSF RR CITY OF LANDFILL NORTH SAN PABLO RICHMOND San Pablo Dam Road CONTRA 2010 april 26, version 1.3 WILDCAT MARSH PHASE I PHASE II reaches reaches COSTA COUNTY ALVARADO PARK

watershed Point boundary Molate WILDCAT CANYON 23rd Street REGIONAL CHEVRON RICHMOND PARK

MacDonald Avenue RICHMOND-SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE BAY TRAIL RIDGE TRAIL BART BAY AREA

RICHMOND GREENWAY WILDCAT CREEK POINT RICHMOND Cutting Boulevard 80 SAN PABLO 580 RESERVOIR

MILLER-KNOX EL CERRITO OHLONE GREENWAY

REGIONAL San Pablo Avenue to Marin County Parks and Trails to Marin County Parks BAY TRAIL SHORELINE

MARINA Jewel BAY Lake

POINT ISABEL REGIONAL RICHMOND SHORELINE TILDEN INNER REGIONAL PARK HARBOR KENSINGTON Lake Anza

SAN FRANCISCO Vollmer  Peak BAY 1905ʼ ALAMEDA Grizzly Peak COUNTY BERKELEY 1758ʼ sources: Contra Costa County 2009, Association of Bay Area Governments 2009, East Bay Regional Parks District 2009 to Redwood Regional Park wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 4  San Jose Suisun Bay Mt Diablo South Oakland Bay Central 1.1 plan OBJECTIVES 1.1 Napa Bay San Pablo San  NORTH Francisco  miles 20 San Rafael Mt Tamalpais 10 WILDCAT CREEK WATERSHED SAN PABLO CREEK WATERSHED BAY AREA WATERSHEDS OCEAN PACIFIC 0 re 1-2: Watershed location figure 1-2: uction Reduce Reduce flood risk basedon Wildcat 100-year Creek’s floodflows and improve neighborhoods. in low-lying management stormwater Enhance specificallyriparian habitat, focused andon resident rainbow trout the migration. steelhead anadramous of restoration potential specifically a fully connected the for community, resources Develop recreational the City. through Trail Creek two-mile Wildcat 1. introd 1. ECTIVES 1.1 plan OBJ The WatershedWildcat Restoration Action Plan information and (WRAP) recommendations provides to support management decisions for lower Wildcat Creek watershed City the within portions urban its in 1-1). (Figure Pablo San of The Wildcat Councilpreparing began San Watershed Pablo Creeks the WRAP in recurring 2004 flood to can occur damages address in the City of San which Pablo and to flood develop protection a and management strategy while stormwater protecting and for instream and riparian the enhancing habitat and recreational Wildcat resources. to bound tightly is scope The Pablo. San of the City within Creek follows: as prioritized are plan of the objectives main The three 1. 2. 3. These objectives represent on-going efforts critical opportunities and constraints by along lower Wildcat Creek. the local Despite communitya thirty year history of planning address for flood to by management all levelsof thegovernment, City remains vulnerable to flooding,as witnessed in therecent December 2005 storms. Although neighborhoods have been built in its Wildcatfloodplain, Creekremains a major a representing grid, urban City’s the through cutting feature natural dominant edge thin a and channel opportunity to open create a refuge for residents and wildlife. creek’s the Opportunities to enhance by supported are habitat instream and riparian as such infrastructure Urban City. the of most through vegetation riparian remnant of wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 5 1.2 Scope 1.2 PHASE II UPPER WATERSHED Wildcat Canyon City of San Pablo area of focus area Alluvial Plain LOWER WATERSHED Alluvial Plain LOWER WATERSHED PHASE I 1/2 mile North Richmond 1 mile TIDAL FLAT OF WILDCAT Watershed MAJOR SECTIONS figure 1-3: 1.2 Scope While it was the Councilof preference the to Watershed address the entire Wildcat Creek watershed in this planning effort, theconstrained the grant scope program to funding focus the analysis project and recommendations reaches on Wildcat within Creek the City of watershed-scale San processes Pablo for (Figure flood 1-3). and The previously sediment conducted plan watershed management studies, considers as but greater does described not contribute in further or make recommendations at analysis this scale. Theplan does address some critical flood boundaries becauseCity theof of downstream strategies management sediment and issues and their effects on management floodingresource within closely interrelated limits. City culverts, encroaching development, altered stream flow and sediment dynamics, and and dynamics, sediment and flow stream altered development, encroaching culverts, riparian of conservation to challenges entrenched present pollutants urban pervasive wildlife who depend on a well-connected, high-quality creek corridor through the whole linearformwatershed. The connects creek’s twomajor regional destinations: the well-developed park lands of the East Bay hills along and the shoreline stunning unfulfilled but well-recognized a presents corridor Creek Wildcat The Bay. Pablo San opportunity to connect urban neighorhoods to regional destinations, mass transit and employment centers via a greenway, a linear park much-needed park space and within City limits and trail supporting goals for reduced flood system, creating habitat. improved and risk Wildcat Marsh in Wildcat Creek’s lower Phase II in the City of San the creek flows out of the between two ridgelines, is Wildcat Creek’s main stem (shaded in gray) is located upper nine miles lies within Pablo implemented). (never watershed. About miles 2.2 land. This upper watershed, uch of the City of San Pablo County community of North Army Corps of Engineers led Richmond (constructed) and characterized hilly by terrain the City. Downstream, in the canyon onto its alluvial plain. of Wildcat Creek run through boundary between the upper highway Interstate where 80, flood control planning efforts Wildcat Creek’s channel flows M unincorporated Contra Costa 11.1 square miles. The creek’s 11.1 Bay. Starting in 1985, the Starting U.S.Bay. in 1985, channel flowslineal13.8 along and lower watershedfalls near East Bay Regional Park District in two phases: Phase I in North into a tidal flat along San Pablo known as Wildcat Canyon. The Richmond, another 2.5 miles of Richmond, another miles 2.5 of miles and the watershed covers wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 6

figure 1-4: wildcat and san pablo creek shared floodplain 1.2 Scope 1.2

San Pablo Creek Watershed Boundary

san pablo creek

PHASE I

PHASE II Richmond Parkway Richmond

wildcat creek

I-80 NORTH CITY OF

RICHMOND UP RR SAN PABLO BNSF RR

Vale Road

Wildcat Creek Watershed Boundary

UPPER TIDAL ALLUVIAL PLAIN FLAT WATERSHED

sources: Contra Costa County 2009, Federal Emergency Management Agency 2010 FEMA 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN FEMA 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN STREAM GAUGE wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 7 1.5 Methods 1.5 provides provides a framework , Wildcat Wildcat Creek Watershed: Technical Advice, Community Advice, Technical Outreach and Coordination Fish Habitat Assessment Stream Flow and Stormwater System Analysis Geomorphic Assessment of Channel Conditions Hydraulic Modeling Grant Administration, Project Coordination, Restoration Implementation Community Outreach, Information Source, Funding INSTITUTE INSTITUTE PARKS DISTRICT EAST BAY REGIONAL BALANCE HYDROLOGICS URBAN CREEKS COUNCIL WATERWAYS RESTORATION WATERWAYS RESTORATION NAME ORGANIZATION ROLE Adéle Ho CITY OF SAN PABLO Ann Riley Josh Bradt Laurel Collins WATERSHED SCIENCES Pete Alexander (through 2008) Roger Leventhal Jonathan Owens watershed characterization The planning process for the WRAP included watershed-wide summary a reports, accountingand data of all inventories, and corralledproposed projects planning under thisthe of this cover information report. The documents, completed and 2001 report by San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI), A ScientificStudy of Physical Processes and LandUse Effects able 1-1: Wrap technical ADVISORY COMMITTEE Table 1-1: ment funding and project manage which funded contract WRAPthe in began grant Program Watershed CALFEDThe ofthe member and organization a local Creeks Urban Council, non-profit 2004. The Council, Watershed served as the fiscalagent and project manager for the WRAP. The Watershed Council provided guidancethroughout planningthe process made and key decisions, such as the selection of immediate priority projects, based on Committee. Advisory the WRAP Technical by provided analysis and information hods 1.5 Met Approach The WRAP continues the traditionof watershedplanning withan interdisciplinary and multi-objective that approach applies a watershed perspective on the processes to information of analysis and collection the emphasizes It reaches. different affecting address floodand stormwater management, fish habitat enhancement, recreational opportunities, public access and stream the local with compatible are that priorities and channel opportunities objectives, restoration restoration. It aims to identify environment while reducing flood damage to property owners recognizes urban creeks as and an for resource wildlife important and people, providing residents. It health benefits, educational opportunities and recreational amenities by restoring environment. in the urban processes natural for for understanding processes affecting thewatershed summarized as in Section 2 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 8 1.5 Methods 1.5 Fish habitat and population survey Geomorphic survey Hydraulic analysis of storm drain network Review of HEC-RAS models used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Hydraulic modeling of flood mitigation options and restoration designs Findings from these studies are summarized in Section 3 Project Area Analysis. Full Full Analysis. Area Project Section3 in summarized are thesestudies from Findings Appendices. as available are reports project area Assessment To provide background information and scientificthe datatechnical advisory for committee completed the following the assessments in order planning to effort, habitat: fish and conditions, channel floodcreek affecting risk, factors understand • • • • • Field Observations Early in the WRAP study period, a major storm hit the region. Thenewly installed Road Vale stream gauge collected floodstage data while the City of SanPablo staff documented conditions of the December 31, floodedareas and 2005 a camerato thephotograph Mostscene.of the flooding storm occurred with a map depicting along Wildcat Creek, while San Pablo Creek experienced severe bank erosion from the storm. Based on fieldobservations from thegeomorphic surveys and thestorm event, the advisory team identified potential causesof flooding. To evaluate further,FarWest Engineering ran a HEC-RAS model to evaluate the capacity of Wildcat Creek and determine to system drain storm the modeled Hydrologics whileBalanceculverts its whether flooding in certainareas was occurringas aresult of backups in the storm creek. the from flow overbank from or system drain Watershed Charactersics. This ansectionoverview provides of natural Watershed at processes watershed, lower the in communities the of description scale,a watershed the at play trail connectivity. Creek Wildcat of inventory an and stream gauge The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gauged Wildcat Creek 1-4) from 1965 Vale to at 1997. The peak(Figure Road flow duringthat period (2,050 cfs) occurred January 4, on 1982. Balance Inc. Hydrologics (Balance) reoccuppied the gauge station to monitor water levels, streamflowand provide sediment to recorder transport level water starting automatic an ininstalled Balance 2005, conductance DecemberJanuary In specific 2004. A streamflow. and stage of record 15-minutes) (every continuous and temperature sensor was installed in July 2006 following observations of periods. low-flow during spikes flow daily wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 9 1.5 Methods 1.5 nity Participation rvey interviews recommendations of surveys geomorphic with along considered were modeling hydraulic of results The Wildcat of reaches nine for plan management integrated an develop to Creek Wildcat Creek within City of San Pablo, the USACE Phase The USACE. by II developed as cfs, 2,300 of project volume flood flow 100-year the area. a assumed The modeling in Section this document. outlined 4 of are WRAP recommendations resulting su Richmond High School twenty- students first The flooding. and creeks interviewed the to related issues regarding forty area study Pablo residents in the Wildcat-San 100- FEMA-designated the within homes at conducted were interviewsessions eight year floodplainon Folsom Avenuesand University in May 2005.The second set of The 2006. January in event flood major a after Avenue Folsom on focusedinterviews in Spanish English, was made available and 5-10 minutes survey took approximately and Vietnamese. Both survey sessions asked the same set of no overlap in questions; respondents (no there one answered the was survey twice). Survey results are discussed in Section 3-X. ent and ent andCommu Engagem Stakeholder The WRAP developed throughan process.iterative Although thisreport is the first to bring all of the ideas together, recommendations have been vetted through Council Watershed the and discussed in the wider community over the course of longer. much been around cases,the period. some the ideas have In WRAP study community meetings A series of three public meetings 2007 to was provide an opportunity held for community members in to review October and comment 2006 on plan through alternatives. Themeetings February were publicized through the Cityof Sannewsletter, the Pablo local newspaper, and by postcard to all households in Community meetings. three the of total a attended 100-year people 25 Approximately floodplain. members were also reached through the Watershed Council, whose includes membership a number of community-based organizations (see Appendix B). Projects as that a are implemented of result this plan will undergo their own public outreach processes. of Implementation each of the recommended actions will require additional study, planning, design and Council, and local in agencies to stay involved members, the community Watershed monitoring, thereby providing further the process. opportunity for wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 1. introdu ction 10 1.5 metadata 1.5 ncil Adéle Ho (City of San Pablo), Cece Sellgren (Contra Costa County), Neoma Lavalle (Urban Creeks Council), Jennifer Natali Neoma Lavalle (Urban Creeks Council), Neoma Lavalle (Urban Creeks Council), Rich Walkling (Restoration Design Group), Charmain Bernard (Contra Costa County), Michelle Luebke (Contra Costa County), Ann Riley (Waterways Restoration Institute) reviewers REPORT AUTHOR J. Natali A. Riley J. Bradt D. Robinson J. Natali t thE wrap u t thE watershed co datE 04.25.10 1.2 1.1 01.26.10 0.1 0.2 1.0 10.20.09

able 1-2: Wrap VERSIONS Table 1-2: 1.5.2 abou 1.5.2 This document was developed Plan Action Restoration Wildcat the of drafts in first the reports, completed Committee major two thrusts. between Council Creeks Urban the of As Robinson TechnicalDoria and the Bradt Advisory Josh by written were 2005 and 2007. After a twoyear the hiatus, report wasrevivedUrbanby Creeks the Natali, Jennifer by 2010 April to 2009 August between developed further and Council planner to a environmental the consulting Creeks Council, Urban and Ann Riley of Thereport Institute. was Restoration reviewed iterations inmultiple the Waterways group working a including Council, Watershed Pablo San Wildcat the of members by 2010. review in January 1.5 metadata create to abou 1.5.1 1985 in established first was Council Watershed Creeks Pablo San Wildcat The Creeks. Pablo San and Wildcat of miles two lower the for plan consensus community a In 2001 through a of resolution the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors this watershed partnership was formally recognized and designated as the coordinating of consortium A watersheds. two the in issues management resources water for body this prepared Council Watershed Creeks Pablo San Wildcat the in participants active plan including nonprofitorganizations, governmental and regulatory agencies and B. Appendix in listed are of the Council Members firms. consulting wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 11 4 1 4 CTION 3 2 1 2.1 INTRODU 2.1 4 3 (canyon to plain) (to Vale Street gauge) (to 7th & Rumrill gauge)

2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2.1 INTRODUCTION Wildcat Creek collects waters from a steep upland canyon through and a drains plain gently to sloping the San alluvial northern Pablo end of Bay the at East the Bay approximately 20 Area, miles northeast of San Francisco, California in Contra Costa County. Wildcat Canyon lies south the to hills Berkeley the between the north. to Ridge Pablo San and Average annual rainfall ranges from 24 inches in the upper canyon to 20 Bay. Pablo the San near inches Over the past 150 years, development drainage watershed’s the increased has density by watershed, contributing 26% to increased throughout flooding, frequency of and magnitude the urbanized watershed’s the in especially 2-2). (Figure alluvial plain 24 to 20 inches 13.4 miles 2,280 cfs 9.1 miles per square mile of watershed 7.7 cfs 7.79 square miles 8.67 square miles 70 miles in the watershed 1,905 feet at Vollmer Peak 20% 26 cfs in 1976 11.1 total square miles 2,050 cfs in 1982 250 to 500 cfs at Vale Street gauge 24,000 people  San Jose Suisun Bay Mt Diablo South Oakland Bay Central WATERSHED AREA Napa DRAINAGE DENSITY Bay HIGHEST ELEVATION San Pablo San  NORTH Francisco ESTIMATED POPULATION TOTAL CHANNEL LENGTH  RECOGNIZED POLLUTANTS Diazinon miles ESTIMATED 1.5-YEAR FLOW 20 ESTIMATED 100-YEAR FLOW LONGEST BRANCH OF CREEK AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL San Rafael ESTIMATED MEAN DAILY FLOW ESTIMATED PERCENT IMPERVIOUS Mt Tamalpais 10 MIN RECORDED ANNUAL PEAK FLOW MAX RECORDED ANNUAL PEAK FLOW WILDCAT CREEK WATERSHED BAY AREA WATERSHEDS OCEAN PACIFIC able 2-1: wildcat creek Watershed Statistics Table 2-1: 2. watershed OVERVIEW watershed 2. 0 re 2-1: Watershed location figure 2-1: ayward faultline onto Balance Hydrologics (2005) Balance Hydrologics 3 3 at the H its gently sloping alluvial plain. United States Geological Survey 4 4 flows northwest through its steep Contra Costa Watershed Atlas (2003) Contra Costa Watershed uplandcanyon then turns westward FIGURE 2-2: Wildcat FIGURECreek2-2: generally San Francisco Estuary Institute (2001) 2 2 1 1 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 12 SE slope 8.11% UPPER CANYON lake anza slope 3.90% 48000 jewel lake MIDDLE CANYON 2.2 watershed LAND U 2.2 Lake Anza CANYON Jewel Lake slope 1.55% 32000 LOWER CANYON distance (ft) UPPER WATERSHED Wildcat Canyon 16000 slope 0.56% UPPER ALLUVIAL PLAIN Alluvial Plain ALLUVIAL PLAIN LOWER WATERSHED slope FLOOD 0.26% CONTROL 0 1 mile TIDAL sources: SFEI (2001), USGS 7.5” Quadrangle sources: 0 TIDAL FLAT

800 400

OF WILDCAT Watershed MAJOR SECTIONS figure 2-3: 1200 (ft) elevation Wildcat Marsh re 2-4: wildcat creek long profile figure 2-4: 2.2.1 Upper wildcat canyon Watershed: 2.2.1 From its headwaters at Peak Vollmer (elevation at 1,905 feet), Wildcat Creek flows northwest through Wildcat Canyon, following the local Wildcat Fault between the Berkeley hills and San Pablo Ridge. The East Bay RegionalPark District (EBRPD) owns and manages 4,500 acres within the 80 canyon, approximately percent of the public to dedicated institution old 75-year A area. drainage watershed Creek Wildcat access to the natural and cultural trails, one miles which host of Canyon, resources Wildcat and Tilden thewithin canyon, parks of the region, EBRPD manages two artificial lakeforswimming (LakeAnza, constructed in 1938) andanother dammed public a 1921), in constructed Lake, (Jewel education environmental on focused pond golf course, botanic garden, natural open space, picnic amenities and habitat along 1-1). (Figure grazing managed with ND USE tershed LA 2.2 wa anuary 2009 (above) and J March 2010 (below). March 2010 Wildcat Canyon Regional Park in Park in Scenes from trails in Tilden Regional 2. watershed OVERVIEW 13 SE terrestrial and fluvial 2.2 watershed LAND U 2.2 Wildcat Creek Watershed: Watershed: Creek Wildcat PHASE II City of San Pablo Alluvial Plain LOWER WATERSHED PHASE I 1/2 mile North Richmond on the alluvial plain A ScientificStudy of Physical Processes and major a are Land UseWatershed Effects, Upper the within impacts use land and slopes steep over flows Jewel and Anza Lake impoundments, two The Creek. Wildcat for sediment of source expand to attempts on constraint a migration, fish to barriers impassable present Lake, fish population. thewatershed’s for habitat lower Watershed: alluvial plain2.2.2 Once the creek exits the canyon and crosses the East active Bay’s Hayward Fault, it North and Richmond, Pablo, San of communities urban the through westward flows Richmond before reaching the tidally-influencedWildcat Marsh, its industrialized runsCreek roughly the alluvial Wildcat plain, Within Bay. edges, the and San Pablo remnant major the are creeks two These northeast. its to Creek Pablo San with parallel natural features within this urbanized area. At points within the City of San Pablo 330 feet. only is between the creeks the distance Drive) Brookside (along culverted) open not (i.e. remains channel of portion Creek’s vast Wildcat Roughly of ninety percent a but watershed, lower the within vegetation of band thin a by lined and property. private protect and erosion prevent to revetted been have banks channel the urban Within the reaches creek’s of the alluvial plain, the streambed typically dries during the summer A drought. dwindling number of wet pools impose a constraint fish. over-summering on Development of Wilcat Creek’s floodplaincycles conflicts and the natural withtendency for channel migration within this the seasonal low-slope open plain, flooding presenting a challenge to the local community. as Urban infrastructure impervious such surfaces, stormwater crossings drainage can and exacerbate the undersized problem. culverts To protect private Corps property, at a (USACE) U.S. Army flood street control project, known Phase as of the protects I, plain downstream lowerthe of Pablo, San half of Union City the within PacificFlooding . 2-6) Railroad(Figure Richmond North including of community the unincorporated implemented never was floodplanning of II Phase as unaddressed relatively remains arterial main streets some events, storm details in Sectionin 20-year (more X). Even become impassable at low-lying intersections and a few vulnerable neighborhoods of water. floodedfeet to 3 1 are with According to San Francisco Estuary Institute’s 2001 report, report, 2001 EstuaryInstitute’s Francisco San to According re 2-6: flood control flood 2-6: figure into City of San Pablo (bottom). Looking down from Alvardo Park ridge from Point Richmond (top). ridge from Point Richmond (top). the alluvial plain to San Pablo Berkeley hills. Below: View across and San Pablo) and up to the Marsh, the alluvial(RichmondplaintheMarsh, Above: Panorama of Wildcat wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 14 21 19 SE Grassland (mostly non-native) Creek, Laguna, Riparian Forest Brush Woodland Oak/Bay Landing Adobe Road ail Native Moist Native Grassland Grassland Native Creek, Laguna, Riparian Forest Brush Woodland Oak/Bay Shellmound Village T r Bay/Channel Mudflat Tidal Marsh Bay/Channel Mudflat Tidal Marsh 2.2 watershed LAND U 2.2 2 miles 2 miles FIGURE 26. WATERSHED VIEW CIRCA 1850 FIGURE 26. WATERSHED N S mile FIGURE 24. WATERSHED VIEW CIRCA 1800 FIGURE 24. WATERSHED 1 N S mile 1 Scale 1:48,000 Scale 1:48,000 se 1850 se 1800

)

k e

) r

)

o k e l

e ) r b

e k a

r C

P e

t C

n t

r a a

C c S d ( l d l

i i o

e l

d W b W

(

( n a

a o

o r t

P i c G u

n e iq o

a h

S y

o C S

o r ( o y r o oy e rr A rr d A A

a r

o Wildcat Creek Watershed: A Scientific Study of Physical Physical of Study A Scientific Watershed: Creek Wildcat y o r r A se History re 2-8: wildcat creek watershed land u figure 2-8: 2.2.3 land u 2.2.3 2001, June of report SFEI The Processes and Land Use , Effects delves deeply use into and the watershed response relationship over the between past 250 land years. According to the thousands of report, years, native for tribes salt), and managed tule, upland vegetation with willow, regular waterfowl, burning, fish, (i.e. resources natural watershed’s the harvested constructed shellmounds and settled villages along the creek. follows. use maps land An interpretive overview report’s of the wildcat u creek watershed land figure 2-7: AN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE 2001 SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE 2001 S ission Dolores M rroyo Seco during a A ission Dolores ran cattle nce California was ceded by buried over 100 acres of marsh. San Pablo and Wildcat Creeks time, a lobe of sediment from market gardens and hay. By this the fertile alluvial soils for Mexico in 1846, farmers worked O burns of the native people. watershed watershed without the managed Woodlandsexpanded theinupper shallow-rooted shallow-rooted annual grasses. compacted soils with non-native rooted rooted perennial grasslands into led to the conversion of deep- grazing of thousands of cattle the turn of the century. The the dominant land use through watershed, watershed, which continued as M ranching operations in the In the early 19th century, shared, dynamic marsh.dynamic shared, joining with San Pablo Creek in a creek meandered widely, at times times at widely, meandered creek suspected that the mouth of the creek It’s drought. prolonged of period The Spanish had named the in present-day San Francisco. native people to after Spanish missionaries forced the the watershed was depopulated For a short period around 1800, wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 15 25 25 23 SE ail ail Lawn Plantation Urban Forest Landing Levee City Center T r Road Railroad Lawn Plantation Urban Forest Landing Levee City Center T r Road Railroad Grassland Grassland/ Land Agricultural Creek, Laguna, Riparian Forest Grove Willow Brush Oak/Bay Woodland Landing Levee City Center Road Railroad Grassland Grassland/ Land Agricultural Creek, Reservoir, Riparian Forest Brush Oak/Bay Woodland Grassland Grassland/ Land Agricultural Creek, Reservoir, Riparian Forest Brush Oak/Bay Woodland Bay/Channel Mudflat Tidal Marsh Marsh Diked 2.2 watershed LAND U 2.2 Bay/Channel Mudflat Tidal Marsh Marsh Diked Bay/Channel Mudflat Tidal Marsh Marsh Diked 2 miles 2 miles FIGURE 28. WATERSHED VIEW CIRCA 1900 VIEW 28. WATERSHED FIGURE 2 miles FIGURE 30. WATERSHED VIEW 1950 FIGURE 30. WATERSHED FIGURE 30. WATERSHED VIEW 1950 FIGURE 30. WATERSHED N N S S mile mile 1 1 N S mile 1 Scale 1:48,000 Scale 1:48,000 se 1950 se 2000 Scale 1:48,000 se 1900

k k

e e

r r

0 0

C C

o o

l l

b b

a a

P P

n n

a a

S S

b a

P k n e a e r S C t a c d l i

k k

e e

r r

C C

t t

a a

c c

d d

l l

i i

W W re 2-11: wildcat creek watershed land u wildcat figure 2-11: re 2-10: wildcat creek watershed land u figure 2-10: re 2-9: wildcat wildcat u land creek watershed figure 2-9: SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE 2001 SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE 2001 SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY INSTITUTE 2001 nce water diversions O arsh. The current Union M il Company moving onto a diked from from residential development. protection of the upper watershedupperthe protectionof was formed in 1976, expanding WildcatCanyon Regional Preserve Canyon in the upper watershed. expandedtheridgesto Wildcatof Cerrito, Kensington and Berkeley economy. The communities of El supported by a growing Bay Area steadily increasing population The next forty years brought a infrastructure, and outmigration. infrastructure, and outmigration. rates, rates, quickly and poorly built in a bust with low employment impounded impounded for recreational use. Richmondleft end war’s The years. suppressed, and Lake Anza was population within to 100,000 five upper canyon, fires were actively Richmond’s quadrupled that boom 1920s. 1920s. was largely discontinued in the economican watershedwithlower reservoir fordrinking water in the By 1940, intensive grazing development, transforming the Jewel Lake was constructed as a watershed from development. World War II brought industrial were established in 1911 and formed, protecting the upper and and monterey pine plantations Lake, Tilden Regional Park was the upper watershed, eucalyptus replaced the need for Jewel outpaced groundwater supplies. In supplies.groundwateroutpaced the 1930’s. Development soon population increases through The lower watershed faced rapid of this historic land use change. their crossings remain a legacy Pacific and BNSF railroads and Wildcat O quickly followed with Standard Industrial and urban development continental lines in Port Richmond. Richmond.Port in continentallines system terminated its Western By 1900, the Santa Fe railroad wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 16 forest trails trails housing compacted soils grazing grassland HIGH INFILTRATION rbanized watersheds REDUCED INFILTRATION INCREASED OVERLAND FLOW roads scrub TRANSPIRATION asphalt 2.3 impacts of u 2.3 REDUCED VEGETATION school grounds stream ephemeral highways INCREASED IMPERVIOUS SURFACE INCREASED IMPERVIOUS surfaces SLOW RUNOFF impervious grassland REDUCED PEAK FLOWS streets levees natural culverts forest parking lots riparian DEPLETED, POLLUTED GROUNDWATER pipes wetland seasonal GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, SEASONAL INTERACTION ACCELERATED RUNOFF, INCREASED EROSION more extreme peak flows, channel instability creek of urbanized watersheds 2.3 impacts the Generally, main impact of urbanization is the replacement of vegetation and its with smooth, impervious roads surfaces: our groundwater with soils and interaction and buildings (Figure 2-12). Even in the relatively upper undeveloped watershed’s parks, compacted soils and loss of deep-rooted perennial Development grasses attributes. over runoff 182 and years production of sediment impact to continues grazing along ridgelines, roads, trails and water impoundments have downstream water drastically and sediment changed flows.In the catchmentarea betweenJewel Lake and Lake Anza, for instance, the drainage density has increased by 42% since 1830 and the density of dirt paths reaches 14.6 miles per square mile. Runoff fromresidential the development along ridgelines volumes sediment all, above In drains. road below gullies deep forms and steep landslides causes slopes accelerates erosion, 2001). (SFEI system high-sediment-production already in an increased have creek revetted SEDIMENT FILTRATION FLOODPLAIN DEPOSITION rbanized watershed invasive species

industry

HYDROLOGIC IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT NATURAL HYDROLOGIC INTERACTION re 2-12 impacts of u figure 2-12 intact habitat gradient marsh POLLUTION, HABITAT LOSS TIDAL ECOTONES wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 17 rbanized watersheds source: Schueler 1987 small storm pre-development post-development 2.3 impacts of u 2.3

recession TIME

gradual peak flow runoff

peak

volume greater higher

attenuated attenuated rban hydrograph runoff accelerated al u rvey evidence of incision, erosion and aggradation large rain storm

higher base flow URBAN HYDROGRAPH VOLUME FLOW re 2-14: field su field figure 2-14: re 2-13: conceptu figure 2-13: In In the lower watershed, urban drainage systems, from the gutters and downspouts on homes to curbed streets and storm drains into underground pipes are designed to quickly shed rainfall. in However, doing so, they increase drainage density (by 193% since 1930), reduce opportunties for treatment and of attenuation rainfall via As soils. into infiltration bypass surfaces, and rough and with vegetation interaction flows across the imperviousstormwater surfaces 57%that cover of the alluvial plain accumulate sediments and pollutants 2001), (SFEI gutters) road paved including (not and are delivered directly into the creek without treatment. Therunoffnet enters theresult: channel more more rapidly withmore pollutantsand sediment (Figure 2-9). The time the Within to destabilize. channels reach and increases, flooding of magnitude peak and frequency flow volumes within creek the aggradation and erosion incision, of the much creek’s area, project City of San Pablo accelerated, is the use. land in changes to adjust to attempting channel the stream of symptoms are Sediment is deposited Incised channels are cut flow capacity(Column 3). can exacerbate erosion on on one side of the channel Erosion of banks threatens aggradation and creating a downstream of eroded and reaches, leading to channel from the channel’s reduced leading to revetment of the or even collapse (Column 2). need for costly maintenance opposite banks downstream. opposite banks downstream. incised channels in low-slope structures on private property, channel Revetment (Column 1). is often followed bank by erosion regimes to prevent flood hazards of the low flow channel. Incisision downward, lowering the elevation wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 18 2.4 Hydrology 2.4 source: Balance (2007) source: spawning steelhead MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP APR 2006 water year 2005 water year DEC JAN FEB MAR NOV OCT at vale road gage station 5 0

25 45 40 35 30 20 15 10 flow (cfs) flow CFS re 2-15: wildcat creek mean daily base flow figure 2-15: freely through June, but as summer wore on entire creek sections dried up, fragmenting fragmenting up, dried sections In wetted area surveys by EBPRD creek in 2005, reaches through the alluvial entire plain flowed on wore summer as but June, through freely reaches urban the in water of majority The habitat. aquatic dwindling a isolating and trout. rainbow for habitat pools, the over-summering in standing resided During initial 2005). (Balance Road project Vale near channel creek investigations the to water in of source major a provided 2005, a regular but artificial Approximately 530 flow feet upstream pulse of the Vale Road crossing, a pipe from Pablo campus the of San the Doctor’s Medical Center (DMC) spilled water into the creek with an average outflow of 0.45 gallons persecond to 2005). Jerry the According Gordon, chief engineer thefor this measured DMC, (as isflow well October on 16, water This 2006). 15, June EBRPD, to communication (personal creek the into water source generated the only perennial flow downstreamof I-80and was a significant ceased since has it completely. but fish, for water of source drolog y 2.4 Hy Base flow Levels In our climate, region’s the distinct seasons of winter a provide predictable variation in seasonal base rain Atflows. least 95of percent annual and summer drought flow the season, dry summer the During April. through October from occurs rainfall atonefoot less Roadthan flow cubic per water measured second (cfs). Vale at gauge Downstream locations to Rumrill Boulevard are often completelydry through the the alluvial within plain. intermittently be can found ponds summer but summer, Perennial flowvaries annually, although alluvial the plain historically experiences flows. intermittent The extentand magnitude of summerflowshave decreased due to soil compaction, increase in impervious surfaces, loss of infiltrationand reduced overland by dominated now is watershed The supplies. groundwater with interaction flow that causesmore flashy winter runoff and minimalsummer base flows (SFEI 2001). ctober through April; 905(b), November 2003 905(b), of flood-producing storms and recede just as rapidly.” experience very small flows during the summer months. of the annual rainfall occurs from O in an area where percent 95 and inadequate culverts and short duration; they develop causing inundation within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the creeks aretypically dry or sinuous alignment, insufficient bridges retard the floodwaters city of San Pablo. Floods are of within hours 24 after the onset channel capacities, debris jams, “The drainage basins of Wildcat During the wet season however, Flood Damage Reduction Report and San Pablo Creeks are located wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 19 2.4 Hydrology 2.4 source: EBRPD (2006) source: Early Summer Wetted Area Early Summer Late Summer Wetted Area dy area reach return period (years) rn period of peak flows SUMMER CHANNEL WETTEDSUMMER AREA STUDY REACHES WILDCAT CREEK RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOWS

BETWEEN EARLY AND LATE SUMMER WETTED AREABETWEEN EARLY AND LATE SUMMER WETTED DECREASED BY 85%

peak flow (cfs) flow peak cubic feet of water of feet cubic Flood Frequency The USArmy Corpsof Engineers estimates the 100-year flowvolume for Wildcat Creek at 2,300 cfs. In any given there year, is a design 1% the and projects chance that flood-control I flowsPhase Creek willWildcat equalThe or volume. this exceed estimates. volume flow 100-year on USACE basedare Phase II for peak flow retu figure 2-17: EBRPD EBRPD estimates that removal of this water source results in an 80% reduction in wetted area downstream of this source, equating to 6,000 approximately cubic feet water. of gallons) 44,900 (or er flow in stu er flow umm creek s wildcat figure 2-16: ctober) O Rivers and Streams Jeff Mount, California can be made about flood persists through summer decreased By late 85%. by of 2005. Betweenof 2005. Early and where historic data sets are creek in Early Summer (mid- This flow has since stopped. Creek as the annual drought frequency analysis. First, the is a virtual certainty that the it is likely. Third, in California, (late-August to mid- months. EBPRD surveyed the small, the floodplain 100-year In this graph the cubic feet of will usually expand following a Late Summer the wetted area Doctor’s Medical Center in the originated from outflow at the last flood. 100-year Second, it wetted area demonstrates the major flooding event. Finally, it will strike a river in California is May and to June) Late Summer year event will occur sometime Vale Road reach (EBRPD 2006). Vale Road reach (EBRPD 2006). summer, the only flowing water is not a certainty that the 100- in the years, next although 100 the actual floodplain.” 100-year “Four important generalizations generalizations important “Four the same every regardless year, possibility that flood a 100-year decreasing water flow of Wildcat of how long it has been since the defined100-year floodplain is not

wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 20 2005

2.4 Hydrology 2.4

2000 1995

source: Balance (2007), Ginsberg (2008) Ginsberg Balance (2007), source:

1990 1985 1995

1992

1980 1989 1975

IN CFS) AL FLOW ( 1970 1974

Balance Hydrologics Gaging Station at Vale Rd (2007-2009 subject to revision) Balance Hydrologics Gaging Station at Vale USGS Gaging Station at Vale Rd Data from San Ramon Creek) Estimate based on Regression Analysis (Mass 1965 WILDCAT CREEK PEAK ANNUALWILDCAT (cfs) FLOW 0 re 2-19: photos of flow variation figure 2-19: 500 2500 2000 1500 1000 PEAK ANNU figure 2-18: storms fill the channel to Winter rains sustain a low- dry in summers (Column 1). dry in summers (Column 1). varying degrees (Column 3). flow channel(Column2) and 905(b), November 2003 905(b), after the onset of flood- of Wildcat and San Pablo Within the City of San Pablo’s urban reaches, the creek runs yearly basis from overflow events in 1993 and 1995.” events in 1993 extent occurson an almost realized during recent storm they develop within hours 24 producing storms and recede “Floods are of short duration; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Creeks. Significant damages to Flood Damage Reduction Report structures in the floodplain were just as rapidly. Flooding to some wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 21 2.5 Sediment Transport 2.5 s sediment measurements rements spended Sediment Comparison to previou Compared to previous data collected by USGS in 1978 toward through decreased have 2006 through 2004 1980, years water from suspended- rates transport sediment 1970’s late in the Measurements 2-6). (Figure flow given a at transport of rates lower have may cover vegetative reduced when drought extreme of period a after taken were resulted in increased erosion. Grazing management practices, movement of deep- seated landslides in the upper watershed, or ongoing channel incision in the upper reaches of Wildcat Creek may have influenced a decrease in sediment suspension 30 years. the past over rates Measu Wildcat Creek tends to transport substantially more sediment in suspension than as bedload. Approximately 21,000 tons 2007). (Balance 2006 year of water during bedload station gauge Road and Vale 87,000 past flowed sediment tons of suspended For that Balance water year, estimates that over 70% of annual suspended sediment and 87% discharge of the bedloadannual transport occurred on December 31, 2005 during the peak flow event.Nearly all bedload sediment dischargemoved the during four largest streamflow eventsof the wateryear. Becausesuspended sediment transports more easily at lower flows,it moved more frequentlyand regularly over the season. Su suspended sediment consists of fine Creek’s sands,Wildcat siltsand clays and tends bedload coarse the storm, a After bedload. than volumes flow lower at entrained be to sediment typically settles from the water column prior to suspended sediment. The finersuspended sedimentmay be depositedon top of the coarse sandsand gravels, potentially affectingfish habitat for spawning orover-summering pools. In urban and damage water of risks dual the face owners property recede, levels creek as areas, clay. and silt of clean-up ort Transp 2.5 Sediment BEDLOAD In Wildcat Creek bedload consists primarily of coarse sands and gravels. Bedload influences the degree regularly of is deposition aggradation Bedload-sediment and bed common. is stability flooding in overbank the where lowercreek, reaches of the cleared from the bed of Wildcat Creek in the vicinity of Rumrill Boulevard by of creek. the the floodthe capacity improve to Pablo San of City Themajority of bedload carriedby Wildcat Creek settles in Flood I Phase Control the awithin tracks railroad Pacific Southern the of sedimentdownstream basin just reach. Vegetation clearing and sediment removal to allow for flood ongoing flows remain cost and operation concerns District. for Contra Costa County Flood Control wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 22 source: Balance (2007) source: 2.5 Sediment Transport 2.5 rves WILDCAT CREEK SEDIMENTWILDCAT DISCHARGE CURVES at vale road gauge measured station SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT study watershed 2001 SFEI’s Creek, Wildcat to supply sediment long-term of review a In concludes that sediment Wildcat’s sources and to challenge transport major a yields presents Sedimentation are “comparatively small.” so is that area drainage a for large downstream in objectives restoration and stability channel management, control flood design restoration a high remains study, for priority Sediment reaches. management practices. use and monitoring. SFEI hypothesized land that total 60% sediment is of supply the creek’s improved by mitigated be can yields high therefore related, land-use In SFEI’s sediment supply rate measurements, the alluvial plain contributed 4% of only the total sediment suggesting supply, that the greatest land use management lands. in EBRPD reside opportunities ent discharge ment discharge creek sedi wildcat cu Figure 2-20: of fine sediment may have Recent suspended sediment suspendedsediment Recent data measurements are at the low end of the range observed the late 1980s (Balancethe late 2006). 1980s in water years 1978 to 1980 by by to 1980 in water years 1978 diminished slightly compared to the USGS, implying that sources wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 23 G G ality F F 2.6 Water qu 2.6 E E G Picnic Area Big Springs D D C C F B Lone Oak Area Trail (1/4 mile up) A E Buckeye Picnic Area D Vale Road C Lane Church B Park Davis ter quality 2.6 Wa Throughvolunteer efforts managed bywatershedmonitoring experts inthe Contra Costa County Watershed been have studies Other 2005. Forum since Creek Wildcat in sites benchmark on (CCCWF), conducted bioassessment surveys have in this analysed report. not are but in the past, conducted been In collecttrained recent surveys volunteers benthic macroinvertebrates by CCCWF, (BMI) at benchmark sites within a watershed, and (IBI) ranking Integrity Biotic of to calculate an Index collected organisms categorize then professions identify and and the of taxato respond diversity overall creek conditions BMI score. populations reflect local conditions, in part because certain BMIare more creek sensitiveto of pollution level relative a indicate can they While others. than stress environmental and (CWF 2009). creek a impacting identify a specificstressor cannot health, BMIs surveyed been have sites seven year, each surveyed been have sites two only Although intermittently during the annual spring surveys. the In seven sites over reviewing the past IBI four survey scores seasons (Figure across 2-20), scores “very range good” levels from in the relatively protected upper watershed to “marginal” in the time over urbanizedScores except tend for remarkably watershed. to lower improve low scores affecting the twouppermost sitesas well as Lone Oak theat site trail in (F), Tilden urban Road2006. Notably, in Spring locations Lane Vale and at Church located downstream of Lake Anza, regularly scores much As Lake Anza. lower of upstream (G), Area Picnic (never Springs Big at site the than out range) “fair” of the a popular recreational destination with swimming, picnic areas, parking and roads, further investigation. warrant Lake may Anza surrounding activity of the impact A Bridge 3rd Street

WATER QUALITY benthic macroinvertebrate levels Figure 2-20 source: Contra Costa County Watershed Forum (2009) Contra Costa County Watershed source: IBI score IBI wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 24 G ality G F F 2.6 Water qu 2.6 E 2008 E Picnic Area Big Springs D D 2007 2007 C C B Lone Oak Area Trail (1/4 mile up) 2006 2006 A Buckeye Picnic Area 2005 Vale Road Lane Church In In addition to BMI Assessments ranking, (PHAB) CCCWF following also the conducts California severalto according conditions stream which rates Procedure Bioassessment Stream Physical Department regimes, of Habitat velocity/depth embeddedness, Quality Fish cover, and substrate/available epifaunal Game’s categories: sediment deposition, channel flow status, channel alteration, frequency vegetation protection bank and of riparian stability, vegetative zone width. According riffles, lowlands urbanized and upland between difference the 2-21), (Figure scores PHAB to is again apparent and underscores reasons why BMI scores may be lower in urban reaches. In looking at scores PHAB alone, thedifferenting quality of urban reaches is difficult.more The BMIscores indicateclearly Vale a decrease qualityin between Road and 3rd Street. In Davis Park, urban EBRPD an of reports midst the high in habitat trash creek quality levels, high highlighting creating to challenges many of one park. public water Given quality the 303(d) creek’s listing of impairment for diazinon pollution, further study of the relationship between BMI scores and may local help target programs and for approaches water improving quality. pollution In addition sources to continuing BMI and PHAB assessments, a trash assessment seems cited issue, is a particularlymajor in Illegal the the of urban dumping reaches watershed. urgent combined When surveysin resident recommendations. in and technical committee with culverts and bridge footings, dumping can contribute to floodhazards if maintained. regularly not is creek the Park Davis ABCDEFG Bridge

3rd Street AGNLGOOD MARGINAL PHYSICAL HABITAT QUALITY POOR 0

80 60 40 20 160 140 120 100 SCORE PHAB Figure 2-21 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 25 2.7 Habitat 2.7 commonly Onchorhynchus mykiss, ). aculeatus (Gasterosteus stickleback the three-spined and known as steelhead, is estimated to number roughly 250,000 adults; half the population population the half adults; 250,000 roughly number to estimated is steelhead, as known segment The Steelhead distinct Central California population Coast ago. 30 years of was federally listed as a threatened species as part of the in Endangered 1997 Species and reaffirmed Act in 2006.Threats as such parameters quality to thewater and species temperature include water barriersfluctuations, flow diversions, passage, to habitats. spawning of sedimentation Steelhead require relatively good water quality, low suspended sediment loads, contaminated and as well as sufficient low flows forspawning, rearing and migration. Diverse stream support habitats the steelhead lifecycle: shallow rifflesfor spawning and relatively deep pools with well-developed cover for over-summering. These The native stickleback population throughout Wildcat is Creek and many thriving of its tributaries. and On high 50 their average, are millimeters approximately and abundant in female length, with year, adults males single being slightly a withTheir smaller. during times multiple spawn distribution to ability size, small relatively fecundity helped them survive the natural period effective an of as adverse act spines conditions when dorsal three the their rainbow Additionally, extirpated. were trout non- aggressive and trout off fending in stickleback the assist and mechanism defense survive spawning typically a not second do adults Most in watershed. the fish native the and numbers population robust resulting highfecundity, their to due season,but geographical small relatively within lifecycle entire their fulfill to able are they that fact areas, the EBRPD is confident that the stickleback decline. populationpopulation significant is in danger no of California’s entire population of anadramous Fishery bitat 2.7 Ha TheWildcat watershedprovides refuge for both the wildlifeand peopleof the East to protected connects corridor criticalintact habitat stream marsh relatively Its Bay. uplands. Although its lower urban reaches provide constrained and discontinuous riparian habitat, the creek’s relatively open channel connectivity. longitudinal revived presents an opportunity for At the mouth of the creek, where freshwater recovering 387-acre mixes Wildcat Marsh (once with stretching to the San Pablo Creek San as part Pablo of Bay, the a dynamic, contiguous 2,000 acre system) supports a diversity marsh salt the of rail, black the rail, endangered clapper California the including and species, threatened vole. Pablo the San and harvest mouse, Theupper watershedhosts oakwoodlands and grasslandsmanaged as recreational habitat protected miles of to connections and pasture, grazing of area an space, open such predators carnivorous top for ranges home two supporting Ridge, hosts Bay East Creek the along Wildcat 2006, of As fox. grey and coyote lion, mountain bobcat, the as (Onchorhynchus trout rainbow reintroduced the populations: fish native reproducing mykiss) wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 26 2.7 Habitat 2.7 t, a critical keystone species t, a critical keystone requirements requirements for water in-channel quality complexity, and sediment load equate to key indicators for healthy watershed function. Thussteelhead keystone is aprotect critical to keystone developed strategies Conservation watersheds. native its in species species can help protect the entire inhabited ecosystem. streams throughout Bay Steelhead Area watersheds. More populations limited populations still historically exist. According to anecdotal evidence, steelhead once ran in extirpated sometime after 1915.The exact causesare but unknown, Wildcat the population’s Creek but were demise was increased possibly with caused conjunction by in Anza), the Lake construction and Lake of (Jewel the reservoirs dams Canyon that Wildcat created the two regional urbanization. In 1977, and again in 1981, the surveys did not electroshocking and in the creek conducted (CDFG) Game and Fish California Department of of former descendants theresident freshwater trout,” “rainbow steelheadfind any or runs (Leidysteelhead 2005). In September of 1983, the EBRPD and public volunteers caught 615 rainbow trout in Redwood Creek in Oakland and transplanted them into Wildcat Creek between Alvarado Park and the Botanic Garden in Tilden Park (Peter Alexander, personal communication, June 1, 2005). Since their populations. breeding re-established and reintroduction, stem main mile 13.5 the creek’s the throughout trout have spread This successful reintroduction of native rainbow trout carries portion the of these potential fish for to a revert backto an anadromous lifecycle 2006). (EBRPD Creek run steelhead in Wildcat viable therebyreviving a Currently, Wildcat Creek’s juveniles. out-migrating reintroduced or spawners adult in-migrating rainbow of evidence no with trout residents appear to be “trapped” Boulevard) During surveys, sub-adult and intermittent adult rainbow however, trout Rumrill have been below pools (in Creek Wildcat of reaches lower the in documented as early as 1997, suggesting that the spawning and lower rearing, watershed not presents just opportunities migration. for According of 2007, Evaluation only 5.1 to Estuary miles Watersheds total of 22.22 the watershed’s CEMAR’s San Francisco steelhead. to available and suitable is channel stream miles of re 2-22 steelhead/rainbow trou steelhead/rainbow Figure 2-22 Francisco 1915 Bay, -- Byways Around San hid in the deep pools…” exercise of a good tramp engage in the invigorating [sic] Creek, five[sic] miles from should go over to Berkeley, some excellent sport here.” before they cast their lines, where the speckled trout lie “We descend“We into the cañon “Those who feel disposed to grateful after our walk in the sun. follow We downstream, the University. They will find walk over the hills to Wild-cat the shade of the trees is most and, taking the San Pablo road, [sic] by a well-marked by [sic] trail, and and General Guide, 1877 -- Sportsman’s Gazetteer wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 27

miles 13.57 HEADWATERS 2.7 Habitat 2.7 (SOURCE: Graul 2004)

2.13

Lake Anza Dam Anza Lake 11.44

1.75

Jewel Lake Dam Lake Jewel 9.69 lation year t popu Impassable barriers for steelhead include: the sediment chute downstream 5.33 culvert (EBRPD 2006), Jewel Lake and Lake Anza (CEMAR 2007, SFEI 2001). culvert Jewel SFEI 2001). Lake (EBRPD and 2006), Lake Anza(CEMAR 2007, of Union Pacific Railroad, Davis Park culvert San (EBRPDPablo 2006), Avenue RAINBOW TROUT

RAINBOW TROUT PER SHOCK SECOND 1984-2005

San Pablo Ave Culvert Ave Pablo San 4.36 mean number of trout per shock second shock per trout of number mean

re 2-24: resident rainbow trou Figure 2-24: The resident rainbow trout occupy most reaches populations of Wildcat are more Creek, robust in the mid though their and upper reaches of the main population stem. The is largely dependent on warm, deep dry summers. During droughts, over-summering the overall population numbers pools historically to survive decreased due the to reduced No habitat significantavailability. population decline has localized although 1983, in creek the to beenobservedrestored species was the since population decimation may result due to varying degrees of contamination (spills, pool availability. or drought etc.), Evidence of resident trout populations downstream should of watershed lower the in migration projects restoration barriers and modifications bed stream suggest that not only facilitate migration, but also support spawning, rearing and enhance over- summering habitat for the resident trout. stream bed Adding to thesupport processes and geomorphic fish lifecycle functionsis often roughness to Wildcat Creek’s which capacity flow channel’s the decreases roughness because unacceptable deemed measures. floodchallenges control

2.39 Davis Park Culvert Park Davis

Sediment Chute Sediment 1.82 of the trout population 1.82 0.57 1.97 of trout sampled per unit the electroshocker over a time of “electrical effort,” throughout Wildcat Creek. throughout Wildcat Creek. and should not be factored into the overall assessment introduced into the water by i.e. the quantity of electricity This graph shows the number measurement of the fish. The STEELHEAD essentially generates a density WILDCAT CREEK FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS ON MAIN STEM OF CHANNEL BARRIERS ON MAIN FISH PASSAGE WILDCAT CREEK period of time. This calculation years 1988 and 1995 are outliers and 1995 years 1988 BAY igration barriers migration fish Figure 2-23: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 28 sace 1985) Wildcat Creek flood management on lower 2.8 upstream of railroad tracks to I-80 PHASE II PHASE I Phase I focused on reaches from the creek mouths at San Pablo Bay to the Union Union the to Bay Pablo San at mouths creek the from reaches focusedI on Phase Rumrill of Boulevard) (downstream tracks Railroad Pacific 80. Highway Interstate to tracks the railroad of upstream II extends Phase Creek Wildcat on lower d management 2.8 floo Army U.S. the asked first (CCCFCD) District Control Flood County Costa Contra The Corps of Engineers to (USACE) help alleviate flooding within the shared floodplain in Creeks 1956, associated with most likely San highPablo and flows that Wildcat of 1986). occurred 1955 (USACE, in December of for planning project flood control initiated USACE CCCFCDand 1970s, early the In sections of Wildcat and San Pablo Creeks authorized that Congress 1976, flowIn throughPablo. San North of City the Richmond and (an community) unincorporated Wildcat Creek alluvial floodplain anda onprojectPablo flood the San lower control with the project area extending from San Pablo Bay up to Road Vale (Figure 2-24). phases: two into divided the project USACE • • downstream of railroad tracks to marsh I and phase ii selected planS (u S. Army corps of engineers phase U. 1985 Figure 2-25: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 29 report (also report Section 1135 Section Wildcat Creek flood management on lower 2.8 PHASE II PROJECT Selected Phase II USACE of 1985 2-24) of Plan flooding(Figure aimed to address in thewith 1.7 City of rectangular and trapezoidal San milesPablo channel railroad of concrete the at downstream ending and Avenue Pablo San at starting Creek Wildcat on tracks. As with initial Phase I thedid plans, not community it. support Alternatives, such as a diversion bypass for high-flows (Figure 2-25)never attained a cost benefit favorable analysis using the USACEmethod of calculation. Althoughnone of the programs, regulatory present-day or standards community to conformed alternatives Flooding occurred again in 1982. By 1985, when released USACE plans for putting environmental the local communities, channels, concrete trapezoidal into the creeks objections. strong voiced agencies regulatory and groups, PHASEECT I PROJ Immediately following the release of 1985 Supervisors USACE established plans, the the County Wildcat-San Board community consensus and Pablo obtain of regulatory agency approval for a Creeks multi-objective to addition In Designobjectives. environmental with protection flood integrated that project Team to create stable geomorphically included objectives flood, 100-year in one the from protection stream channels excessive and of prevention protection marshes, of of fishrestoration and habitat preservation and on focused migration. objectives Critical regulatory sedimentation in sensitive habitat, and protection of other wetland attracted Creek Wildcat endangered along trail regional a as species. such enhancements Integrated Conservancy, Coastal District, Park Regional Bay East the including sponsors, project Commission. Lands the State and Resources, Water of the California Department Theresulting locally-preferred,multi-objective flooddamage reductionproject was constructed and thebetween by USACE adopted 1986 1990. and project Thegreatly North Richmond. of community flooding in unincorporated reduced the The design successs team’s coordinating in diverse the and community agencies organizations in mutually time, beneficialOver problem issues. solving maintenance led and to continuedimplementation post-project project addressing collaborations the restoration, team habitat broadened fish its reduction, focus, trash addressing issues management, such toxics as monitoring, environmental education, quality water and other watershed management concerns. Theteam eventuallyprogressed into a the WRAP. sponsoring the which entity is Council, Watershed county-recognized With an function creek enhance adaptive to 2000 in reaches lower Creek’s management Wildcat on work restoration approach, the Watershed Council and reconnect led the channel to further its mature working Station, Experiment riparian Waterways vegetation. USACE the expertsfrom To restoration issues, refine remaining authority restoration a released Council, Watershed the with in 2000) which evaluated strategies for increasing flood protection and correcting fish fish correcting and protection flood increasing for strategies evaluated which 2000) in Final passage problems. were designpostponed due and to implementation USACE budget reductions. Recommendations in the WRAP revive some of these delayed improvements. wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 30 sace 1985) dover bypass pipe Wildcat Creek flood management on lower 2.8 U.S. Congressman George Miller (7th District of California, elected 1974) has kept the kept has 1974) elected California, of District (7th Miller George Congressman U.S. between collaboration future for allowing active, authorization II Phase 1976 original withworked Council Watershed Congressman The theand the USACE community. Miller to broaden the authorization to include ecosystem restoration in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (WRDA 2007). The Act also county allows or the other city, non-federal entity to be receive credit expended for in planning and projects implementating localif the projects are included and in a state dollars occur and plan a byfinalfederalbefore theplanis adopted Corps USACE-approved and local entities. The hasCorps, welcomed atherefore, locally-sponsoredplanning Watershed Councilprojects has anumberforof implementing options process. The other with partnering or own its on grants state or aid financial the using include that the Corps. or federal agencies Themost recent flooding (water years 1997, 1998,and 2006)has been restricted to the Phase II planning reaches within the City of San Pablo where no flood control measures were implemented via the USACE process. In 2000, the new Federal Emergency publication Agency Management (FEMA) of Flood Insurance Rate Maps designated an additional 1,200 properties in the City of San Pablo number the in Although requirements. the insurance flood incurred and 100-year area hazard flood of designated properties was later reduced to 574, the economic burden on the low- income and poverty-stricken community revived the City’s interest in addressing flood risk. for basis local a develop to team project a formed Council Watershed the 2001, May In support to Program Watershed CALFED the to grant a submitted and plans II Phase a planning process that would build upon the legacy of multi-objective, consensus effort. of community-based this result is the plan This based plans. y corps of engineers phase ii dover bypass plan (u S. Army corps of engineers phase ii dover U. 1985 Figure 2-26: of the Water Resources interest in the project.” Development Act, 2007 “The project for aquatic San Pablo Creek Phase II, in determining the Federal California, being carried out of 1996 (33 U.S.C. 2330), is U.S.C. 2330), (33 of 1996 5b), toward the non-Federal5b), Resources Development Act project and to authorize the to credit, in accordance with -- Section 3040 Wildcat/San ct of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 1962d- (42 ct of 1970 project before the date of the Secretary to consider national A partnership agreement for the Pablo CreekPhase II, California the cost of work carried out by ecosystem restoration benefits under section of the 206 Water the non-Federal interest for the share of the cost of the project, modified to direct the Secretary ecosystem restoration, Wildcat/ restoration, ecosystem section of the Flood 221 Control wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 31 0.5% 0.4% nity black/ african american american indian/ alaska native 2.9 Commu 2.9 white asian 17.9% 16.2% native hawaiian/pacific islander 16.2% other 44.6% 0.6% RACE AND ETHINICITY (2007) CITY OF SAN PABLO POPULATION more than one race 3.7%

hispanic/latino

2007

2000

1990

1980

1970

1960 1950 CITY OF SAN PABLO POPULATION 5 0

35 30 25 20 15 10 in thousands in re 2-27: city of san pablo demographics Figure 2-27: Residents of the Wildcat watershed represent a diverse population with a wide income income wide a with population diverse a represent watershed Wildcat the of Residents range. Higher income communities of the Berkeley hills, Kensington and lower whileareas watershed, upper of of edges the line CostaCounty Contra unincorporated income minority communities of West Contra Costa County (City of Richmond, City of San Pablo, unincorporated North Richmond, Parchester Village) populate the alluvial plain in the most flood-pronereaches. As aresult, areas with problems. flooding the been recurrent with plagued have resources least Demographics Lower Watershed 2.9.1 Institute (Pacific Project Indicators Community Costa Contra West the to According 2009), the diverse neighborhoods of “West income household County” median a with color, are of people are whom of 90% “home residents, 47,000 to approximately of $32,000.” These neighorhoods struggle with drop-out high rates, unemployment crime, and violence, school and environmental pollution. along Wildcat and San ThePablo Creek also communities have a strong history of activism in socialremain agencies public and localorganizations Numerous issues. environmental and actively involved in watershed issues through Council. the Wildcat-San Pablo Watershed The Cityof SanPablo, thefocus of the WRAPand Phase II floodcontrol projects, is densely populated and urbanized with a mix of residential, commercial, and light industrial uses. Theis Asprimarily of population low-income. 2000,median family income was $37,184, meeting state guidelines for designation as a “disadvantaged by community” state falling household average income below of 80% of California’s $47,493. 15.5% of families and 18.1% of individuals are below Census poverty 1999). levels (US The population is remarkably diverse (Figure 2000). (US Census home at English than other language 3-1); 58.5% speak a (FEMA) Agency’s Management Emergency Federal the within parcels of Landowners recently expanded 100-year floodzone are costs increased theyface as Pablo, requiredSan of City the in residents for hardship a policies, purchase to flood insurance of living. In 2004, the City of San Pablo estimated the annual cost for $100,000 at $625. coverage flood insurance in mmunity 2.9 Co wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 32 nity 0.32 0.84 0.15 Miles 2.9 Commu 2.9 the Bay Area Ridge Trail, a mile ridgeline trail. Both programs 550- aim to connect all nine Bay Area and bicycle with multi-use counties 2-27). pedestrian (Figure facilities As far back as 1969, the Richmond Model Cities proposed a linear system of parks Program and trails along first By Wildcat 1972, EBRPD Creek. adopted a long- term goal to establish the Wildcat Creek connector trail. Although Richmond and San considerable Pablo potential have reap and trail the of visitors regional to draw real economic benefits,creekside development has continued over the past forty years and major gaps use. in the trail discourage End Downstream of Richmond Parkway at the Bay Trail Downstream of Union Pacific Railroad Davis Park Bay Area Ridge Trail 4.47 rces start Upstream of Richmond Parkway Upstream of Rumrill Boulevard Alvarado Park EBRPD MARSH Dead End at Wildcat Marsh PHASE I section DAVIS PARK FLOOD CONTROL Today, the Wildcat Creek trailsections the of disjointed four 5.8 consists Wildcat covering miles Today, Park Alvarado through up Trail Bay the and Marsh Wildcat from miles 8.4 total the of 2-2). (Table Trail Ridge Area the Bay to The Bay Trail intersects with Wildcat Creek at Richmond Parkway (Figure 2-28). The 2-28). (Figure Parkway Richmond at Creek Wildcat with intersects Trail Bay The Regional trails Canyon within Wildcat connects with Bay EBRPD’s Area Ridge Trail border with Alvarado Park. Each accessible Park, at regional the City of San Pablo’s trail project recognizes the value of connector trails for promoting access to open areas. dense urban space from able 2-2: wildcat trail existing sections Table 2-2: 2.9.2 recreational recreational u reso 2.9.2 toArea connectBay anopportunity twomajor presents corridor Wildcat Creek The regional trail systems: The SanFrancisco Trail,Bay a 500-mileshoreline trail, and trails & connectors regional Figure 2-28: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 33 nity 2.9 Commu 2.9 Gaps Gaps and barriers to a continuous trail exist at major road and and railroad along crossings private parcels that hug the creek banks or even claim ownership of the channel. Major crossing barriers Southern include PacificRichmond and Parkway, BNSF Railroads, San Pablo and Avenue I-80. The largest gap exists between City Davis the through section 1.78-mile a Park, Alvarado at trailhead EBRPD the and Park major a presents corridor creek the into encroachment property Private Pablo. San of this section. the trail through connecting to challenge Efforts to close these the 800-foot completed Pablo ofProgram, the City San Grant Trail Through the Bay gaps have beenpursued in 1997. Rumrill Boulevard In from to Park Davis Trail Creek section the of Wildcat by stakeholders independently. Creek Wildcat daylighting for study design and feasibility a completed City the 2001, ond portion of the san francisco bay trail bay trail of the san francisco mond portion rich (2010) figure 2-29: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 34 nity 2.9 Commu 2.9 RD STREET (RDG 2008) through through Davis Park and extending the trail from Davis Park to 23rd Street. Thequarter mile trail extension was incorporated into the Davis Park Master Plan 2009) (ABAG (Figures 2-28, 2-29). PARK MASTER PLAN (CALLANDER 2009) DAVIS figure 2-30: re 2-31: DAVIS PARK CREEK RESTORATION AND TRAIL TO 23 figure 2-31: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 2. watershed OVERVIEW 35 nity 2.9 Commu 2.9 West County Indicators CountyIndicators West (2009),by the ofInstitute the Pacific majority East Bay are parklands located (2009 draft) recognizes the recognizes draft) (2009 Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Countywide Costa Contra in or near the most affluentcommunities and “equitable access toparks and open issue.” justice environmental important an become has shorelines as spaces such The Cityof SanPablo currentlymanages 21 acresof park withinits planning area. With 31,240 residents as of 2007, the present park to population ratio is 0.67 acres of park per one thousand residents. this reach This To (PPIC). residents park per 3.0 of poverty” thousand acres at one “park ratio falls wellspace park of below acres 93.6 additional the an needs Pablo definition San of of City the standard, minimum (not considering population growth). and According color to of “People The 2009: of City Report” “Economic Policy Project’s Justice Equal and Space Green Stimulus, in disparities unfair from suffer disproportionately California throughout income low child from disproportionately suffer and resources, health and school, park, to access healthy and activity physical for places of lack the to related diseases other need and the obesity of evidence further provides youth County’s Costa Contra of study A eating.” or overweight either are olds 5-year to 2 county’s the of 33.3% space: recreational for record high obese.anticipate rates diabetes, of adult hypertension and obesity, “We early death from heart disease unless we can in the change which environment kids Costa 2007).” (Contra County up grow Jordan de 1992 Staebler’s thesis, Greenway Proposal “A for Wildcat and San Pablo delves Creeks,” more deeply into the opportunities and constraints of a linear trail Creek. Appendix The Jsystem andalong Wildcat thesisas available is several of the Plan. this Action of versions future into be incorporated may recommendations Report East Bay Regional 2008 Park District’s Measure WW allocates $900,000 toward re- opening the Wildcat Creek Trail crossing of Richmond Parkway, a preventing major access barrier to the shoreline and Bay Trail for 2009). Costa (EBRPD Contra County urban communities in West The gaps Creek Wildcat in Trail its countywide bikeway network. The trailis described as a 1.3-mile unbuilt Class I paved segment that traverses the City of San in Pablo a County The #613). and #836 List Project Transportation (County direction east-west funding recommend and review to plans Committee Advisory Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation for Metropolitan bicycle the and and pedestrian program projects under Facilities” two main Trail funding and sources: Bicycle “Pedestrian, Measure J’s Program.” Pedestrian Bicycle and “Regional Commission’s date, To no specificplans for connecting the trail from 23rdStreet and acrossImprovement I-80 and Linkage Creek Pablo’s San of City the beenalthough defined, have Program (CLIP), as described 1996 in General theactions Plan, and city’s promotes policies to aquire parcels adjacent to the creek and includes a 25-foot setback from new development. banks for the channel the Wildcat Richmond, North and the City of Richmond, of San Pablo residents For Creek presents a Trail vital and needed connection to the fresh vistas air, and open the in cited As trails. and parks upland shoreline, the of space wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 36 3.1 overview 3.1 RRENCE intervals 3.2.1 FLOODPRONE areas and RECU 3.2.1 While United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) designs flood control for the intervalrecurrence 100-year the disruptive flows, City but experiencecan minor (SFEI) Institute Estuary Francisco San 2001, In floodevents. 6-year even flooding in areasidentified with floodprone Works the for departmentCity ofPabloSan Public 3-1). interval (Table recurrence the 6-year Thepresenceof two creeksmajor flowing throughthe City ofPablo San leadsmany to assume that flooding occurs because the creekarechannels undersizedto handle the flood flows whichthen overflow into streets, residences and commercial areas. While floodingoverbank of theis onechannel of creek cause flooding inthe City of San urban Pablo, infrastructure greatly influenceschannel flow capacity, the creek’s volumes and water surface elevations by introducing constrictions, culverts, paved streets, railroad berms, storm drain inlets, underground pipes, and outlets into the creek. As discussed in Section 2.3, changes to land use and drainage density also have increased 150 theof years over development and frequency magnitude of flood flows. Peak flows today could more be thanSpanish settlement of the East Bay (SFEI 2001). 1.5 times The combined effects higher of structural today before then in interventions the drainage system and widespread to changes land watershed use reaches low-slope in sedimentation excessive producing incision, and erosion to lead or culvert undersized (i.e. constrictions to due backwater that areas in or creek the of presence of trestle footings), further reducing channel habitat capacity, quality and impact. and costs maintenance increasing 3.2 flooding analysis project AREA 3. 3.1 overview An in-depth study of geomorphology, fish habitat, hydrology and hydraulics of 3.22-mile length a of Wildcat Creek between the upstream edge of the Phase I Flood Control Project sediment basin at Union Pacific Railroadto theupstream edgeof periodand 2005 between two-year a over conducted was culvert box double I-80 the 2007 (Figure 3-1). Theproject area falls almost completely within the Cityof San of Contra Pablo Costa County in California, boundaries although watershed extend into Richmond (see Appendix A2 for the with coincides area study the design, overview By area). study the through reaches of maps, maps Appendix A3 for detailed USACE Phase II Flood Control project area. Therecommendations resulting from in Section 4. follows that action plan the restoration informed these studies wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 37

figure 3-1: wildcat creek action plan stu dy area and reaches The study area focused on the creek channel, banks and immediate surroundings of Wildcat Creek from the downtream end of the fish ladder to the 3.1 overview 3.1 upstream end of the I-80 double box culvert.

The study area was then subdivided into nine separate reaches, running in sequential order from downtream to upstream. All reaches were named according to their downstream border and

fish ladder then ran upstream until the next section’s downstream border. davis park rumrill boulevard

railroad trestle For example, Reach 7 Church was named for its downstream border, Church Lane. Reach 7 runs upstream from Church 23rd street Lane over the next crossing at Vale Road, but it does not sediment basin include Church Lane. Likewise, Reach 8 Vale starts at the upstream side of the Vale Road culvert. To prevent   van ness confusion, it is important to note that the downstream  border determines the name of the reach, but that the structure itself is not in that reach. Consequently, the Vale culvert is in Reach 7 Church, not Reach 8 Vale.  church 

UP RR

BNSF RR I-80

vale  san pablo

city of san pablo  richmond  WILDCAT CREEK REACHES 1000 ft City of San Pablo Study Area wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 38 tter 3.2 flooding 3.2 rill at su rum rill at mission rum Rumrill Blvd culvert Davis Park box Downstream extent of culvert street 22nd of Van Ness St Slightly downstream culvert Church Lane box culvert A feet upstream few hundred limit upstream BNSF’s wood railroad trestle Rumrill Blvd culvert extent of Davis Park Upstream culvert extent of Van Ness St Upstream box culvert box extent of I-80 Upstream culvert m limit downstrea ber 2005 (ho 2005) (ho levard, december 2005 rill at manor rum rill at market rum 2 trestle 2 3 RUmrill 3 DAVIS 4 st 23rd 5 VAN NESS 6 St culvert 23rd I-80 9 reach 20-year storm of december 2005 20-year In late December 2005, just after the WRAP’s technical advisory committee was formed formed was committee advisory technical WRAP’s the after just 2005, December late In (Balance), Hydrologics Balance installedby was Roadgauge Vale the and 1-1) (Table a series hit the rain storms of winter with area floodAdele byobservations recorded City Ho, of San Pablo Director of 6:00am At Public on Works. December 30th, the reaching 1,565feet Creek cubic Wildcat reaching pertheflow peaked 20- second, in of products flood observations. are figures following interval. The recurrence year m (sfei 2001) stor 6-year wildcat creek in areas of floodprone table 3-1: u rill bo flooding on rum figure 3-2: Downstream of Rumrill Boulevard culvert, high water marks recorded after the storm indicate that the creek waters rose to just under the top of bank did (i.e. not overtop its but banks) feet above the invertreached of the 48-inch 11.4 storm drain outlet in that reach. wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 39 3.2 flooding 3.2 omes along Manor Drive, on the opposite bank, In Reach 3 Rumrill, homes along the north side of Folsom Avenue are particularly vulnerable to flooding as the land slopes downward fromFolsom Avenue to the creek. homes The row are of 12 built on a floodprone creek bench and the street forms a natural levee During (Figure 3-7). the storm, water reached the homes from the creek at the back yardsand the street at the front yards, creating a dangerous situation for residents. H are also vulnerable to flooding. In the photo to the left, creek waters overtopped the right North) (or bank and flood Wildcat Creek trail along PG&E’s substation. During the December storm, 2005 sand bags were filled and distributed to residents at the City’s nearby (but also flooded) CorporateYard. ber 2005 (ho 2005) (ho RD STEET, december 2005 e AND 23 ffice,left) and University Avenue (right), sediment had ber 2005 (ho 2005) mber 2005 e, dece nce flood waters receded along(at Street23rdthe Post O accumulated in the street and high water marks were found 10-inches above average street elevation on University Ave. O u m aven folso along flooding figure 3-3: re 3-4: flood receding along university avenu figure 3-4: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 40

SAN PABLO CREEK WILDCAT CREEK         HIGH  SCHOOL   SCHOOL 3.2 flooding 3.2 SALESIAN  HELMS MIDDLE   CIVIC   CENTER                  Storm Drain Network Culvert or Crossing               mason                     standard   

 university            23rd

 21st            22nd lovegrove               

 19th        

macarthur      DOVER SCHOOL colin San Pablo/Wildcat Creek Catchment Public Land  ber 2005 stor m dece mber 2005 ring oʼhare  PARK DAVIS  kelley     

 clare                manor     SCHOOL  DOWNER 

marelia             SCHOOL    DRAINS TO RHEEM CREEK DRAINS TO 

road 20 

LAKE ELEMENTARY  barbara

trenton blvd      folsom 15th    giant rd      

 post 

  sutter     

 bush       

 14th   rumrill blvd brookside      

BNSF RR            

giant rd               FEMA 100-year floodplain Observed Flooding 21-year storm 

   filmore   Within the City of San Pablo, areas of flooding during the December 2005 storm were captured(in red) on a map of the city. Flooding occured outside flood 100-year zone even (inthough FEMA’s blue), storm flows fell within a 20-year recurrence interval. ap of san pablomap of d u flooding figure 3-5: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 41 mean daily flow 3.2 flooding 3.2 source: Balance (2007) Balance source: max flow of day mean daily flow ge max flow of day

WILDCAT CREEK DAILY WILDCAT CREEK DAILY FLOW HYDROGRAPH WATER YEAR 2006 vale road gage station daily flow (cfs) flow daily WILDCAT CREEK DAILY WILDCAT FLOW HYDROGRAPH 2006 WATER YEAR station vale road gage WILDCAT CREEK PEAK STAGE OF DECEMBER STORM WATER YEAR 2006 vale road gage station WILDCAT CREEK WINTER SERIES STORM WATER YEAR 2006 vale road gage station

at vale gau YEAR at vale WATER 2006 Figure 3-6:

daily flow (cfs) flow daily

stage (feet) stage recorded flow (cfs) flow recorded arch. Near-record at 1,565 cfs, the second-at 1,565 anuary and February until December storms flooded annual flow for water year J on this creek, reaching the highest recorded discharge causing streamflow to peak in early M 21-year recurrence interval. recurrence21-year interval. a peak stage of 11.3 feet at a peak stage of 11.3 In the water late 2006 year, regular periods of moderate acre-feet, approximately 145 throughout the spring. Total already saturated watershed, prior to the prolonged rain on monthly rainfall for March and the watershed and primed the after high-intensity a 6- to 12- storms and streamflows began annual flowacre-feet.3,640 of 2006 was2006 approximately 5,306 winter drought ensued through hour burst of rainfall fell on the the project area. A typical mid- creek for high runoff conditions 6:00am on December 31, 2005. 6:00am 2005. on December 31, December 30 and 31. TheDecember peak and 30 31. April resulted in fairly high flows A series of four storms starting flow occurred on December31st streets andbuildings throughout The gauge at Vale Road recorded on saturated December 2005 18, percentof the long-term average wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 42 3.2 flooding 3.2 creek overtop right bank backwater effect at 23rd Street culvert surcharging storm drain inlets creek and surface runoff unable to drain due to high water surface elevation in the creek surcharging storm drain inlets in surcharging storm Rumrill Blvd low-lying areas on surface runoff from large urban area to the east drains to low-lying area constrained storm drain network creek overtop right bank along trail, drain onto Manor Drive Ave creek overtop left bank onto Folsom stormwater backup on Rumrill Blvd, Folsom Ave due to high water surface elevation in the creek causes of flooding • • • • • • • • • • ses of flooding, 20-year storm 20-year ses of flooding, Along Folsom Avenue and Manor Drive to Rumrill Blvd to Standard, Ave, University Mason St and Standard Ave Low-lying areas along Rumrill Blvd (Bush to Market), 14th Street and 15th looding ses of F 3 RUmrill 3 st 23rd 5 Street from Dover Ave 23rd reach area 2 trestle 2 3.2.2 Cau 3.2.2 storm surveyed marks, water high recorded Hydrologics Balance flood, the Following drain inlets and outlet elevations, and modeled the system creek to and urban determine stormwater the causes (Balance 2007). of flooding for each observed floodprone area floodprone areas and cau table 3-2: Balance found that flooding in Reach 3and Reach 5 St 23rd and 3) (Reachrelates Blvd Rumrill culverts, of to upstream just elevation surfaceoverbank water flowand culverts (Reach 5), specifically. In all locations, the invertsof storm drain inletson the street and outlets into the creek were below the high water surface elevation in the stormwater creeks, into water more any to convey 3-7). the (Figure Unable creek pipes were unable to drain any overbank flowor surface runoff. In the case ofthe area low-lying along Rumrill Boulevard, thearea leading catchment to storm drains impervioussurface largely of acres 118.8 sizeable: is intersection Street Market the at model. Balance’s to according exacerbated was Street Market at flooding creek, the from distance 1,200-foot a Despite brown, by indicated (as pipes drain storm the through up discharging water creek by sediment-filled creekwater mixing with therelativelyclear street runoff, see Figure 3-2). Storm drains in Balance this by area Modeling are one storm. 2005 to December two the feet during below Creek the Wildcat high in experienced water elevation handle adequately to able appears network drainage the storm of most that indicates Sutter and Bush of vicinity in the appears problem significant “a but storm, 20-year a where Avenues a single 12-inch corrugated metal pipe conveys runoffto a 24-inch flooding causes and capacity conveyance which constrains pipe” concrete reinforced (Balance2007). wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 43 3.2 flooding 3.2 source: Balance (2007) source: ral Levees Natu cture and u m drain infrastr stor figure 3-7: the storm drains. n Folsom Avenue, extreme flooding. extreme into neighborhoods via forming natural levees. of suspended sediment water may be conveyed areas behind the levees. and therefore is prone to In an urban setting where the storm drain system to created a flood water trap the elevation of the storm homes constructed on the to the creek, natural levees storm drains are connected cannot convey water out of its banks while flood waters During storm the of 21-year Creek carries large amounts sediment is depositedalong system and flood developed December natural 2005, 30, and in the worst case, creek channel terrace experienced If the creek level rises above low elevation neighborhoods between the creeks until the function. O flow through the storm drain dropped low enough to allow may contain the creek within time periods where overbank the top of the banks. Wildcat drain invert, the storm drains Natural levees form over long creek water surface elevation levees along the banks of San When creek levels are low, the Pablo Creek and Wildcat Creek storm drain functions properly. wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 44 3.2 flooding 3.2 ctures ptions um hec-ras model ass figure 3-8: odel of the 100-year flood hydraulic model of the 100-year In order to evaluate the impact of bridges and Engineering culverts (Hydrologic a HEC-RAS on conditions, flow water simplified surface under flooding and elevation Centers River Analysis model System) hydraulic was used to water simulate surface elevations under steady-state flowconditions experienced during hundred the year one discharge one in (Q100=2,300 cfs). The model scenarios ran of different management culvert/bridge removal and modification Engineering using the Water Company Resource (WRECO) in maps flood (FEMA) Agency Management RAS Emergency Federal verify to conducted model geometry culvert/ each of removal simulate to used was model RAS The 2001). and (August city the study lowering in have can one originally each impact the determine to time, a at one structure, bridge the flooding.surfaceoverbank and water then elevations The prevent modelingalso looked at the value of cumulatively removing and replacing culverts The and resultsprovide a of range values forquantitative planning purposes bridges. and agood analysis qualitative of where the future focus on reducing flood damages will be the effective. cost most The RAS model ends Church at Lane where FEMA out indicate maps of flows from the the first break creekchannel with thehundred year flood. results. modeling the hydraulic of the discussion A3 supplement Appendix Reachmaps in Observations and modeling of the December 2005 storm fueled existing concerns concerns fueled the existing December 2005 storm of modeling Observations and Studies channel. in the creek structural of interventions the impacts about Restoration West Far Sciences and Watershed Balance Hydrologics, SFEI, from flooding to contribute crossings road culverts in box and that indicate Engineering Wildcat 21% of or 2,476 feet comprise Culverts reach. study in Wildcat problems flooding to addition 2006). In (EBRPD reach the study within channel Creek’s to barriers or permanent ten as intermittent culverts indentified EBRPD impacts, 968- and Park at Davis culvert 509-foot The migration. trout rainbow and steelhead the into migration steelhead anadramous prevent Avenue Pablo San culvert at foot 2006). (EBRPD watershed Based on observation, many culverts (Rumrill Boulevard, 23rd Street, and Church Lane) are unable to transmit flowvolumes of evenmoderate storm events. When culverts are designed at an angle to flow directionor sized, inadequately storms can create “backwater severalfloods of thatdredging sediment slow annual water Without velocity, superelevate the2001).” flow,(SFEI and deposition force sediment more culverts, floodingwould bemore frequentdue to further decreasecapacity. in conveyance 3.2.3 Impact stru of in-strea m 3.2.3 beneath the crossing. EC-RAS model assumes replacement with an open- span bridge that allows the (dashed to be line) restored The H the removal of the culvert and surrounding channel geometry geometry channel surrounding wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 45 2 6 40 29 160 ZONE PARCELS IN FLOOD 3.2 flooding 3.2 2.53 8.55 68 3.81 4.68 12.15 30.15 ZONE FLOOD (acres) DESIGN RATING ctures XS (sf) 196 Poor 336 Poor 310 Poor 291 Poor AREA 90 160 Failing 78 48 84 184 64 262 Failing (ft) 509 320 336 LENGTH Stream flow at slight angle to entrance of culvert, bank erosion at wingwalls Stream flow at slight angle to entrance of sediment each year Culvert typically fills with several feet feet upstream of entrance Channel aggradation for several hundred pedestrian bridge and culvert lowers water Model suggests removal of Davis Park of the culvert in 100-year storm surface elevation 0.5-1.5 feet upstream Channel bottom grouted with rip-rap, cements over-flattened slope, with rip-rap, cements over-flattened Channel bottom grouted elevation to rise during high flows causes water surface during flood debris and sediment, major risk 5 wooden piers catch highly narrow space between piers can cause Flow constriction in and unstable flows during storms erosive hydraulic jump to backwater at trestle for hundreds of feet upstream due Channel aggradation at right bank (erosion, revetment) Exit flow directed feet of sediment each year Right bore typically fills with several feet upstream of entrance Channel revetment for hundreds of banks in less than 20-year storm Overbank flow observed upstream, both maintenance to bulldoze sediment Channel aggradation upstream, annual and Rumrill culvert lowers water Model suggests removal of Trestle bridge of Rumrill culvert in 100-year storm surface elevation 2-3 feet upstream capacity at the pedestrian Observed effects of restricted conveyance splitting of flows, directing creek bridge include backwater flooding and Yard on Folsom Avenue flow south (left bank) toward Corporate Concrete chute designed to accelerate flows, deliver sediment to basin deliver sediment accelerate flows, chute designed to Concrete to high- channel transitions slope as upstream Over-flattened to rise in water surface elevation velocity chute leads to fish migration Fish ladder is a barrier Both banks failing at entrance to bridge Exit flow directed into right bank bank only in less than 20-year storm Overbank flow observed upstream, right lowers water surface elevation Model suggests removal of structure (not affecting upstream up to 3 feet bringing a localized benefit conditions), keeping flood flows within the banks in 100-year storm Cross-sectional area of culvert too wide, downstream channel narrows quickly Entrance flow directed toward right bank Exit flow directed toward left bank Model suggests no benefits to removal Sheet pile support on right bank (civic center property) appears to be failing fill in left bore Upstream channel meander causes flow to enter right bore, sediment Exit flow directed into left bank concrete wingwall Model suggets removal of structure lowers water surface elevation by 2-3 feet in 100-year storm Entrance flow hits left bank abutment, creating backwater Channel incision upstream for 70 feet Concrete apron incised by 2 feet, leaving it undermined by 2 feet. • • • • • • • • Rumrill Culvert • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Van Ness Culvert RE STRUCTU • • • • • • • • • • • 4 23rd St Bridge 3 4 Davis Park Ped Bridge 4 Davis Park Culvert 2 RR Trestle Bridge 5 1 Fish Ladder Reach 6 Civic Center Ped Bridge 6 Church Culvert 7 Vale Culvert m stru in-strea of and design conveyance 3-3: Table wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 46 3.2 flooding 3.2

intermittent intermittent impassable intermittent intermittent intermittent intermittent impassable intermittent L L L L L L L L L H V H H H H H H H H V V V V V V V W V W W W W W W W W 8ʼ 8ʼ fps fps 10ʼ 32ʼ fps fps fps fps fps fps fps 12ʼ 38ʼ 12ʼ 64ʼ 84ʼ 90ʼ 42ʼ 2 2 509ʼ 2 2 4 4 4 2 3 260ʼ 968ʼ 320ʼ 8.17ʼ 8.17ʼ 7.67ʼ 8.83ʼ 24.75ʻ 22.54ʻ 16.83ʻ 21.83ʼ 22.33ʼ 21.67ʼ 48ʻ + 85ʼ + 48ʻ FISH LADDER FISH I-80 CULVERT 78ʼ + 215ʼ + 78ʼ VAN NESS CULVERT ctures SAN PABLO CULVERT VALE ROAD CULVERT DAVIS PARK CULVERT 23RD STREET CULVERT H height CHURCH LANE CULVERT W weight H height

RUMRILL BOULEVARD CULVERT RUMRILL BOULEVARD L length W weight V maximum velocity for fish passage L length length of barrier 1:200 scale H height V maximum velocity for fish passage channelization barrier 1:200 scale W weight length of barrier 1:200 scale cross-section of barrier 1:10 scale H height L length channelization barrier 1:200 scale sediment in culvert (2006 survey) W weight V maximum velocity for fish passage cross-section of barrier 1:10 scale L length length of barrier 1:200 scale m stru in-strea figure 3-9: sediment in culvert (2006 survey) V maximum velocitychannelization for fish passage barrier 1:200 scale length of barriercross-section 1:200 scale of barrier 1:10 scale channelizationsediment barrier 1:200 in culvert scale (2006 survey) cross-section of barrier 1:10 scale sediment in culvert (2006 survey) wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 47 te 3.2 flooding 3.2 pstream maintenance lvert sedimentation and u rill cu rum reach 2-3 figure 3-11: Hydraulic modeling indicates that significant changes in creek slope within this reach this within slope creek in changes significant that indicates modeling Hydraulic channel the where velocities) high very (i.e. flow supercritical of areas localized to lead has been encased in concrete and designed as a velocities where and sedimentation slopes been in have Thechanges rapid flattened. chute and model the localized example, areas For elevations. of surface low water in changes rapid produce slope creek five-pier the of upstream and under elevation surface water in rise significant a shows also surfaceelevations Water flattens. the slope where bridge trestle woodenrailroad rise in the slope over-flattened downstreamof the trestleas thechannel transitions was designedto allow chute This downstream a chute. high rectangular into velocity it but fishway, slotted narrow a through ofchute the center the down fish passage for barrieristo fish in migration. ladder” factfailed a theto perform complete and “fish the Ultimately, only feasible way of re-establishing upstream fish migration in this chute. concrete the around channel bypass will passage a fish bearea construct to The watersurface elevation riseat the trestlemay bemore a functionof the raised creek bed and over- flattenedslope underand upstream of the trestle in this area, which has been than in a put rip grouted rap, function of the of elevation the bridge supporting piers five of the influence the capture not does model the However, soffit. the trestle in its chronic underestimate the rise in role water surface elevation. Themodel of indicates that current catching debris may lead conditions to at the jump a face upstream hydraulic of the rail road bridge and sediment and thus because of may the constriction of flows though thenarrow spaces in unstable theflowswerepiers. observed These in the 1986 flood to lead modelreach indicates used modelto this state steady The Richmond. to North towards overbank flows flowing and debris the the banks without that in overflow 2,300 idealnot cfs may conditions sediment blockages. Supercritical flowsand hydraulic jumps are typicallyareas of forces. highly erosive of this that replacement trestle indicate estimates with Modeling a better design and the of Rumrill Boulevard with theculvert replacement willcombined slope, channel lower the probably water surface elevation in the Rumrill reach by a substantial two storm. a 100-year during feet three to u ch fish ladder in high-velocity trestle and railroad 1 reach figure 3-10: 1 to reach 3 REACH 1 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 48 Street rd 3.2 flooding 3.2 lvert lvert and wingwall erosion RD STREET re 3-13: reach 5 bank collapse at entrance to 23rd street cu bank collapse at entrance to 23rd reach 5 figure 3-13: Combining Combining the removal of the existing foot bridge and the culvert under fieldthe inball Davis Park provides substantial benefits loweringby to 1.5 water surface feet. This estimate likely understates the by 0.5 benefit of culvert removal because it creek the restoring and daylighting of part as regrading channel for account not does channel. Modeling several cross-sections though this 500 foot stretch with a linear non-restoration channel slope indicates that the amount of overbank flow into the the design flow. at reduced is park 23 REACH 4 Thepreliminary analysis demonstrates benefit by replacingthe bridge at 23 re 3-12: reach 4 davis park pedestrian bridge, cu davis park pedestrian reach 4 figure 3-12: 4 DAVIS PARK REACH 4 with with a higher bridge. Thisbridge doesnot appear to be impacted the does channel Currently not flood from downstream. fromto conditions thebut south backwater it does floodover thenorth bank.The replacement of this structure doeslower the surface water up by to three feet a bringing localized affectingbenefit upstream (not withinbanks. the flood whichthe keeps flows conditions) wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 49 3.2 flooding 3.2 lvert (looking upstream) lvert (looking lvert (looking downstream, upstream, downstream at ped) rch cu RCH 6 CHU REACH 6 upstream as well as benefit local significant a presents culvert this of replacement The to a distance of one approximately thousand feet. Themodel suggests that the area near Church Lane can experience a lower water surface elevation by approximately 100-year that indicate results modeling initial hydraulic general, In feet. three to two Street culvert. of the Church removal following within the banks stay volumes flow chu reach 6 figure 3-15: This is the one reach where modifications to culverts and bridges do not significantly significantly not do bridges and culverts to modifications where reach one the is This reduce over bank flows. Replacing the culvert has the minimalreplacement of bridges and localizedculverts downstream do benefit not appear and to significantly with addressed be best may area This location. this at elevations surface water reduce a detention of flowsupstream between ChurchValeand Streets and the San Pablo lot. parking Avenue re 3-14: reach 5 van van cu 5 ness reach figure 3-14: NESS VAN REACH 5 wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 50 3.4 In-stream conditions 3.4 osity 3.4.4 Aggradation 3.4.4 channel led to has sedimentation reach, the study of portions the lower In In some flood increased and potential. capacity conveyance of a loss aggradation, placement poor with design associated and is sedimentation excessive instances, 3.4.2 Sinu 3.4.2 Due to the high correlates magnitude sinuosity Lower time. decreasedover has Creek Wildcat of lower of sinuosity channelization within its urbanized reaches, the with shortened stream length and increased slope, resulting in a chain of negative repurcusions: faster flow complexity, velocities, lower higher erosive macroinvertebrate species 2006). (EBPRD riparian and aquatic of decreased diversity forces, populations, decreased homogenized channel habitat, and Incision 3.4.3 has become force primaryoccurs, the artificial erosive hardening bank Where bed. In the creek of lowering and the channel the deepening of incision: streambed severe to moderate causing is incision channel reach, the study portion of the upper undercut are revetments of the many result, As a feet). five (over entrenchment at the footings of undercut structural The implications the creek. falling into and banks remain Where attention. immediate worth a risk present Road crossing Vale streambed and channelization by caused forces the shear increased unrevetted, Sciences 2007). (Watershed bank erosion. exacerbated have incision Today, Today, upward of 80% of the study concrete, reach sacrete, gabion, has or metal beenwalls along both channelized banks of in the channel the corridor (EBRPD form 2006). of To accommodate increased runoffvolumes and sediment supply associated with watershed-wide land use impacts, within loss and channel damage property to led erosion bank excessive geometryand instability stream adjusts. As the were developed constructedto revetments artificiallyfloodplain, fix the position Sciences 2007). Thenature (Watershed migration lateral prevent of theand channel in rainfall sequential years (i.e. variability interannual climate’s the of mediterranean cycles. the develop-and-revet reinforce to tends year) a wet by followed drought of stream conditions 3.4 In- Direct observation of floodingand computermodeling of flowscan identify major opportunities provide to restore conditions stream channel channel existing dimensions of to surveys accomodate In-stream flood intervals. flows recurrence at defined their watershed, the in work at processes geomorphic understanding for lens another impacts at a more project-oriented scale, and pervasive inform policy symptoms actions. or managemeent TheAppendixmaps in A3 the illustrate and in- trends to basis. a reach-by-reach on conditions stream channelization 3.4.1

osity

source: Sustainable Watershed Planning in in Planning Watershed Sustainable source: hio O re 3-16: sinu figure 3-16: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 51 3.4 In-stream conditions 3.4 TION COMPLEXITY 3.4.7 CHANNEL 3.4.7 Steelhead and rainbow trout require the three basic stream habitat components at periodsvarious in their lifecycle: area, pools, resting provide rifflesand Pools glides. refuge, and reduced flowvelocities that allow fine sediments to2002). settle. (Hagar fry alevinand development early and activity spawning Rifflessupport glides and a comprise which macroinvertebrates, for unit habitat productive most the are Riffles diet. trout of rainbow the portion significant As fish traverse thestream, they seek aofto diversity habitat fulfill givena life stage or an immediate need for refuge. This withmobility combined is flexibility essential 3.4.6 Sediment SIZE AND DISTRIBU 3.4.6 Based on gravel availability and fishdistribution patterns within the Valereach hosts project themajority the hypothesizesEBPRD fisheries thethat department area, of spawning habitat for resident rainbow trout between culverts. Pablo Avenue the Rainbow trout and steelhead have Davis similar requirements for Park and San spawning habitat. Due to their larger size, steelhead can spawn in fish. larger stronger substrate larger, particles because they rock are larger sizes: they move can section the for in surface of the gravel Vale distribution an acceptable EBPRD found current population of rainbow trout and for a small population of steelhead. The overall sediment composition of the gravel bed in the Vale section had acceptable steelhead. and trout rainbow spawning for quality gravel understanding overall the improve would reachES study the throughout analyzed sampling and collected More be should samples Sediment quality. sediment subsurface the of using bulk sampling protocols (as outlined in Harris 2005). Fine sediment should be closely analyzed because an abundance of fine sediment can leadto suffocation of salmonid embryos (Barnhart 1986). “increasedSpecifically, fine sedimentcauses between space pore reduces embeddedness Increased embedded. become to substrate small fish.” and macroinvertebrates for habitat which important is cobble, and gravel Embeddedness through the spawning can waters also oxygenated theof inhibit flow 2006). the eggs (EBPRD of in decreased oxygenation beds, resulting gravel of box culverts. Subsequently, annual dredging is required in and near several near of in and required is dredging annual culverts. Subsequently, box of Boulevard (Watershed Rumrill of downstream the reach as culverts well the box as Sciences 2007). floodprone width 3.4.5 reaches entrenched focus on should instability channel reducing for Strategies geometry channel natural using By width. floodprone sufficient have do not that within the active floodplain benches inner by creating and bankfull to flow relations reducing while channel in the floods section, can be contained larger cross channel instability channel and erosion of rates lead accelerated to that stresses the hydraulic Sciences 2007). (Watershed

wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 52 SAN PABLO SAN

31 20 49

glide pool riffle VALE

23 38 39 CHURCH ER FISH HABITAT SUMM 3.5

48 29 23 VAN NESS VAN

44 17 39 23RD ST 23RD

27 43 29 DAVIS PARK DAVIS

41 10 49 RUMRILL

8 38 54 TRESTLE

44 26 30 FISH LADDER FISH 61 39 WILDCAT CREEK CHANNELWILDCAT CREEK COMPLEXITY riffle, pool, glide ratio 0

80 60 40 20 100 percentage figure 3-17 During the annual summer drought, flowvolumes typicallydwindle to zero in the project area. As stream flow dries, aquaticandfragmentshabitat are stranded, trout trout. rainbow of classes all age for pools critical become habitat POOLS 3.5.1 evaluate the To viability of poolsover-summer in the project area, EBPRD counted and categorized pools within each reach during the summer of 2005 (Figure 3-18). Pools with a minimum depth of one foot combined with greater than dissolved 5 parts oxygen per million levels and temperatures less than 20 degrees celsius were considered viable for rainbow trout survival. Early summer pools were counted in summer). in October (late then re-evaluated June, 3.5 SUMMER FISH HABITAT to to a there where areas population. other to Individuals moving by can creek the of respond area one in to turbidity or increases disturbance, in predation, competition, is are habitat “Good” fewer pressures. often environmental equated with alternating approximately of ratio riffle to pool a with reach a throughout distributed units habitat this indicator. Reach approached Vale Only 2006). 1:1 (EBPRD Vale’s rifflesVale’s and pools reaches approached the the approached reaches Overall, the entire study sub-par from a biological pool areas. Despite a fair productivity perspective. perspective. productivity should consist of riffle and riffles and pools comprised Trestle’s good Trestle’s riffle to pool riffle to pool Trestle’s ratio, of 2.17, which is considered of 2.17, percentage of glide habitat. percentage of glide habitat. optimal condition threshold. optimal condition threshold. optimal riffle to pool ratio of 26.2% and 29.9%, below the and below 29.9%, 26.2% the 1:1. In optimal conditions,1:1. 80 comprised and 38.9% 38.3%, Trestle (0.87) and Vale (1.02) and Vale (1.02) Trestle (0.87) reach had a riffle to pool ratio respectively, barely below the to 100 percentto 100 of the channel ratio is outweighed its by large wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 53 ER FISH HABITAT SUMM 3.5 LATE SUMMER EARLY SUMMER ality non-viable pool viable trout pool never viable pool VALE still viable trout pool CHURCH RUMRILL 23RD ST TRESTLE VAN NESS SAN PABLO no longer viable trout pool DAVIS PARK OVER-SUMMER POOLS FISH LADDER figure 3-18 er Early Summ survival rainbow to the of conducive surveyall parameters Summer found The Early trout. Specifically, theaverage watertemperature was 18.13 degrees Celsius with a dipped theabove 20 temperatures water deviation standard of degree 1.79. Average Celsius threshold in the Rumrill and Davis Park sections but since habitat. other could seek water reach, trout the throughout freely was flowing still deviation standard a with mg/l 9.9 was area study the for oxygen dissolved average The very was low. turbidity area, project the 1.88. Throughout of 3.5.2 Water Qu 3.5.2 just a With handful of pools to support the survival of fish in the projectarea, water quality thresholds become critical factors for the persistence of the population. For rainbow trout and steelhead, temperatures must remain below 21 in each degree pool. understand the To Celsius varying pool conditions, EBPRD conducted spot- readings of dissolved oxygen, temperature, and turbidity during the Early and Late surveysSummer in 2005. While early summer held the promise of 37 total viable pools within the project area, area, project the within pools viable total 37 of promise the held summer early While only seven viable trout pools remained by late summer. pools Five were supported by the artificial Medical of outflowfrom the Center(as Doctor’s these remaining discussed in Section x.x). Therest of thepromising earlysummer poolshad dried or the water quality measurements dropped below the “potentially viable” dissolved depth, oxygen and/or temperature criteria. Consequently, the Church and Vale reaches accounted for 100% of the late summer viable trout pools. The two pools in represent and outflow DMC the by influenced be to appear not did reach Church the reaches. in other habitat over-summering for the potential LATE SUMMER EARLY SUMMER non-viable pool viable trout pool never viable pool VALE still viable trout pool CHURCH RUMRILL 23RD ST TRESTLE VAN NESS SAN PABLO no longer viable trout pool DAVIS PARK OVER-SUMMER POOLS OVER-SUMMER FISH LADDER FISH wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 54 ER FISH HABITAT SUMM 3.5 Temperature variability In addition to the spot surveys of which temperature produced unexpected average 30th to June from conducted was monitoring temperature continuous temperatures, October 31st 2005 in two deep pools: one Ness in reach and the another in Van the reach. Vale The Van Ness pool represents typicala fluctuationsare isolaled expected with pool reduced water quantities. As in the water reach. the levels Temperature drop, temperatures fluctuate beyond trout-survival thresholds for longer periodsof time. depth pool constant a with outflow DMC the from benefits pool Vale the contrast, In survival. fish for conditions quality water optimal and Complex decreases. oxygen dissolved increases, temperature when thumb, of rule a As a if example, For rule. that break can context surrounding pool’s a within interactions photosynthesis stimulate may light increased the sunlight, by warmed being was pool in which aquatic plants, would then increase the dissolved in oxygen the even water the pool increasing. of was temperature thethough overall physical internal and position geographic the on based inputs different has pool Each characteristics. Some banks, undercut poolssubjected are have wider are or deeper, to soil erosion as people walk on the banks above them, receive direct sunlight external or plant have matter, highly varied substrates that may support more aquatic insects, etc. Consequently, the management Overall, treatment. general same the of pools all giving on focus outflow, just restoration DMC not and the specific activities Without Creek. should Wildcat lower be in hold pool tenuous a have trout rainbow with However, population. breeding entire the eliminate could year drought severe a artificiallythe and increasing of water source a constant providing outflow the DMC number pools and section,quality of in over-summering the the trout rainbow Vale rainbow the Furthermore, drought. prolonged a against insurance some provided are trout that were inventoried were healthy and robust. Even though they face par living sub- conditions, there is no immediate reason to expect a rapid or prolonged 2006). (EBPRD population trout in the current diminishment By By late summer the overall water quality changed substantially and varied between increased pools in many through the reach as theysummer pools. turned Turbidity stagnant and/or became occluded with algae. As expected, experienced the higher temperatures fishdue to ladder its Celsius degrees standing reach 17.21 was area water study and entire the for the temperature lack water of Average canopy cover. with a standard deviation of degree 18.13 2.34. the to compared As as water evaporates however, increase; and to expected pool be would depths temperature decrease, Celsius average reading in early summer, temperatures unexpectedly appeared to decrease. er LATE Summ

wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 55

cumulative percentage cumulative percentage cumulative ER FISH HABITAT SUMM 3.5

temperature (celsius) temperature (celsius)

frequency frequency vale pool continuous monitoring POOL TEMPERATURE continuous monitoringvan ness pool figure 3-19 verall, O in dissolved oxygen? in dissolved oxygen? of 21 degreeof 21 Celsius. 96% of temperatures96% of the Vale pool. From Through the summer of exceeded temperatures temperatures exceeded the perspective of both The vertical bars on the temperature monitoring monitoring temperature lower and approximately In the Ness Van pool, for 2005, the Ness Van 2005, pool the artificially-fed waters rainbow trout would have recorded were lower than eleven 30-minute periods pool is ideal over-summer was their sufficient direct or number of times that a were 18 degreewere Celsius 18 or of temperatures recorded experienced much a wider temperature stability (low of temperatures recorded. of temperatures recorded. and the resulting decrease repersents the percentage sunlight and aquatic plants is difficultto determine if a data collection period. The range of temperatures than habitat for rainbow trout. It variability) and range (below 19.5 degrees Celsius.19.5 to offset temperature spikes example, approximately 90% cumulative percentage curve survival thresholds), the Vale measured during a 30-minute graphs indicate the frequency survived in the Ness Van pool: specific temperature value was wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 3. project AREA analysis 56 3.5 bioassessment 3.5 Epifaunal substrate/available cover: the amount of available instream cover such cover: cover instream of the available amount substrate/available Epifaunal as submerged logs and snags (large woody debris), cobble, and undercut banks. This category enumerates theprevalence of instreamavailablehabitat for biotic colonization. Channel flow status: used to gauge the presence prevalence. a larger indicating water, of with higher scores Pool variability: while rainbow trout necessary typically to a have some variety pools of pools Specifically, optimal for habitat. prefer deep, cool pools, it provide is different biotic opportunities for smaller fish, macroinvertebrates and food sources. of trout availability affect the which can allalgal of growth, re 3-20: bioassessment scores by reach figure 3-20: assessment 3.5 bio The Church and Vale reaches supported the largest number of trout reach, in an expected the result of good abundant water, riparian study in-stream canopy cover, cover (woody debris, undercut banks, etc), high relatively bioassessment scores and reduced impacts anthropogenic (based on observation). Reach had Vale the largest best the with section the also was coincidentally, not and, two the of population trout riffle to runratio. Additionally, allsurveyed trout were in good health: clear normal eyes, opercula, and no visible parasites, lesions or evidence of fins. erosion on their The leasthospitable trouthabitat in thestudy reach was the Fish Ladderreach, but was reach Rumrill The lower. scored Rumrill criteria, bioassessment rapid the to due completely dry, had no epifaunal substrate, and was highly channelized. Becausecover canopy was not a factor in the method, rapid bioassessment the scores can be misleading. Aside from Reach 1, the majority of the study reaches had an average of 70% forsufficient generatingcanopy input,cover, cover allochthonous and some regulation. temperature of degree Of the various habitat characteristics inventoried during the rapid bioassessment, habitat: trout deemed especially rainbow were critical for characteristics three • • • wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 57 ctures 4.1 objectives, findings and strategies 4.1 lvert replacement with open span bridge re 4-1: cu figure 4-1: and strategies 4.1 objectives, findings replace in-stream stru strategy 1: constrictive risk flood reduce to is (WRAP) Plan Action Restoration Wildcat of objective main The ofYears flood Wildcat Creek. on volumes 100-year flow in for the City of San Pablo observation (Section 3.2), geomorphic assessments and recent hydraulic modeling studies (Section 3.2.3) all suggest that insufficiently sizedand poorly designed stream in- structures constrict storm water surface flows, elevations upstream of creating the structure) that backwaterlead to overbank flooding conditions and (raised in-channel sedimentation. Excessive sedimentation within these structures and further fillreduce conveyance capacity, over-summering pools and upstream of spawning gravels for fish,and create a costlychannel maintenance into flows floodregime direct several of culverts angles exit and for entrance hard-line The the city. banks causing erosion and need cycle. for another revetment, A maintenance major reducing for potential highest the with structures the remove to is plan this of strategy increase to order in structures bridge span open with them replace to and flood risks flows, overbank prevent elevation, surface water reduce capacity, conveyance channel reduce and sedimentation, restore habitat quality, allow a recreational trail to safely crossings. road underneath pass ended actions recommended 4. This sectionpresents a summary of thesignificant findings of the report and results of the floodreduction and restoration planning efforts. Wepresent roadmapa actions restoration along Creek of Wildcat to reduce flooding, quality habitat improve Pablo. San of the City within resources recreational increase and wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 58 4.1 objectives, findings and strategies 4.1 rban stormwater management Physical barriers above the bank such as floodwalls or berms Physical barriers above the bank such long profile of low-slope reaches In-channel activities to regrade the channel capacity affected by aggradation and reduced capacity, complexity and stability, Channel widening to increase channel bench habitat or space for a trail. reduce erosion and create floodplain on a watershed Investigate potential to detain stormwater scale and thereby attenuate peak flows • • • • Actions to reduce the water surface elevation of the creek (pursued in Strategy 1) should should 1) Strategy improve u strategy 3: in (pursued creek the of elevation surface water the reduce to Actions also help to reduce recurrent flooding inlow-lyingoff-channel, city neighborhoods (Section the network 3.2.2). drain If the storm through surcharges water when creek drain storm the of elevation the below remain can creek the of elevation surface water inlet in the street, the surchaging effectmay beprevented during moderate storm events. Because the of elevation storm drain within outlets are bankfull dimensions of the creek and the bankfull dimensions of the creek often coincide with the 100- year flowvolumes for floodprotection, the threat ofwater surcharges will probably remain a threat in more extreme storms (despite the fact that several of the affected low-lying areas are not included the FEMA 100-year floodzone). The pursue actions city to prevent creek should water surcharge through the storm drain network. Recommended actions from Balance Hydrologics (Appendix E2) downstream include further installing outflow to pipes re-routing or creek the in outlets the at gates flap elevations). lower (at was water creek if even that alsorevealed models drain storm and observations Field not actively surcharging up through the storm drains, drain inlets in many streets were unable to drain due to high water surface elevations in the creek, the effectof natural levees (Section 3.2.2, Figure 3-7), excess overbank flow running streets, into and urban drainage areas producing more surface pipe runoff network than could handle. the underground Actions to increase conveyance and possibly capacity of pipe storage networks should be weighed against opportunities and constraints sub- affected within runoff stormwater treating and slowing infiltrating, detaining, of areas. drainage strategy 2: prevent overbank flooding for 100-year flow for 100-year flooding prevent overbank 2: strategy As further investigation and project implementation moves forward for reducing water surface elevations via replacment of constrictive in-stream structures, creek floodedhistorically ofover storm top bankthe events have in moderate that reaches must be addressed in the short-term. Overbank flooding inRumrill Reach 3 (both banks) and 23rd Reach 5 (right bank) occured in a 20-year storm. Although initial flood 100-year keep should structures constrictive of removal that suggests modeling flow withinchannel banks,recurrent floodinginto single-storyhomes to on danger a life-threatening possibly and health concern Folsom a on-going presents Avenue residents of these households due to the surrounding effectof floodflows, thelack tendency to rise to of quickly during escape and Measures storms. the routes creek’s flooding include: overbank reduce wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 59 4.1 objectives, findings and strategies 4.1 strategy 5: connect gaps in wildcat creek trail connect gaps in wildcat strategy 5: visionary were system EastBay the by adopted plan space open and trail trail regional a partof is Creek Wildcat Creek Wildcat the for plans early The District. Park Regional Costa Contra west of communities disadvantaged the linking endorsed they because North unincorporated and Pablo, San and Richmond of Cities the including County, Richmond with and Village Parchester both their San Pablo Bay shoreline and with the regional park experience offeredby Pinole RegionalPark and Wildcat Canyon and Tilden Regional Parks. Until this time, with a few exceptions, such as Beach in Crown Alameda, the regional vision was mostly to protect the more natural open Hills. the East Bay of space areas As discussed in Section 2.9.2, the dream of linking our to communities the bay and regional park system has made being from vision the prevent trail significant connective a to gaps progressAny remain. gaps sinceSignificant social needed) (and it numerous for was potential theenvisioned. first constrains and use trail deters realized, and economic benefits. Several gaps,such as crossing the RichmondParkway, are should Pablo San of City the area, study the Within bridge. to contentious and costly take action to close gaps, include trail planning in general plans and redevelopment plans as well as specific creekrestoration plans, incorporateneighborhood linksto and public setof diverse a with trail the along activity encourage and system trail the it. to connected tightly the trail and/or onto facing destinations commercial In addition, the WatershedThe Council endorses the completionof TrailsThe For Richmond Action Committee (TRAC) Richmond-wide trail plan which integrates of City Council, Watershed The trail planning. regional into Trail Creek the Wildcat and other San stakeholders needPablo, efforts to tocollaborative continue close the gaps on the Creek trail Wildcat system to realize the forty-year old vision and all its visitors. regional and localresidents for benefits As As discussed in Section 2.7, long-term goals for the creek include the revival of an anadramous steelhead run based on the EBRPD sustaining success a with breeding reintroducing population and of rainbow trout (the of steelhead) below resident Lake Anza. freshwater TheWildcatWatershed Council San Pablo form aims to enahnce for conditions habitat the entire anadramous fish life cycle: spawning, egg or smolt and adult refuge, over-summering rearing, juvenile emergence, incubation, migration. At this point, while pervasive effortsare needed to habitat protect and throughout create the watershed, concentrated focus on barriers can open more to habitat resident removing rainbow trout and increase the potential fish passage keystone a As Creek. Wildcat in run viable a establish to steelhead threatened the for indicator species, actions to promote sustaining populations improve of the entire watershed steelhead ecosystem. should Themost egregiousfish barriers (Figure 2-23) within the study area include Reach 1 Sediment the of Chute/Fish many Ladder, Reach addition, In 4 Culvert. Avenue Pablo San 8 Reach and Culvert, Park Davis culverts targeted for replacement under Strategy should 1 (Replace replacements Constrictive their In-Stream and passage fish to barriers intermittent also are Structures) improvements. quality habitat and passage fish promote ove fish passage remove fish barriers 4: strategy wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 60 1 ctures In-Stream Structures Section 3.2 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 ower water surface elevation by 1 to 2 to 2 feet Lower water surface elevation by 1 feet to 1.5 Lower water surface elevation by 0.5 feet (localized Lower water surface elevation by 3 keeping benefit, not affecting upstream conditions), flow within banks. pact in 100-yr flood expected impact in 100-yr ower water surface elevation by 2 to 3 to 3 feet Lower water surface elevation by 2 If combined with Rumrill replacement, lower water Reach 3. surface feet in Rumrill elevation by 2 to 3 lvert lvert & lvert lvert davis park cu pedestrian bridge structure

reach 2 4 3 4 st bridge 23rd 4 6 church cu 1 3rill cu rum ACTION 5 2bridge trestle 1. According to HEC-RAS modeling, discussed in able 4-2: Prioritized Actions to Replace Constrictive Table 4-2: ategy to str ctions according mmended a 4.2 reco replacem stru constrictive in-strea strategy 1: Themost effective strategyfor reducing flooddamages Wildcatalong Creekshould focus on the following prioritized replacement of bridges for reducing overbank planning flowsapproach is to hydraulic address downstream and culverts. The best constrictions first which can Reducing often overbank flood flowsbenefit in thismanner can often hydraulic protection flood with increase the conflict not do which opportunities ourrestoration environmental options conditions for upstream. address not did WRAP The habitat. more for allow hydraulics new the because needs the cost impact for relocation of utilities involved with these culvert is It alternatives. replacement removal possible that relocation of utilities and at certain locations (i.e. Rumrill Blvd) may be too costly and therefore, floodreduction efforts project. should Park be the Davis which would option culvert the next removal focus on u rill c replace rum action 1 of the removal Rumrill Roadrecommend with culvert a bankfull bridge and replacement We and slope channel steeper overall an to gradient channel the of re-grading and of Replacement reach. this through transport sediment attain to dimensions channel this culvert with a bridge will and address problems costs chronic maintenance and lowers the water surface enough (1-2 feet) that flows will channel probably in the remain Rumrill Road area in and provide floodreduction the benefits upstream in Davis Park. Although, we recommend this as the firstrestoration step, therebe may significantcosts associated with this project depending on removal or coststhe relocation in this utility for area. Thisshould be explored in asubsequent design date. a later at be could done then this project too prohibitive, are costs If phase. wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 61 This likely understates the benefit of the removal ofthe removal the benefit This understates likely 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 lvert edestrian edestrian Bridge lvert & P Street Bridge rch lane cu Street with a higher bridge. Thisbridge doesappearnot to be impacted from rd a back water from conditions downstream. Currently the channel does not floodto the south but it does floodover thenorth bank.affecting The (not localizedbenefit a replacement bringing feet of3 to up by thissurface water the structure lower does withinbanks. the floodthe which keeps flows conditions) upstream Park Cu Remove Davis Action 2 ction 5 replace bnsf railroad trestle bridge replace Action 5 concrete velocity high a is there project, I Phase USACE the of end downstream the At rectangular flow chute designed accelerateto below just and chute flowsthis of deliverUpstream and School. sediment Verde above basin sediment CCCFCD into the the project area, there is a Railroad trestle bridge and the channel bottom has been grouted with rip-rap upstream for 100 approximately feet. Phase II of the USACE project and the focus of this report begins just above the Creek theis Wildcat a of that trestle area reach modeling indicates rail Hydraulic riprap. road at this grouted flow supercritical of localizedto areas leading slope creek in changes significant with velocities. low of areas slope) (low flattened overly other and velocities) high very (i.e. elevations. surface water in changes rapid produce slope creek in changes rapid These For example, the model shows a significant raise in watersurface elevation under and upstream of the RR bridge trestle where the slope flattens.There isalso in arise water surface elevation in the over-flattened slope downstream transitions into the as downstream high channel the velocity rectangular chute. This downstream chute was supposed to allow for perform to upstream failed fishhas passage through afishway, fish slotted laddernarrow a down through chute the of bottom center the as designed and is in fact a complete barrier to fish the migration. construct Ultimately, only to be will area this in migration fish upstream reestablishing of way feasible chute. concrete the around channel bypass passage a fish Thepreliminary analysis shows that thereis agood benefit in replacingthe bridge at 23 chu replace Action 4 Thereplacement of thisbridge with a higherbridge Church has near aarea significantThe benefit feet. locally thousand one approximately of distance a to upstream and lane can experience a benefitof lowering the two watersurface to by approximately three feet. In general, initial hydraulic modeling results indicate that the Q100 flow culvert. Street the Church of removal thebanks within following (2300 cfs) stays Combining the removal of the existing foot bridge and the culvert under the ball field field ball the under culvert the and bridge foot existing the of removal the Combining surface water the which in area Park the in benefits substantial provides Park Davis in a by half to is foot 1.5 lowered . feet replace 23rd Action 3 of the culvert because it does not take into account a regrading of the channel which the channel of a regrading account the culvert of doestake becauseinto it not occurs under creek restoration scenario. Modeling several cross-sections though this 500 foot stretch with a linear non-restoration channel slope indicates that the at designthe flow. reduced is the park into bank flow over of amount wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 62 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 Thewater surface elevation riseat the trestlemay bemore a functionof the raised creek bed and over- flattenedslope underand upstream of the trestle in this area, which has been than in a put rip grouted rap, function of the of elevation the bridge the supporting 5 piers of the influence the capture not does model the However, soffit. underestimate may thus and sediment and debris catching of role chronic its in trestle the rise in water surface elevation. Themodel indicates thatmay current conditions lead to a hydraulic jump at the upstream face of the rail road bridge because of the constriction of flows though the narrow spaces in the piers. were Theseobserved unstablein flows the 1986 floodto leadto overbank flowsflowing towards Richmond. The North steady state model used to model thisreach indicates that the 2,300 cfs may not erosive highly overflowof areas the typically are banksjumps hydraulic in and flows ideal Supercritical blockages. conditions without debris andsediment forces. this that indicates report this for done one the with survey channel 1982 a Comparing area is chronically a depositional due environment to the trestle. UrbanThe Creeks slope creek the out flattened further Project Restoration Rumrill (2006-2007) Council leading to increased sediment deposition in this area. Because of the uncertainties of working with the railroad companies, this report recommends that channel the be regraded stream to more uniformly graded flow from theupstream endof the proposed fishby-pass ladderup to Rumrill Road inorder to more effectively pass to Regradingachieve thechannel steeperoverall a the sediment load floodand flow. troughs peaksand extreme the out smooth would sectionthis through slope channel of the velocity changes through this reach resulting in a much improved sediment therail of thepiers necessary, If costs. maintenance reduced and capability transport road bridge can be protected with installation of pier scour jackets if the steepened slope creates shear stress and scour issue for the piers. Thisreach needs of to channel be also redesigned to avoid localized supercritical flows (i.e. theareas of high very velocity) that could impeded fish passage whilesupporting enough sediment fish. for channel a clear and sedimentation excessive prevent to transport A watershed council effort in 2006 evaluated aproposal by of the elevation (bottom railroadcord bridge higher a to with trestle a recommended replace and trestle the the bridge deck), wider span and or strategic placement of piers to reduce flooding, debris catchment and sedimentation impacts. the Unfortunately, response of the railroad company was to do a quick weekend emergency repair job on and leave the the existing damaged trestle structure in place. Thisis not a permanent solution distant too not the in point some at structure the replace to have will railroad the and future. Therefore, a future actionitem of the councilis to work with theregulatory and agencies the railroad on redesign a permanent of more this structure. Modeling estimates indicate that replacement of this trestle with a better design and channel slope, combined with the replacement by area of Blvd. Rumrill the in the elevation surface water discharge Rumrill year hundred the lower Blvd. culvert will probably 2-3 feet. a substantial over bridge railroad new a constructing for applications permit submitted BSNF The wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 63 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 Match Match the new span with the Road Rumrill below constructed 111 foot wide floodplain placement and restoration span bridge the project elevation, its that such soffit trestle lower the Design freeboard of feet three 2,300 cfs with peers convey of sediment that so channel active the of boundaries the outside peers new any Place interrupted not is passage fish and transport Thecross section of trestle the structure conditions flow supercritical avoid and shouldchannel critical flow produce a more sub- stable Thestream channel design invert through thisreach should provide continuity with up and downstream reaches to allow a soft bottom adjustable equilibrium bankfull channel and floodplainto properly accommodatefish passage at a 2-5 interval flows recurrence year catchment of debris problem the creating avoid designneedsto The and shear Velocities stresses need to be reduced sufficiently to reduceripraping bottom or sides the channel strategy 2: prevent overbank flooding for 100-year flow prevent overbank flooding for 100-year strategy 2: following the progress, culverts replacing for options 1 Strategy into investigations As action items should be considered as further options risks. for Some reducing may be existing short-term flood opportunities to immediately reduce risk (such as construction of floodwalls), whileothers must be incorporated into long-term city planning (such as land aquisition, redevelopment plans) or would be cost-effective if worked into other restoration priorities (such as Bridge). combining Street of 23rd floodwallreplacement and with University narrowing Avenue Wildcat Wildcat Creek in 2004. The proposed deign of feet 99 and a widthnew bridge low cord 1.05 feet lower than span existing conditions would not overmeet the creek U S Army Corps floodstandards to achieve threefeet of freeboardabove the water surface elevation for the hundred year flood estimatedat 2,300 cfs.The watershed of the council rail met 2006 road in to with achieve July a representatives negotiated deign for the new trestle. This resources effort federal included and two engineers state of from needs the the Army coordinated Corps meeting The Branch. Works Civil the council. of members other and agencies The applying thefor councilrecommended following standards future performance this trestle: for deigns replacement • • • not will trestle this that so peers of depth adequate the with built to needs structure The ) project 1135 USACE the in (described objectives restoration future the with conflict a accommodate to needs slope restored The reach. this in slope channel the change to created slopeof newandover for correction flattened the allow fish channel passage the trestle. of upstream riprap grouted by • • • • wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 64 Daylight the creek under the largely unused Daylight the creek under the largely parking lot on San Pablo Avenue. This area and can provide floodplain overflow area the moderate the timing of the peaks of lot hydrograph downstream. The parking the area, if acquired by the city, also offers stream option of creating a multi-objective restoration , and flood basin retention area and green space park for San Pablo Avenue. All reaches can benefit from channel restoration where revetments have intruded on the cross-sectional areas of channels and created incision that leads to excessive bank erosion problems. The addition of floodplain and flood prone areas along the channel can add up to greater channel capacities to storage and convey flows. See Appendix G from Watershed Sciences for specific recommendations. location Wildcat Creek Trail, PG&E On right bank, along on Manor Drive substation and residences vulnerable homes (options Willing sellers of seven onto open parcels in the to relocate the structures be investigated) neighborhood may Add Along Davis Park’s southern boundary. allowing simple closure floodgates to wall openings during storms. Along northern boundary (right bank) of Davis Park Street. up to 23rd Avenue, consider On right bank along University potential to narrow street to one-way, making room for a floodwall as well as a trail. On left bank, work with property owners to create a berm/floodwall a few feet high to match elevation of right bank wall or berm. Redevelopment plans for the North side of Wildcat oad should Creek between Church Lane and Vale R greenway, provide ample space for a recreational increase floodprone width of incised channel, and berm if enhance right-of-way with a wide-based This may additional flood protection is needed. the area provide some flooding relief needed for near Van Ness Street. 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 e increase floodprone width, add floodplain benches CONSTRUCT FLOODWALL OR BERM DAYLIGHT CREEK, INCREASE FLOODPRONE WIDTH description Construct floodwall u acquire folsom aven properties connect existing floodwalls construct floodwall or berm

reach *

ACTION 6 3 7 3 8 4 9 4 14 10 5 construct floodwall 11 5 12 7 increase creek setback 13 9 able 4-3: actions to prevent overbank flooding to prevent overbank actions Table 4-3: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 65 Sutter Avenues as recommended by gh sediment basin e culvert nvestigate opportunities to reduce impacts of Investigate opportunities to reduce impacts large expanses of impervious surface in parking lots (Casino, Hospital, commercial lots). valuate feasibility of moving storm drain outlets Evaluate feasibility of moving storm drain and flow further downstream to prevent surcharging backups. Investigate benefits, costs and risks of installing drain the flapgates to stormwater pip outlets that Street to Van Ness neighborhood upstream of 23rd for Require green stormwater infiltration systems new development plans between Church Lane and Vale Road. description pipe in the vicinity Replace undersized stormwater of Bush and Balance Hydrologics in Appendix E2. Investigate benefits, costs and risks of installing stormwater pipe entering flapgates to the 48-inch Wildcat Creek below Rumrill Blvd. Should be part of burial of slope restoration project to prevent partial the stormwater outlet. lvert 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 management rban stormwater ment mwater manage rban stor lvert IMPERVIOUS CE tlet relocation RFACES action item odify i-80 cu modify i-80 SU investigate flapgates on stormwater outlet LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT REDU replace stormwater pipe investigate flapgates on stormwater outlet investigate storm drain ou action item reach reach *

ACTION ACTION 21 4 daylight davis park cu 23 124 construct fish bypass channel 0 create low flow channel throu 22 9 daylight san pablo avenu 25 10 18 5 19 7 20 8 15 2 16 2 17 26 6-7 enhance habitat move fish passage barriers actions to re Table 4-5: strategy 4: remove fish passagestrategy 4: barriers the remove to are projects restoration migration and habitat fish important most The most egregious fish barriers theseparating from theupper watershed reaches. lower in listed require the floodsectionprojects should Allprotection culvert replacement habitat. and passage fish accommodate design to a dirt bottom strategy 3: improve u 3: strategy In order for floodingto besuccessfully addressed in several need at neighborhood locations problems management the stormwater chronic Cityof SanPablo, some be to acted on. actions to improve u Table 4-4: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 66 gh sediment basin e culvert lvert 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 ct fish bypass channel action 21: daylight davis park cu davis park daylight action 21: action 24: create low flow channel throu create low action 24: of fish the for passage restoration alternative project council preferred A watershed through the sediment basin reach is to assure fish passage through the riparian ction 23: constru Action 23: connecting ladder fish the circumvent to channel pass by step-pool new a onstructing the sediment basin to the upslope PacificUnion Rail Road overpass area, is non-functioning one this of for correct to council watershed the of alternatives preferred the fishconstructedThe ladderonewas aspart ofphase which the flood damage ladder. baffles the of clogging the to due problems performance serious has project reduction with woody debris and sediment. Efforts to correct end upstream the at rack trash a adding for and 1997 ladderin the over grates removing the sedimenttrapping by have failed to correct the performance problems of the ladder. Thefish ladderhas ironically been a good mechanism to trap and observe steelhead and (even migrating coho) up the channel from San Pablo Bay. The ladder consistsof aladder constricted Denil at a fish steep 20% slope with a vertical liftof 8feet risingabove the Washington sediment ofbasin. remainder Theupstream theportionis of composed baffles at a 1% slope. TheArmy Corps Section 1135 completedreport in 2000 along with meetings subsequent with the Corps has identified anumberof specific design options. newpassage fish address to alternatives action 22: daylight san pablo avenu action 22: needed most other the is culvert Avenue Pablo San the of removal or to Modifications feet, 968 at length juveniles.The and adults both benefit to barrierproject migration its darkness and velocities and lack of resting pools restrictionssignificanton create center shopping a under located been historically has culvert this of Much passability. years. many for unused 80% approximately remained has lot parking The lot. parking a newly into creek daylighted a integrate to options creative numerous offers site The need badly as servealso could which area park pocket or commercial parking, design open green space One along San option is Pablo Avenue. to daylight sections of the more a with roughened be bottom, dirt a to restored be can channel the that so creek up .and break the aspectdark tunnel long substrate of the natural existing culvert. If it is necessary to keep some sections , underground the should bottoms concrete be added. baffles or removed, Removal Removal of the Davis Park culvert (450 feet) darkness under and the sedimentation ball issues field. make The this velocities, a mostly impassable steelhead barrier trout. This culvert for should beremoved and the the creek daylighted since this reach is contained in a city park. The daylightingshould addressfish habitat needs which includes a shading canopy with willow overhanging or other riparian low to mid story plants to assure some cover from wildlife predators and human activity at the park. The Cityof SanPablo adopted anew DavisPark Master Plan in the plan part as of the creek 2007 of the restoration approving wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 67 4.2 recommended actions according to strategy 4.2 lvert odify i-80 cu modify i-80 action 25: The fifth priority projectmigration barrier is modifying the culvert Interstate under 80 in which velocities associated with the low offlows 2- 3feet per second make it an impassable area. Potential solutions are the addition of baffles or removingthe pools. resting adding the culvert and of bottom enhance habitat Action 26: Rearing and spawning habitat potentials within addressed at the the Davis Park day lighting project, City and reaches from Ness Street Van of San Pablo to Street. LaneThis Church canand Lane Church are beto Vale done with the addition best of some plantings of canopy and with conflicts midlevel minimizes which manner overhanging a in vegetation, habitat adding bank undercut woody assisting or debris flood conveyance while encouragingmore deepValeStreet pools. can be a foci for these effortshabitat in the City portionof the watershed particularly if the summer additional flows can bereturned and sustainedat this location.The ChurchLane to St Vale reach has possible good is habitat corridor restoration potential stream on wider a the and north redevelopment side for of planned the is creek area this because a result. as area area allowed to re-establish itself on the southern boundary of the sediment basin. This riparianarea has beenretained by the watershed councilas a future migration in channel flow low a create to excavated partially was and area opportunity corridor 2006 to allow fishfor passage between thefish ladderpast the basinsediment tothe downstream reach by Elementary Verde school. Alternatives for this reach are also space more adding entail could and report 1135 section Corps Army the in described to the located sediment basin basin to sediment the .The north area and project rerouting the the regional of trail boundary through north county the on property owned the because also servecan migration to barrier fish a area as project one phase the in failed. the basin through channel flow low a selfsustaining for original design plan wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 68 treet along a corridor Street along a corridor rd street area. On the south side rd Street pocket park to the east side rd treet by widening the creek corridor at Street by widening the creek corridor at rd ablo has acquired the San Pablo has acquired the for which the City of for A cantilevered trail design easements for access. on a tight trail corridor this the north bank enables and adhere to regional and ADA link to be completed See Appendix H2. trail design standards. of 23 Provide a creek side multipurpose floodway- greenway along the north bank of Wildcat Creek between Church and Vale St. Develop a San Pablo Avenue multi-purpose San stormwater, flood detention park between Pablo Avenue and Contra Costa Avenue University Street. University description extension of the existing trail The plan includes the 23 through the park to A first phase of the trail will require creative and streets alignment using neighborhood sidewalks the creek in a few places because in some cases where corridor faces on back yards and lot lines The trail access to the creek bank is not possible. throughcan connect to the upper regional parks a new crossing at Riverside Drive. A future trail appendix. alignement plan will be available as an Expand the 23 mmendations by reach stream restoration reco 4.4 gh e park de greenway in redevelopment plans inclu implement davis park master plan of 2007 complete trail throu street expand 23rd pocket park action item city of san pablo

reach *

ACTION 28 31 9 san pablo avenu 30 7 27 4 29 4 recommendations by reach 4.4 stream restoration reach- a on opportunitites restoration in-channel to applies discussion following The basis. by-reach rill rum reach 3 which trap sediment a creates culvert Blvd. Rumrill the of alignment and design The Replacement problem. habitat and passage fish a as well as hazard flood a both creates of the culvert with these correct can a floodplain and channel bankfull constructed bridge, a with channel bottom re-sloping the channel invert phase next the in and designed be should slope providing channel and dimensions a Bridge problems. dirt of modeling. Utility crossing associated with this right of way need to be flap identified of addition The crossing. Blvd. Rumrill the of redesign the in accommodated and pipes to of undersized culvertsstormwater gates the entering creek and replacement in this area neededare to the resolve flooding whichproblems can occur with small rainfall. magnitude moderate to floodwall short a include can This damages. flood reduce to features add can area This constructed along the north bank to tie into the 23 strategy 5: connect gaps in wildcat creek trail in wildcat connect gaps 5: strategy actions to connect gaps in wildcat creek trail Table 4-6: wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 69 street area rd Street bridge location location bridge Street rd mmendations by reach stream restoration reco 4.4 street indicating a stable channel at the widths of 25-26 rd was was measured by a tape in 2010 and indicated that the width 25 was approximately in thoseUrban Creeks almost feet, no indicating ten Council adjustment years. The restoration project located near Church Lane was designed as a bankfull width of 22 feet. Thisproject is still undergoing adjustments becauseof its location behind the rail road bridge Thebackwater. Wildcat creekchannel appears to adjust with a reach 4 davis park to reach 7 vale road davis park 7 reach 4 to reach understanding an develop to is design restoration channel stream for practice Typical can which of the environment an shape of providing a while stream problems channel stabilization which bank will avoid not thereby excessively erode or deposit and recommending with concerned also are designers Restoration life. in-stream support incision, channel reduce banks, on stresses shear lower to widths floodplain adequate for corridor riparian increase and some areas, developed into flows overbank reduce use. public aesthetics and enhance and control, erosion Reports on stable bankfull stream dimensions for the Davis Park-23 of of the channel, relocations or buy-outs of the Folsom Street residences under which regular flood risk are can bepursued, ifstate or other non-federal fundswould can be project This share. non-federal the raise Pablo San of City the help to identified the City involve of as San Pablo a partner with the Federal Emergency Management Agency The 2007 CityAdopted Park Plan benefitsthe community in terms ofthis renovating important recreational area, and as well, the proposed culvert removal under the Wildcat Creek day lighting plan can offer multiple benefits. a sediment Theseof removal the flows, bank includeover of depth and frequency the of the reduction trap, correction of an extremely difficult maintenance issue, and removes the most important fish barriers in of one the Cityof SanPablo. Because of these multiple council. of watershed the project priority is a this benefits corroborate corroborate closely. The studies (Collins 2007, flow with curvesof discharges rating flood data, WRI 1999) information, frequency station gage combination a use of widths and depths, reference sites, regional hydraulic geometryof areas (average cross-section channel and areas), and for watershed dimensions shear stress analysis to feet a recommend bankfull 3 of depth a , feet 30 25- approximately of width channel most flows the represent to considered are discharges Bankfull feet. 90 approximately recurrence 1.5-2.0 the as occur typically and channel, the of shape the for responsible intervalor inflow, urbanareas may occur Formore frequently. this central partof Wildcat Creek these are estimated at around 300 cfs. Effective discharge, measurement to another represent channel forming flows, was computedusing a sediment rating curve and flowduration curve .The effective discharge wascomputed by the these are values 500 cfs but basin theat sediment below the Corpschannel for Army affected by the different downstream conditions a caused which in 2000 in Street 23rd the of by downstream constructed was the sediment project restoration basin. A wider floodplain was Thisproject excavated,. produced two surveyedcross-sections at two locations near 23 feet with depths of 2.5 to 2.6 feet. The channel width at the 23 the at width channel The feet. 2.6 to 2.5 of depths with feet wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 70 Street. This rd Street location could better rd Street can benefit by relocating relocating by benefit can Street rd street bridge and a raised bridge offers offers bridge raised a and bridge street rd mmendations by reach stream restoration reco 4.4 Street. The east side of 23 of side east The Street. rd Street to the San Pablo historic Civic Blume Center, House Museum and rd Street offers uniquepublic benefits because of its location inthe City Center, rd connect connect to Kennedy Plaza directly to the North by arranging for a trail connection this of corner Northwest the on center shopping large the of lot parking the through intersection. the multiple benefitsof providing a trail under thebridge and linking23 of twosides both on parks pocket area area also needs stormwater improvements which can include flap gatesto culverts entering either Wildcat or San Pablo Creeks. This 23 the two structures which are unfortunately sited too close to the creek. The conversion conversion The creek. the to close too sited unfortunately are which structures two the connect to corridor the creek widening and street way a one to Avenue University of with a new wider bridge will remove a serious hydraulic constriction for the and chronic problem of debris correct blockage on the upstream end of 23 reach 5 23rd street 23rd reach 5 23 narrower narrower channel than the regional average which could be explained by the high the banks. of content clay The designof optimum floodplain widthscan bebased onthe needs ofthe stream side residents. Greater widths can be used overbank flooding. to Eachreach of stream reduce corridoris governed by bank differentland use erosion or to Where floodplain widths. greater accommodating for opportunities and reduce constraints no and benefits multiple provides floodplains of widening the exist, opportunities the channel to add to widths “floodprone” for design to is tool planning One backs. draw feet 60 case, this in or width, bankfull 2x approximately as defined are which stability, of more. Floodplain widths can be designed by calculating Theythe shear erosion. stresses acting excessive reduce help that depths flood the selecting and channel the on can also be designed with the objective to lower the elevation of flows by providing flood discharges. for area cross-sectional more reach 6 van ness reach 6 This corridor also can the continue civic center theme in which the trail can extend from 32 restoration restoration project and its newly accomplished green space completed at Church Ness Street.Van remains a flood riskarea unless someupstream options for flood right of way on the north Trail bank are implemented. detention need to be secured Street. Church to the link up accomplish to the City by near near Kennedy Park and in an important business district. It is common communities place to for enhance and even revive business districts featuring creek and and riverside by “downtowns” parks. This visionis one the Citythe land acquisition for has a trail and pocket acted park on the on west side of the with street as well as the city’s impressive architectural continued a from restoration benefit would project area This 1990s. the of in accomplished street commercial 23d along buildings and protection flood greenway, more provides which plan redevelopment coordinated trail extension which could be phased and use multiple funding sources. There are 23 the rebuilding from flood benefits definite wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 71 mmendations by reach stream restoration reco 4.4 rch In addition to Davis Park, this is a high priority reach for addressing both flood damage damage San Pablo Reach 9 flood both addressing for reach priority high a is this Park, Davis to addition In quality community and needs migration and habitat fish and opportunities reduction upstream some for need the indicates map road flood modeling The amenities. life of detention and this site is a prime candidate for this function. The culvert under the shopping center parking lot is the greatest fish migration barrierto link the lower with Park with Canyon watershed the Wildcat highest value Thehabitat. underused parking lot acreage on the eastside of San Pablo Avenue can be adaylighting creek feature and and park usefloodspace, parking detention multiple reconfiguredas a A project. new designsite can a transform dead, underused, space unattractive into a community focal point which features an outdoor gathering place with food for shoppers and casino visitors across the street. A nearby model for this concept is a few miles away on San Pablo in Avenue the City of El Cerrito at the new Gateway Park. reach 8 vale reach 8 outfall Hospital The Doctors resolve. to issue habitat fish important an has reach This above Vale Road has provided a long term, reliable summer of pool steelhead. for The the hospital rearing discharge, reportedly from a well, stopped subsequently the loss of this important in 2008 reach habitat has occurred. and A collaboration with the hospital should be attempted to identify a potential strategy for returning this habitat. Pablo toTheCasino reduce Sanstorm theopportunity provides massive parking lot water runoff and improve water quality for creek. the Federal and state grants are to increasingly available parking lotsretrofit with instream aquatic life Wildcat in green infiltrationareas which significantly slowthe rate and volume ofstormwater pollutants. absorb and discharges u ch reach 7 recreational City, the for protection flood address to opportunities key offers reach This opportunities and fishhabitat enhancement. Thisopportunity is tied tothe design of the whichredevelopment is sited to occur on the north bank of the creek where mobile home units are currently being TheValeofremoved. replacement Road the extend which area tothis benefits flood significant brings bridge higher a with culvert about a thousand feet upstream. A wider stream corridor on the north bank where redevelopment is to occur can provide dedicated areas for flood detention,floodprone area wider to reduce erosionand floodproblems and enhancehabitat values. green and trail a with corridor steam wider a case show to potential the has area This flows overbank the resolving to critical be could reach this in located Detention space. in New development this reach should use Avenue. Ness green infiltration near Van to creek. the runoff stormwater reduce to systems wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 72 4.5 Recommended Actions for phase one reaches 4.5 Re-aligning the levees downstream of the Richmond Parkway to create a wider marshplain floodwall short a construct or levees and berms existing the to elevation some Add berms. the levees and of ontop Retain the current configurationthe of Use side. north thethe on property sedimentcounty adjacent basin,onto expanding by and necessary, add to its size if riparian area on the south side of the basin to construct a new self maintaining A major sewer trunk located across the mouth of Wildcat slope the and controls Creek of channel the artificially mouth the the elevates marsh enters where the creek of the creek upstream. An optimum condition would be whenever it needs to to be replaced lower to better the connect creek discharges into sewerthe marsh line and allow tidalnatural for more action up the arecreek There channel. sewer access wells near the mouth of Wildcat creek which sediment catching by serve floodplain the elevated as artificially have wells These line. sewer maintenance access to the and debris . These depositionalfeatures along with the backwaterand deposition caused by the Richmond parkway create a situation floodplain gradiant designed in for the Wildcat Creek which floodprotectionproject is the not original lower and thetheneedThis existing situation, reinforce bermsfor to sustainable. possibly additional structural safety and and possible additional freeboard needs to address with work to council watershed the induced change, climate and uncertainly and risk the Army Corps of Engineeers to draftstrategies for building more flood capacity reach. this lower into habitat resiliency and and Thelowflow channel designed for center the School of to the sediment provide for fish migration basin is Verde not above a functioningfor fish passage the channel because fills in with sediment..The fish ladder is also notfunctional because it fish to the made were logical The sediment. modifications easy and debris with clogs andinstallation thethe baffles of top on grates of the removal laddernamely system, of a trash rack upstream of the by ladder. problems Neither sedimentation of exacerbating rack trash thesethe with problems modificationsthe to produced solution a andvelocities flows needed reducing to The transport sediment through the ladder. identified instrategies process thewith 2000-2003 planning the Army management the following: listed have Station Experiment Corps Waterways • • • hes phase one reac ctions for ommended A 4.5 Rec Phaselood Damage Reduction Reach One F The WRAP provides opportunityan revisit to Phase strategies 1 FloodWildcat Creek’s Control reaches (below the WRAP forstudy furtherarea). The evolution of planning. future for be considered should recommendations following Fish Ladder Richmond Parkway to the wildcat creek restoration action plan Urban Creeks Cou ncil APRIL 2010 4. recommended actions 73 ncil year at the time this watershed plan is th u Recommended actions for watershed co 4.6 active active channel to arrive at the the fish ladderladder or by passchannel around the sediment the of rim north the around passage fish for channel bypass a Construct property. county the north on trail to the adjacent basin. relocate Construct an artificialstep-poolbyon pass thechannel of side south the ladder ladder the fish of upstream channel the stream with reconnect and and Washington the of redesign the include channel bypass fish the to Alternatives denile bafflesin the ladders, orfish channel through design “compound” a new recommended. is deflector A new debris channel. the concrete of the bay north • • • feasibility determining for anaylsis of level first the through gone have strategies These for addressing performance needs and costs. Additional hydraulics, sediment and performance issues remain to be and addressed ladder fish basin, with sediment the for particular in an analysis alternatives additional the narrow technical study to modifications. bypass published. published. The councilis knownfor its high levelof productivity and community outreach efforts. Despite its good reputation, the Council now basic services lacks which beshould era. Thea first in part this of its operations computer some of the council. the find can public broader a where site web basic a needed is improvement While a review of community events and other meetings an electronic calendar calendar needs to be developed items and distributed. The council are publicized at needs to formally adopt a logo and create the next level of community awareness the organization. about for watershed council 4.6 Recommended actions Thewatershed council entering is its 25